Cargando…

“In Litero” Screening: Retrospective Evaluation of Clinical Evidence to Establish a Reference List of Human Chemical Respiratory Sensitizers

Despite decades of investigation, test methods to identify respiratory sensitizers remain an unmet regulatory need. In order to support the evaluation of New Approach Methodologies in development, we sought to establish a reference set of low molecular weight respiratory sensitizers based on case re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ponder, Jessica, Rajagopal, Ramya, Singal, Madhuri, Baker, Nancy, Patlewicz, Grace, Roggen, Erwin, Cochrane, Stella, Sullivan, Kristie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9335368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35910543
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ftox.2022.916370
_version_ 1784759323865382912
author Ponder, Jessica
Rajagopal, Ramya
Singal, Madhuri
Baker, Nancy
Patlewicz, Grace
Roggen, Erwin
Cochrane, Stella
Sullivan, Kristie
author_facet Ponder, Jessica
Rajagopal, Ramya
Singal, Madhuri
Baker, Nancy
Patlewicz, Grace
Roggen, Erwin
Cochrane, Stella
Sullivan, Kristie
author_sort Ponder, Jessica
collection PubMed
description Despite decades of investigation, test methods to identify respiratory sensitizers remain an unmet regulatory need. In order to support the evaluation of New Approach Methodologies in development, we sought to establish a reference set of low molecular weight respiratory sensitizers based on case reports of occupational asthma. In this context, we have developed an “in litero” approach to identify cases of low molecular weight chemical exposures leading to respiratory sensitization in clinical literature. We utilized the EPA-developed Abstract Sifter literature review tool to maximize the retrieval of publications relevant to respiratory effects in humans for each chemical in a list of chemicals suspected of inducing respiratory sensitization. The literature retrieved for each of these candidate chemicals was sifted to identify relevant case reports and studies, and then evaluated by applying defined selection criteria. Clinical diagnostic criteria were defined around exposure history, respiratory effects, and specific immune response to conclusively demonstrate occupational asthma as a result of sensitization, rather than irritation. This approach successfully identified 28 chemicals that can be considered as human respiratory sensitizers and used to evaluate the performance of NAMs as part of a weight of evidence approach to identify novel respiratory sensitizers. Further, these results have immediate implications for the development and refinement of predictive tools to distinguish between skin and respiratory sensitizers. A comparison of the protein binding mechanisms of our identified “in litero” clinical respiratory sensitizers shows that acylation is a prevalent protein binding mechanism, in contrast to Michael addition and Schiff base formation common to skin sensitizers. Overall, this approach provides an exemplary method to evaluate and apply human data as part of the weight of evidence when establishing reference chemical lists.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9335368
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93353682022-07-30 “In Litero” Screening: Retrospective Evaluation of Clinical Evidence to Establish a Reference List of Human Chemical Respiratory Sensitizers Ponder, Jessica Rajagopal, Ramya Singal, Madhuri Baker, Nancy Patlewicz, Grace Roggen, Erwin Cochrane, Stella Sullivan, Kristie Front Toxicol Toxicology Despite decades of investigation, test methods to identify respiratory sensitizers remain an unmet regulatory need. In order to support the evaluation of New Approach Methodologies in development, we sought to establish a reference set of low molecular weight respiratory sensitizers based on case reports of occupational asthma. In this context, we have developed an “in litero” approach to identify cases of low molecular weight chemical exposures leading to respiratory sensitization in clinical literature. We utilized the EPA-developed Abstract Sifter literature review tool to maximize the retrieval of publications relevant to respiratory effects in humans for each chemical in a list of chemicals suspected of inducing respiratory sensitization. The literature retrieved for each of these candidate chemicals was sifted to identify relevant case reports and studies, and then evaluated by applying defined selection criteria. Clinical diagnostic criteria were defined around exposure history, respiratory effects, and specific immune response to conclusively demonstrate occupational asthma as a result of sensitization, rather than irritation. This approach successfully identified 28 chemicals that can be considered as human respiratory sensitizers and used to evaluate the performance of NAMs as part of a weight of evidence approach to identify novel respiratory sensitizers. Further, these results have immediate implications for the development and refinement of predictive tools to distinguish between skin and respiratory sensitizers. A comparison of the protein binding mechanisms of our identified “in litero” clinical respiratory sensitizers shows that acylation is a prevalent protein binding mechanism, in contrast to Michael addition and Schiff base formation common to skin sensitizers. Overall, this approach provides an exemplary method to evaluate and apply human data as part of the weight of evidence when establishing reference chemical lists. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-07-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9335368/ /pubmed/35910543 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ftox.2022.916370 Text en Copyright © 2022 Ponder, Rajagopal, Singal, Baker, Patlewicz, Roggen, Cochrane and Sullivan. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Toxicology
Ponder, Jessica
Rajagopal, Ramya
Singal, Madhuri
Baker, Nancy
Patlewicz, Grace
Roggen, Erwin
Cochrane, Stella
Sullivan, Kristie
“In Litero” Screening: Retrospective Evaluation of Clinical Evidence to Establish a Reference List of Human Chemical Respiratory Sensitizers
title “In Litero” Screening: Retrospective Evaluation of Clinical Evidence to Establish a Reference List of Human Chemical Respiratory Sensitizers
title_full “In Litero” Screening: Retrospective Evaluation of Clinical Evidence to Establish a Reference List of Human Chemical Respiratory Sensitizers
title_fullStr “In Litero” Screening: Retrospective Evaluation of Clinical Evidence to Establish a Reference List of Human Chemical Respiratory Sensitizers
title_full_unstemmed “In Litero” Screening: Retrospective Evaluation of Clinical Evidence to Establish a Reference List of Human Chemical Respiratory Sensitizers
title_short “In Litero” Screening: Retrospective Evaluation of Clinical Evidence to Establish a Reference List of Human Chemical Respiratory Sensitizers
title_sort “in litero” screening: retrospective evaluation of clinical evidence to establish a reference list of human chemical respiratory sensitizers
topic Toxicology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9335368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35910543
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ftox.2022.916370
work_keys_str_mv AT ponderjessica inliteroscreeningretrospectiveevaluationofclinicalevidencetoestablishareferencelistofhumanchemicalrespiratorysensitizers
AT rajagopalramya inliteroscreeningretrospectiveevaluationofclinicalevidencetoestablishareferencelistofhumanchemicalrespiratorysensitizers
AT singalmadhuri inliteroscreeningretrospectiveevaluationofclinicalevidencetoestablishareferencelistofhumanchemicalrespiratorysensitizers
AT bakernancy inliteroscreeningretrospectiveevaluationofclinicalevidencetoestablishareferencelistofhumanchemicalrespiratorysensitizers
AT patlewiczgrace inliteroscreeningretrospectiveevaluationofclinicalevidencetoestablishareferencelistofhumanchemicalrespiratorysensitizers
AT roggenerwin inliteroscreeningretrospectiveevaluationofclinicalevidencetoestablishareferencelistofhumanchemicalrespiratorysensitizers
AT cochranestella inliteroscreeningretrospectiveevaluationofclinicalevidencetoestablishareferencelistofhumanchemicalrespiratorysensitizers
AT sullivankristie inliteroscreeningretrospectiveevaluationofclinicalevidencetoestablishareferencelistofhumanchemicalrespiratorysensitizers