Principles and Procedures for Assessment of Acute Toxicity Incorporating In Silico Methods.

Acute toxicity in silico models are being used to support an increasing number of application areas including (1) product research and development, (2) product approval and registration as well as (3) the transport, storage and handling of chemicals. The adoption of such models is being hindered, in part, because of a lack of guidance describing how to perform and document an in silico analysis. To address this issue, a framework for an acute toxicity hazard assessment is proposed. This framework combines results from different sources including in silico methods and in vitro or in vivo experiments. In silico methods that can assist the prediction of in vivo outcomes (i.e., LD50) are analyzed concluding that predictions obtained using in silico approaches are now well-suited for reliably supporting assessment of LD50-based acute toxicity for the purpose of GHS classification. A general overview is provided of the endpoints from in vitro studies commonly evaluated for predicting acute toxicity (e.g., cytotoxicity/cytolethality as well as assays targeting specific mechanisms). The increased understanding of pathways and key triggering mechanisms underlying toxicity and the increased availability of in vitro data allow for a shift away from assessments solely based on endpoints such as LD50, to mechanism-based endpoints that can be accurately assessed in vitro or by using in silico prediction models. This paper also highlights the importance of an expert review of all available information using weight-of-evidence considerations and illustrates, using a series of diverse practical use cases, how in silico approaches support the assessment of acute toxicity.

Genetic toxicology in silico protocol.

In silico toxicology (IST) approaches to rapidly assess chemical hazard, and usage of such methods is increasing in all applications but especially for regulatory submissions, such as for assessing chemicals under REACH as well as the ICH M7 guideline for drug impurities. There are a number of obstacles to performing an IST assessment, including uncertainty in how such an assessment and associated expert review should be performed or what is fit for purpose, as well as a lack of confidence that the results will be accepted by colleagues, collaborators and regulatory authorities. To address this, a project to develop a series of IST protocols for different hazard endpoints has been initiated and this paper describes the genetic toxicity in silico (GIST) protocol. The protocol outlines a hazard assessment framework including key effects/mechanisms and their relationships to endpoints such as gene mutation and clastogenicity. IST models and data are reviewed that support the assessment of these effects/mechanisms along with defined approaches for combining the information and evaluating the confidence in the assessment. This protocol has been developed through a consortium of toxicologists, computational scientists, and regulatory scientists across several industries to support the implementation and acceptance of in silico approaches.

Structure Overhaul Affords a Potent Purine PI3Kδ Inhibitor with Improved Tolerability.

PI3Kδ catalytic activity is required for immune cell activation, and has been implicated in inflammatory diseases as well as hematological malignancies in which the AKT pathway is overactive. A purine PI3Kδ inhibitor bearing a benzimidazolone-piperidine motif was found to be poorly tolerated in dog, which was attributed to diffuse vascular injury. Several strategies were implemented to mitigate this finding, including reconstruction of the benzimidazolone-piperidine selectivity motif. Structure-based design led to the identification of O- and N-linked heterocycloalkyls, with pyrrolidines being particularly ligand efficient and kinome selective, and having an improved safety pharmacology profile. A representative was advanced into a dog tolerability study where it was found to be well tolerated, with no histopathological evidence of vascular injury.

In silico toxicology protocols.

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.

Regulatory Forum Opinion Piece*: Use and Utility of Animal Models of Disease for Nonclinical Safety Assessment: A Pharmaceutical Industry Survey.

An Innovation and Quality (IQ) Consortium focus group conducted a cross-company survey to evaluate current practices and perceptions around the use of animal models of disease (AMDs) in nonclinical safety assessment of molecules in clinical development. The IQ Consortium group is an organization of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies with the mission of advancing science and technology. The survey queried the utilization of AMDs during drug discovery in which drug candidates are evaluated in efficacy models and limited short-duration non-Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) toxicology testing and during drug development in which drug candidates are evaluated in GLP toxicology studies. The survey determined that the majority of companies used AMDs during drug discovery primarily as a means for proactively assessing potential nonclinical safety issues prior to the conduct of toxicology studies, followed closely by the use of AMDs to better understand toxicities associated with exaggerated pharmacology in traditional toxicology models or to derisk issues when the target is only expressed in the disease state. In contrast, the survey results indicated that the use of AMDs in development is infrequent, being used primarily to investigate nonclinical safety issues associated with targets expressed only in disease states and/or in response to requests from global regulatory authorities.

It's difficult, but important, to make negative predictions.

At the confluence of predictive and regulatory toxicologies, negative predictions may be the thin green line that prevents populations from being exposed to harm. Here, two novel approaches to making confident and robust negative in silico predictions for mutagenicity (as defined by the Ames test) have been evaluated. Analyses of 12 data sets containing >13,000 compounds, showed that negative predictivity is high (∼90%) for the best approach and features that either reduce the accuracy or certainty of negative predictions are identified as misclassified or unclassified respectively. However, negative predictivity remains high (and in excess of the prevalence of non-mutagens) even in the presence of these features, indicating that they are not flags for mutagenicity.

Evaluation of a statistics-based Ames mutagenicity QSAR model and interpretation of the results obtained.

The relative wealth of bacterial mutagenicity data available in the public literature means that in silico quantitative/qualitative structure activity relationship (QSAR) systems can readily be built for this endpoint. A good means of evaluating the performance of such systems is to use private unpublished data sets, which generally represent a more distinct chemical space than publicly available test sets and, as a result, provide a greater challenge to the model. However, raw performance metrics should not be the only factor considered when judging this type of software since expert interpretation of the results obtained may allow for further improvements in predictivity. Enough information should be provided by a QSAR to allow the user to make general, scientifically-based arguments in order to assess and overrule predictions when necessary. With all this in mind, we sought to validate the performance of the statistics-based in vitro bacterial mutagenicity prediction system Sarah Nexus (version 1.1) against private test data sets supplied by nine different pharmaceutical companies. The results of these evaluations were then analysed in order to identify findings presented by the model which would be useful for the user to take into consideration when interpreting the results and making their final decision about the mutagenic potential of a given compound.