Contact hypersensitivity: Integrated approaches to testing and assessment

Skin and respiratory chemical allergy: confluence and divergence in a hybrid adverse outcome pathway

Sensitisation of the respiratory tract to chemicals resulting in respiratory allergy and allergic asthma is an important occupational health problem, and presents toxicologists with no shortage of challenges. A major issue is that there are no validated or, even widely recognised, methods available for the identification and characterisation of chemical respiratory allergens, or for distinguishing respiratory allergens from contact allergens. The first objective here has been review what is known (and what is not known) of the mechanisms through which chemicals induce sensitisation of the respiratory tract, and to use this information to construct a hybrid Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) that combines consideration of both skin and respiratory sensitisation. The intention then has been to use the construction of this hybrid AOP to identify areas of commonality/confluence, and areas of departure/divergence, between skin sensitisation and sensitisation of the respiratory tract. The hybrid AOP not only provides a mechanistic understanding of how the processes of skin and respiratory sensitisation differ, buy also a means of identifying areas of uncertainty about chemical respiratory allergy that benefit from a further investment in research.

Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment

The concept of Integrated Approaches to Testing and Assessment (IATA) has been advanced by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) member countries to enable a progressive shift from traditional chemical assessments largely based on the observation of the adverse effect in animal models, using individual methods or predefined batteries of standard toxicity tests, to assessment strategies integrating diverse lines of evidence. The flexible nature of IATA allows the inclusion of mechanistic data generated with non-animal methods and with new technologies (e.g. high-throughput and high content methods). The assessment process within IATA is typically conducted through weight-of-evidence which inevitably includes the elements of subjective expert judgement. For these reasons, IATA cannot be fully harmonized across sectors and countries. Nevertheless, some of the IATA components, such as defined approaches, which consist of a fixed data interpretation procedure (DIP) applied to data generated with a defined set of information sources, can be harmonized. The focus of this MiniReview is to provide an illustration of the differences between the IATA developed so far in the areas of regulatory toxicology, and ongoing activities related to the international harmonization of defined approaches that rely on multiple non-animal information sources.