Erwin van Vliet

In vitro developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) testing: relevant models and endpoints.

Environmental chemicals have a potential impact on childrens health as the developing brain is much more vulnerable to injury caused by different classes of chemicals than the adult brain. This vulnerability is partly due to the fact that very complex processes of cell development and maturation take place within a tightly controlled time frame. So different stages of brain development are susceptible to toxic effects at different time points. Additionally the adult brain is well protected against chemicals by the blood brain barrier (BBB) whereas the placenta only partially protects against harmful chemical exposure. Many metals easily cross the placenta and BBB barrier since even after the birth BBB is not entirely differentiated (until about 6 months after birth). Additionally, the susceptibility of infants and children is due to increased exposure, augmented absorption rates, and less efficient ability of defense mechanism in comparison to adults. The In Vitro Session during the 12th International Neurotoxicology Association meeting (Jerusalem, June, 2009) provided the opportunity to discuss the new challenges that have to be faced to create new type of safety assessments for regulatory requirements. The integration of various tests into testing strategies as well as combination of information-rich approaches with bioinformatics was discussed. Furthermore relevant models and endpoints for developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) evaluation using in vitro approach were presented. The primary neuronal cultures of cerebellar granule cells (CGCs) as well as 3D aggregate model and the possible application of human embryonic and adult stem cells was discussed pointing out the potential of these models to be used for DNT testing. The presented systems are relevant for DNT evaluation as the key processes of brain development such cell proliferation, migration and neuronal/glial differentiation are present. Furthermore, emerging technologies such as gene expression, electrical activity measurements and metabonomics have been identified as promising tools. In a combination with other assays the in vitro approach could be included into a DNT intelligent testing strategy to speed up the process of DNT evaluation mainly by initial prioritization of chemicals with DNT potential for further testing.

The value of alternative testing for neurotoxicity in the context of regulatory needs

Detection and characterisation of chemical-induced toxic effects in the central and peripheral nervous system represent a major challenge for employing newly developed technologies in the field of neurotoxicology. Precise cellular predictive test batteries for chemical-induced neurotoxicity are increasingly important for regulatory decision making, but also the most efficient way to keep costs and time of testing within a reasonable margin. Current in vivo test methods are based on behavioural and sensory perturbations coupled with routine histopathological investigations. In spite of the empirical usefulness of these tests, they are not always sensitive enough and often, they do not provide information that facilitates a detailed understanding of potential mechanisms of toxicity, thus enabling predictions. In general, such in vivo tests are unsuitable for screening large number of agents. One way to meet the need for more powerful and comprehensive tests via an extended scientific basis is to study neurotoxicity in specific cell types of the brain and to derive generalised mechanisms of action of the toxicants from such series of experiments. Additionally, toxicokinetic models are to be developed in order to give a rough account for the whole absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion (ADME) process including the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Therefore, an intensive search for the development of alternative methods using animal and human-based in vitro and in silico models for neurotoxic hazard assessment is appropriate. In particular, neurotoxicology represents one of the major challenges to the development of in vitro systems, as it has to account also for heterogeneous cell interactions of the brain which require new biochemical, biotechnological and electrophysiological profiling methods for reliable alternative ways with a high throughput.

Application of in vitro neurotoxicity testing for regulatory purposes: Symposium III summary and research needs

