Developing a pragmatic consensus procedure supporting the ICH S1B(R1) weight of evidence carcinogenicity assessment.

The ICH S1B carcinogenicity global testing guideline has been recently revised with a novel addendum that describes a comprehensive integrated Weight of Evidence (WoE) approach to determine the need for a 2-year rat carcinogenicity study. In the present work, experts from different organizations have joined efforts to standardize as much as possible a procedural framework for the integration of evidence associated with the different ICH S1B(R1) WoE criteria. The framework uses a pragmatic consensus procedure for carcinogenicity hazard assessment to facilitate transparent, consistent, and documented decision-making and it discusses best-practices both for the organization of studies and presentation of data in a format suitable for regulatory review. First, it is acknowledged that the six WoE factors described in the addendum form an integrated network of evidence within a holistic assessment framework that is used synergistically to analyze and explain safety signals. Second, the proposed standardized procedure builds upon different considerations related to the primary sources of evidence, mechanistic analysis, alternative methodologies and novel investigative approaches, metabolites, and reliability of the data and other acquired information. Each of the six WoE factors is described highlighting how they can contribute evidence for the overall WoE assessment. A suggested reporting format to summarize the cross-integration of evidence from the different WoE factors is also presented. This work also notes that even if a 2-year rat study is ultimately required, creating a WoE assessment is valuable in understanding the specific factors and levels of human carcinogenic risk better than have been identified previously with the 2-year rat bioassay alone.

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.

In silico approaches in organ toxicity hazard assessment: current status and future needs in predicting liver toxicity.

Hepatotoxicity is one of the most frequently observed adverse effects resulting from exposure to a xenobiotic. For example, in pharmaceutical research and development it is one of the major reasons for drug withdrawals, clinical failures, and discontinuation of drug candidates. The development of faster and cheaper methods to assess hepatotoxicity that are both more sustainable and more informative is critically needed. The biological mechanisms and processes underpinning hepatotoxicity are summarized and experimental approaches to support the prediction of hepatotoxicity are described, including toxicokinetic considerations. The paper describes the increasingly important role of in silico approaches and highlights challenges to the adoption of these methods including the lack of a commonly agreed upon protocol for performing such an assessment and the need for in silico solutions that take dose into consideration. A proposed framework for the integration of in silico and experimental information is provided along with a case study describing how computational methods have been used to successfully respond to a regulatory question concerning non-genotoxic impurities in chemically synthesized pharmaceuticals.

In silico approaches in organ toxicity hazard assessment: Current status and future needs for predicting heart, kidney and lung toxicities.

The kidneys, heart and lungs are vital organ systems evaluated as part of acute or chronic toxicity assessments. New methodologies are being developed to predict these adverse effects based on in vitro and in silico approaches. This paper reviews the current state of the art in predicting these organ toxicities. It outlines the biological basis, processes and endpoints for kidney toxicity, pulmonary toxicity, respiratory irritation and sensitization as well as functional and structural cardiac toxicities. The review also covers current experimental approaches, including off-target panels from secondary pharmacology batteries. Current in silico approaches for prediction of these effects and mechanisms are described as well as obstacles to the use of in silico methods. Ultimately, a commonly accepted protocol for performing such assessment would be a valuable resource to expand the use of such approaches across different regulatory and industrial applications. However, a number of factors impede their widespread deployment including a lack of a comprehensive mechanistic understanding, limited in vitro testing approaches and limited in vivo databases suitable for modeling, a limited understanding of how to incorporate absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion (ADME) considerations into the overall process, a lack of in silico models designed to predict a safe dose and an accepted framework for organizing the key characteristics of these organ toxicants.

Skin sensitization in silico protocol.

The assessment of skin sensitization has evolved over the past few years to include in vitro assessments of key events along the adverse outcome pathway and opportunistically capitalize on the strengths of in silico methods to support a weight of evidence assessment without conducting a test in animals. While in silico methods vary greatly in their purpose and format; there is a need to standardize the underlying principles on which such models are developed and to make transparent the implications for the uncertainty in the overall assessment. In this contribution, the relationship between skin sensitization relevant effects, mechanisms, and endpoints are built into a hazard assessment framework. Based on the relevance of the mechanisms and effects as well as the strengths and limitations of the experimental systems used to identify them, rules and principles are defined for deriving skin sensitization in silico assessments. Further, the assignments of reliability and confidence scores that reflect the overall strength of the assessment are discussed. This skin sensitization protocol supports the implementation and acceptance of in silico approaches for the prediction of skin sensitization.

