Immunomodulation and cancer: Using mechanistic paradigms to inform risk assessment

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.

Consensus on the Key Characteristics of Immunotoxic Agents as a Basis for Hazard Identification

BACKGROUND

Key characteristics (KCs), properties of agents or exposures that confer potential hazard, have been developed for carcinogens and other toxicant classes. KCs have been used in the systematic assessment of hazards and to identify assay and data gaps that limit screening and risk assessment. Many of the mechanisms through which pharmaceuticals and occupational or environmental agents modulate immune function are well recognized. Thus KCs could be identified for immunoactive substances and applied to improve hazard assessment of immunodulatory agents.

OBJECTIVES

The goal was to generate a consensus-based synthesis of scientific evidence describing the KCs of agents known to cause immunotoxicity and potential applications, such as assays to measure the KCs.

METHODS

A committee of 18 experts with diverse specialties identified 10 KCs of immunotoxic agents, namely, 1) covalently binds to proteins to form novel antigens, 2) affects antigen processing and presentation, 3) alters immune cell signaling, 4) alters immune cell proliferation, 5) modifies cellular differentiation, 6) alters immune cell-cell communication, 7) alters effector function of specific cell types, 8) alters immune cell trafficking, 9) alters cell death processes, and 10) breaks down immune tolerance. The group considered how these KCs could influence immune processes and contribute to hypersensitivity, inappropriate enhancement, immunosuppression, or autoimmunity.

DISCUSSION

KCs can be used to improve efforts to identify agents that cause immunotoxicity via one or more mechanisms, to develop better testing and biomarker approaches to evaluate immunotoxicity, and to enable a more comprehensive and mechanistic understanding of adverse effects of exposures on the immune system. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP10800.

In Silico Approaches In Carcinogenicity Hazard Assessment: Current Status and Future Needs

Historically, identifying carcinogens has relied primarily on tumor studies in rodents, which require enormous resources in both money and time. In silico models have been developed for predicting rodent carcinogens but have not yet found general regulatory acceptance, in part due to the lack of a generally accepted protocol for performing such an assessment as well as limitations in predictive performance and scope. There remains a need for additional, improved in silico carcinogenicity models, especially ones that are more human-relevant, for use in research and regulatory decision-making. As part of an international effort to develop in silico toxicological protocols, a consortium of toxicologists, computational scientists, and regulatory scientists across several industries and governmental agencies evaluated the extent to which in silico models exist for each of the recently defined 10 key characteristics (KCs) of carcinogens. This position paper summarizes the current status of in silico tools for the assessment of each KC and identifies the data gaps that need to be addressed before a comprehensive in silico carcinogenicity protocol can be developed for regulatory use.