Prediction of neurotoxic effects is a key feature in the toxicological profile of many compounds and therefore is required by regulatory testing schemes. Nowadays neurotoxicity assessment required by the OECD and EC test guidelines is based solely on in vivo testing, evaluating mainly effects on neurobehavior and neuropathology, which is expensive, time consuming and unsuitable for screening large number of chemicals. Additionally, such in vivo tests are not always sensitive enough to predict human neurotoxicity and often do not provide information that facilitates regulatory decision-making processes. Incorporation of alternative tests (in vitro testing, computational modelling, QSARs, grouping, read-across, etc.) in screening strategies would speed up the rate at which compound knowledge and mechanistic data are available and the information obtained could be used in the refinement of future in vivo studies to facilitate predictions of neurotoxicity. On 1st June 2007, the European Commission legislation concerning registration, evaluation and authorisation of chemicals (REACH) has entered into force. REACH addresses one of the key issues for chemicals in Europe, the lack of publicly available safety data sheets. It outlines a plan to test approximately 30,000 existing substances. These chemicals are currently produced in volumes greater than 1ton/year and the essential data on the human health and ecotoxicological effects are lacking. It is estimated that approximately 3.9 million test animals (including 2.6 million vertebrates) (Hartung T, Bremer S, Casati S, Coecke S, Corvi R, Fortnaer S, et al. ECVAMs response to the changing political environment for alternatives: consequences of the European Union chemicals and cosmetics policies. ATLA 2003;31:473-81) would be necessary to fulfill the requirements of REACH if the development and establishment of alternative methods is not accepted by regulatory authorities. In an effort to reduce animal use and testing costs within this tonnage band, the European Commission has advocated the use of alternative approaches. Neurotoxicity testing is not directly addressed within REACH, however when alerts are observed based on organ specific toxicity studies then neurotoxicity assessment has to be performed. This session at the 11th International Neurotoxicology Association Meeting provided a forum to openly discuss and debate the potential of in vitro testing strategies that could be relevant for neurotoxicity evaluation in the context of regulatory requirements. The EU FP6 project A-Cute-Tox was presented as an example of a possible in vitro testing strategy for prediction of human acute systemic toxicity. Other presentations focused on the characterization of the available in vitro models (cell lines and primary culture) and neuronal specific endpoints, with a special emphasis on electrical activity, metabonomics and modulation of vesicular neurotransmitter release as possible neuronal endpoints relevant for in vitro neurotoxicity testing. Finally, it was underlined that in vitro systems (strategies) that have the potential to be applied for neurotoxicity assessment have to be formally validated under standardised conditions that have been recognised by national and international validation bodies.

Non-animal methods to predict skin sensitization (I): the Cosmetics Europe database*

Abstract Cosmetics Europe, the European Trade Association for the cosmetics and personal care industry, is conducting a multi-phase program to develop regulatory accepted, animal-free testing strategies enabling the cosmetics industry to conduct safety assessments. Based on a systematic evaluation of test methods for skin sensitization, five non-animal test methods (DPRA (Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay), KeratinoSensTM, h-CLAT (human cell line activation test), U-SENSTM, SENS-IS) were selected for inclusion in a comprehensive database of 128 substances. Existing data were compiled and completed with newly generated data, the latter amounting to one-third of all data. The database was complemented with human and local lymph node assay (LLNA) reference data, physicochemical properties and use categories, and thoroughly curated. Focused on the availability of human data, the substance selection resulted nevertheless resulted in a high diversity of chemistries in terms of physico-chemical property ranges and use categories. Predictivities of skin sensitization potential and potency, where applicable, were calculated for the LLNA as compared to human data and for the individual test methods compared to both human and LLNA reference data. In addition, various aspects of applicability of the test methods were analyzed. Due to its high level of curation, comprehensiveness, and completeness, we propose our database as a point of reference for the evaluation and development of testing strategies, as done for example in the associated work of Kleinstreuer et al. We encourage the community to use it to meet the challenge of conducting skin sensitization safety assessment without generating new animal data.