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.

Principles and procedures for handling out-of-domain and indeterminate results as part of ICH M7 recommended (Q)SAR analyses.

The International Council for Harmonization (ICH) M7 guideline describes a hazard assessment process for impurities that have the potential to be present in a drug substance or drug product. In the absence of adequate experimental bacterial mutagenicity data, (Q)SAR analysis may be used as a test to predict impurities' DNA reactive (mutagenic) potential. However, in certain situations, (Q)SAR software is unable to generate a positive or negative prediction either because of conflicting information or because the impurity is outside the applicability domain of the model. Such results present challenges in generating an overall mutagenicity prediction and highlight the importance of performing a thorough expert review. The following paper reviews pharmaceutical and regulatory experiences handling such situations. The paper also presents an analysis of proprietary data to help understand the likelihood of misclassifying a mutagenic impurity as non-mutagenic based on different combinations of (Q)SAR results. This information may be taken into consideration when supporting the (Q)SAR results with an expert review, especially when out-of-domain results are generated during a (Q)SAR evaluation.

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.

Principles and procedures for implementation of ICH M7 recommended (Q)SAR analyses.

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.

Extending (Q)SARs to incorporate proprietary knowledge for regulatory purposes: A case study using aromatic amine mutagenicity.

Statistical-based and expert rule-based models built using public domain mutagenicity knowledge and data are routinely used for computational (Q)SAR assessments of pharmaceutical impurities in line with the approach recommended in the ICH M7 guideline. Knowledge from proprietary corporate mutagenicity databases could be used to increase the predictive performance for selected chemical classes as well as expand the applicability domain of these (Q)SAR models. This paper outlines a mechanism for sharing knowledge without the release of proprietary data. Primary aromatic amine mutagenicity was selected as a case study because this chemical class is often encountered in pharmaceutical impurity analysis and mutagenicity of aromatic amines is currently difficult to predict. As part of this analysis, a series of aromatic amine substructures were defined and the number of mutagenic and non-mutagenic examples for each chemical substructure calculated across a series of public and proprietary mutagenicity databases. This information was pooled across all sources to identify structural classes that activate or deactivate aromatic amine mutagenicity. This structure activity knowledge, in combination with newly released primary aromatic amine data, was incorporated into Leadscope's expert rule-based and statistical-based (Q)SAR models where increased predictive performance was demonstrated.

Decreased apoptosis during CAR-mediated hepatoprotection against lithocholic acid-induced liver injury in mice.

Myeloid cell leukemia-1 (Mcl-1) is an anti-apoptotic protein that is regulated by the constitutive androstane receptor (CAR). Activation of CAR can protect the liver against bile acid-induced toxicity and it may have a role in cell death via apoptosis by altering expression of Bcl-2 family proteins such as myeloid cell leukemia-1 (Mcl-1). Our aim was to determine if activation of CAR reduces hepatocellular apoptosis during cholestasis as a mechanism of hepatoprotection. CAR(+/+) (WT) and CAR(-/-) (CAR-null) mice were pre-treated with compounds known to activate CAR prior to induction of intrahepatic cholestasis using the secondary bile acid lithocholic acid (LCA). Pre-treatment with the CAR activators phenobarbital (PB) and TCPOBOP (TC), as well as the non-CAR activator pregnenolone 16alpha-carbontrile (PCN), protected against LCA-induced liver injury in WT mice, whereas liver injury was more extensive without CAR (CAR-null). Unexpectedly, expression of anti-apoptotic Mcl-1 and Bcl-x(L) was not increased in hepatoprotected mice. Compared to unprotected groups, apoptosis was decreased in hepatoprotected mice as evidenced by the absence of cleaved caspase 3 (cCasp3). In contrast to the cytoplasmic localization in the injured livers (LCA and oltipraz), Mcl-1 protein was localized in the nucleus of hepatoprotected livers to potentially promote cell survival. This study demonstrates that although apoptosis is reduced in hepatoprotected mice pre-treated with CAR and non-CAR activators; hepatoprotection is not directly a result of CAR-induced Mcl-1 expression.

