Computer models versus reality: How well do in silico models currently predict the sensitization potential of a substance

Industrial chemicals need to be assessed for their potential to cause skin sensitization. The European chemical and cosmetic legislations have generated increased availability of reliable experimental data on skin sensitization potentials but also a greater demand for non-animal testing methods. In this study, animal data on 55 non-sensitizing and 45 sensitizing chemicals was reviewed and used to test the performance of computer (in silico) models for the prediction of skin sensitization. Statistical models (Vega, Case Ultra, TOPKAT), mechanistic models (Toxtree, OECD (Q)SAR toolbox v3.1, DEREK) and a hybrid model (TIMES-SS) were evaluated. Substances were selected which were not expected to be found in the model training sets. This study also explored other aspects, such as ease of use and data interpretation, and applicability for regulatory purposes.JRC.I.5-Systems Toxicolog

Assessment of Pre- and Pro-haptens Using Nonanimal Test Methods for Skin Sensitization

Because of ethical and regulatory reasons, several nonanimal test methods to assess the skin sensitization potential of chemicals have been developed and validated. In contrast to <i>in vivo</i> methods, they lack or provide limited metabolic capacity. For this reason, identification of pro-haptens but also pre-haptens, which require molecular transformations to gain peptide reactivity, is a challenge for these methods. In this study, 27 pre- and pro-haptens were tested using nonanimal test methods. Of these, 18 provided true positive results in the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA; sensitivity of 67%), although lacking structural alerts for direct peptide reactivity. The reaction mechanisms leading to peptide depletion in the DPRA were therefore elucidated using mass spectrometry. Hapten–peptide adducts were identified for 13 of the 18 chemicals indicating that these pre-haptens were activated and that peptide binding occurred. Positive results for five of the 18 chemicals can be explained by dipeptide formations or the oxidation of the sulfhydryl group of the peptide. Nine of the 27 chemicals were tested negative in the DPRA. Of these, four yielded true positive results in the keratinocyte and dendritic cell based assays. Likewise, 16 of the 18 chemicals tested positive in the DPRA were also positive in either one or both of the cell-based assays. A combination of DPRA, KeratinoSens, and h-CLAT used in a 2 out of 3 weight of evidence (WoE) approach identified 22 of the 27 pre- and pro-haptens correctly (sensitivity of 81%), exhibiting a similar sensitivity as for directly acting haptens. This analysis shows that the combination of <i>in chemico</i> and <i>in vitro</i> test methods is suitable to identify pre-haptens and the majority of pro-haptens