Validation study on the Ocular Irritection® assay for eye irritation testing

Both a prospective and a retrospective validation study were undertaken to assess the suitability of the Ocular Irritection assay to discriminate ocular hazards as defined by the OECD and UN Globally Harmonized System (UN GHS) for classification. The primary focus of the study was to evaluate the usefulness of the Ocular Irritection assay to reliably discriminate chemicals not requiring classification (UN GHS non-classified), from classified chemicals (UN GHS Categories 1 and 2). Furthermore a post-hoc evaluation was carried out to evaluate the usefulness of the assay to discriminate chemicals inducing serious eye damage (UN GHS Category 1) from other classes. The prospective validation study was conducted between 2009 and 2012 following internationally agreed principles. A set of 56 coded test chemicals for which quality and/or peer-reviewed in vivo data were available were used to obtain prospective data on the assays reliability (reproducibility within and between laboratories) and relevance (predictive capacity). The assay showed good within-laboratory variability, transferability including to a naïve laboratory, and between-laboratory concordance of classifications (82% for the discrimination of non-classified from classified chemicals, and 83% for the discrimination of Category 1 from other classes). The obtained prospective data were then combined with existing data on the Ocular Irritection collected from various sources, totaling 88 chemicals with parallel in vivo and in vitro data to obtain a comprehensive assessment of the test method performances. The enlarged dataset comprised 43 non-classified, 25 Category 2 and 20 Category 1 chemicals according to the UN GHS classification. When used for the identification of UN GHS non-classified versus classified materials (based on the existing cut-off of 12.5) the Ocular Irritection assay showed an overall a sensitivity of 93% and a specificity of 58%. An evaluation on possible reasons for misclassification identified some organic functional groups (acrylate, carboxamide and cycloalkene) to correlate with the observed mispredictions. If these functional groups were excluded from the Ocular Irritection applicability domain, the obtained dataset (n=79 chemicals distributed as 41 UN GHS Classified and 38 Non-Classified chemicals) had an overall sensitivity of 98%, and specificity of 63%, which is in line with currently adopted test methods. When used for the identification of UN GHS Category 1 versus other categories (based on the existing cut-off of 30.0) the Ocular Irritection assay showed an overall specificity of 81% and a sensitivity of 50% which is again in line with currently adopted test methods. The Ocular Irritection assay appeared therefore as a useful test method to predict chemicals not requiring classification for eye hazards according to the UN GHS classification system. Furthermore the method was found suitable to identify serious/irreversible eye damage (UN GHS Category 1). The detailed documentation and results of the study have been submitted to an internationally recognized validation centre for peer-review.

Non-animal methods to predict skin sensitization (II): an assessment of defined approaches**

Abstract Skin sensitization is a toxicity endpoint of widespread concern, for which the mechanistic understanding and concurrent necessity for non-animal testing approaches have evolved to a critical juncture, with many available options for predicting sensitization without using animals. Cosmetics Europe and the National Toxicology Program Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods collaborated to analyze the performance of multiple non-animal data integration approaches for the skin sensitization safety assessment of cosmetics ingredients. The Cosmetics Europe Skin Tolerance Task Force (STTF) collected and generated data on 128 substances in multiple in vitro and in chemico skin sensitization assays selected based on a systematic assessment by the STTF. These assays, together with certain in silico predictions, are key components of various non-animal testing strategies that have been submitted to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development as case studies for skin sensitization. Curated murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) and human skin sensitization data were used to evaluate the performance of six defined approaches, comprising eight non-animal testing strategies, for both hazard and potency characterization. Defined approaches examined included consensus methods, artificial neural networks, support vector machine models, Bayesian networks, and decision trees, most of which were reproduced using open source software tools. Multiple non-animal testing strategies incorporating in vitro, in chemico, and in silico inputs demonstrated equivalent or superior performance to the LLNA when compared to both animal and human data for skin sensitization.

Evaluation of the GARD assay in a blind cosmetics Europe study

Chemical hypersensitivity is an immunological response towards foreign substances, commonly referred to as sensitizers, which gives rise primarily to the clinical symptoms known as allergic contact dermatitis. For the purpose of mitigating risks associated with consumer products, chemicals are screened for sensitizing effects. Historically, such predictive screenings have been performed using animal models. However, due to industrial and regulatory demand, animal models for the purpose of sensitization assessment are being replaced by non-animal testing methods, a global trend that is spreading across industries and market segments. To meet this demand, the Genomic Allergen Rapid Detection (GARD) assay was developed. GARD is a novel, cell-based assay that utilizes the innate recognition of xenobiotic substances by dendritic cells, as measured by a multivariate readout of genomic biomarkers. Following cellular stimulation, chemicals are classified as sensitizers or non-sensitizers based on induced transcriptional profiles. Recently, a number of non-animal methods were comparatively evaluated by Cosmetics Europe, using a coherent and blinded test panel of reference chemicals with human and local lymph node assay data, comprising a wide range of sensitizers and non-sensitizers. The outcome of the GARD assay is presented in this paper. It was demonstrated that GARD is a highly functional assay with a predictive performance of 83% in this Cosmetics Europe dataset. The average accumulated predictive accuracy of GARD across independent datasets was 86% for skin sensitization hazard.