Constitutive androstane receptor-mediated changes in bile acid composition contributes to hepatoprotection from lithocholic acid-induced liver injury in mice.

Pharmacological activation of the constitutive androstane receptor (CAR) protects the liver during cholestasis. The current study evaluates how activation of CAR influences genes involved in bile acid biosynthesis as a mechanism of hepatoprotection during bile acid-induced liver injury. CAR activators phenobarbital (PB) and 1,4-bis[2-(3,5-dichloropyridyloxy)]benzene (TCPOBOP) or corn oil (CO) were administered to C57BL/6 wild-type (WT) and CAR knockout (CAR-null) mice before and during induction of intrahepatic cholestasis using the secondary bile acid, lithocholic acid (LCA). In LCA-treated WT and all the CAR-null groups (excluding controls), histology revealed severe multifocal necrosis. This pathology was absent in WT mice pretreated with PB and TCPOBOP, indicating CAR-dependent hepatoprotection. Decreases in total hepatic bile acids and hepatic monohydroxy, dihydroxy, and trihydroxy bile acids in PB- and TCPOBOP-pretreated WT mice correlated with hepatoprotection. In comparison, concentrations of monohydroxylated and dihydroxylated bile acids were increased in all the treated CAR-null mice compared with CO controls. Along with several other enzymes (Cyp7b1, Cyp27a1, Cyp39a1), Cyp8b1 expression was increased in hepatoprotected mice, which could be suggestive of a shift in the bile acid biosynthesis pathway toward the formation of less toxic bile acids. In CAR-null mice, these changes in gene expression were not different among treatment groups. These results suggest CAR mediates a shift in bile acid biosynthesis toward the formation of less toxic bile acids, as well as a decrease in hepatic bile acid concentrations. We propose that these combined CAR-mediated effects may contribute to the hepatoprotection observed during LCA-induced liver injury.

Minimal role of hepatic transporters in the hepatoprotection against LCA-induced intrahepatic cholestasis.

The multidrug resistance-associated proteins (Mrps) are a family of adenosine triphosphate-dependent transporters that facilitate the movement of various compounds, including bile acids, out of hepatocytes. The current study was conducted to determine whether induction of these transporters alters bile acid disposition as a means of hepatoprotection during bile acid-induced cholestasis. Lithocholic acid (LCA) was used to induce intrahepatic cholestasis. C57BL/6 mice were pretreated with corn oil (CO) or known transporter inducers, phenobarbital (PB), oltipraz (OPZ), or TCPOBOP (TC) for 3 days prior to cotreatment with LCA and inducer for 4 days. Histopathology revealed that PB and TC pretreatments provide a protective effect from LCA-induced toxicity, whereas OPZ pretreatment did not. Both PB/LCA and TC/LCA cotreatment groups also had significantly lower alanine aminotransferase values than the LCA-only group. In TC/LCA cotreated mice compared with LCA only, messenger RNA (mRNA) expression of uptake transporters Ntcp and Oatp4 was significantly increased, as were sinusoidal efflux transporters Mrp3 and Mrp4. Although in PB/LCA cotreated mice, the only significant change compared with LCA-only treatment was an increase in uptake transporter Oatp4. Oatp1 was reduced in all groups compared with CO controls. No significant changes in mRNA expression were observed in Oatp2, Bsep, Mrp2, Bcrp, Mrp1, Mrp5, or Mrp6. Mrp4 protein expression was induced in the OPZ/LCA and TC/LCA cotreated groups, whereas Mrp3 protein levels remained unchanged between groups. Protein expression of Mrp1 and Mrp5 was increased in the unprotected LCA-only and OPZ/LCA mice. Thus, transporter expression did not correlate with histologic hepatoprotection, however, there was a correlation between hepatoprotection and significantly reduced total liver bile acids in the PB/LCA and TC/LCA cotreated mice compared with LCA only. In conclusion, changes in transporter expression did not correlate with hepatoprotection, and therefore, transport may not play a critical role in the observed hepatoprotection from LCA-induced cholestasis in the C57BL/6 mouse.