The present publication surveys several applications of in silico (i.e., computational) toxicology approaches across different industries and institutions. It highlights the need to develop standardized protocols when conducting toxicity-related predictions. This contribution articulates the information needed for protocols to support in silico predictions for major toxicological endpoints of concern (e.g., genetic toxicity, carcinogenicity, acute toxicity, reproductive toxicity, developmental toxicity) across several industries and regulatory bodies. Such novel in silico toxicology (IST) protocols, when fully developed and implemented, will ensure in silico toxicological assessments are performed and evaluated in a consistent, reproducible, and well-documented manner across industries and regulatory bodies to support wider uptake and acceptance of the approaches. The development of IST protocols is an initiative developed through a collaboration among an international consortium to reflect the state-of-the-art in in silico toxicology for hazard identification and characterization. A general outline for describing the development of such protocols is included and it is based on in silico predictions and/or available experimental data for a defined series of relevant toxicological effects or mechanisms. The publication presents a novel approach for determining the reliability of in silico predictions alongside experimental data. In addition, we discuss how to determine the level of confidence in the assessment based on the relevance and reliability of the information.
The ICH M7 guideline describes a consistent approach to identify, categorize, and control DNA reactive, mutagenic, impurities in pharmaceutical products to limit the potential carcinogenic risk related to such impurities. This paper outlines a series of principles and procedures to consider when generating (Q)SAR assessments aligned with the ICH M7 guideline to be included in a regulatory submission. In the absence of adequate experimental data, the results from two complementary (Q)SAR methodologies may be combined to support an initial hazard classification. This may be followed by an assessment of additional information that serves as the basis for an expert review to support or refute the predictions. This paper elucidates scenarios where additional expert knowledge may be beneficial, what such an expert review may contain, and how the results and accompanying considerations may be documented. Furthermore, the use of these principles and procedures to yield a consistent and robust (Q)SAR-based argument to support impurity qualification for regulatory purposes is described in this manuscript.
Peptide couplers
(also known as amide bond-forming reagents or
coupling reagents) are broadly used in organic chemical syntheses,
especially in the pharmaceutical industry. Yet, occupational health
hazards associated with this chemical class are largely unexplored,
which is disconcerting given the intrinsic reactivity of these compounds.
Several case studies involving occupational exposures reported adverse
respiratory and dermal health effects, providing initial evidence
of chemical sensitization. To address the paucity of toxicological
data, a pharmaceutical cross-industry task force was formed to evaluate
and assess the potential of these compounds to cause eye and dermal
irritation as well as corrosivity and dermal sensitization. The goal
of our work was to inform health and safety professionals as well
as pharmaceutical and organic chemists of the occupational health
hazards associated with this chemical class. To that end, 25 of the
most commonly used peptide couplers and five hydrolysis products were
selected for
in vivo, in vitro
, and
in silico
testing. Our findings confirmed that dermal sensitization is a concern
for this chemical class with 21/25 peptide couplers testing positive
for dermal sensitization and 15 of these being strong/extreme sensitizers.
We also found that dermal corrosion and irritation (8/25) as well
as eye irritation (9/25) were health hazards associated with peptide
couplers and their hydrolysis products (4/5 were dermal irritants
or corrosive and 4/5 were eye irritants). Resulting outcomes were
synthesized to inform decision making in peptide coupler selection
and enable data-driven hazard communication to workers. The latter
includes harmonized hazard classifications, appropriate handling recommendations,
and accurate safety data sheets, which support the industrial hygiene
hierarchy of control strategies and risk assessment. Our study demonstrates
the merits of an integrated,
in vivo
-
in
silico
analysis, applied here to the skin sensitization endpoint
using the Computer-Aided Discovery and REdesign (CADRE) and Derek
Nexus programs. We show that experimental data can improve predictive
models by filling existing data gaps while, concurrently, providing
computational insights into key initiating events and elucidating
the chemical structural features contributing to adverse health effects.
This interactive, interdisciplinary approach is consistent with Green
Chemistry principles that seek to improve the selection and design
of less hazardous reagents in industrial processes and applications.
This symposium focuses on the management of genotoxic impurities in the synthesis of pharmaceuticals. Recent developments in both Europe and United States require sponsors of new drug applications to develop processes to control the risks of potential genotoxic impurities. Genotoxic impurities represent a special case relative to the International Conference on Harmonisation Q3A/Q3B guidances, because genotoxicity tests used to qualify the drug substance may not be sufficient to demonstrate safety of a potentially genotoxic impurity. The default risk management approach for a genotoxic impurity is the threshold of toxicological concern unless a more specific risk characterization is appropriate. The symposium includes descriptions of industry examples where impurities are introduced and managed in the synthesis of a pharmaceutical. It includes recent regulatory developments such as the "staged threshold of toxicological concern" when administration is of short duration (eg, during clinical trials).
Quantitative methods for estimation of cancer risk have been developed for daily, lifetime human exposures. There are a variety of studies or methodologies available to address less-than-lifetime exposures. However, a common framework for evaluating risk from less-than-lifetime exposures (including short-term and/or intermittent exposures) does not exist, which could result in inconsistencies in risk assessment practice. To address this risk assessment need, a committee of the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Health and Environmental Sciences Institute conducted a multisector workshop in late 2009 to discuss available literature, different methodologies, and a proposed framework. The proposed framework provides a decision tree and guidance for cancer risk assessments for less-than-lifetime exposures based on current knowledge of mode of action and dose-response. Available data from rodent studies and epidemiological studies involving less-than-lifetime exposures are considered, in addition to statistical approaches described in the literature for evaluating the impact of changing the dose rate and exposure duration for exposure to carcinogens. The decision tree also provides for scenarios in which an assumption of potential carcinogenicity is appropriate (e.g., based on structural alerts or genotoxicity data), but bioassay or other data are lacking from which a chemical-specific cancer potency can be determined. This paper presents an overview of the rationale for the workshop, reviews historical background, describes the proposed framework for assessing less-than-lifetime exposures to potential human carcinogens, and suggests next steps.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.