To the extent possible under law, AOP-Wiki has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to KER:377

Relationship: 377

Title

The title of the KER should clearly define the two KEs being considered and the sequential relationship between them (i.e., which is upstream and which is downstream). Consequently all KER titles take the form “upstream KE leads to downstream KE”.  More help

Covalent Binding, Protein leads to Activation, Dendritic Cells

Upstream event
Upstream event in the Key Event Relationship. On the KER page, clicking on the Event name under Upstream Relationship will bring the user to that individual KE page. More help
Downstream event
Downstream event in the Key Event Relationship. On the KER page, clicking on the Event name under Upstream Relationship will bring the user to that individual KE page. More help

Key Event Relationship Overview

The utility of AOPs for regulatory application is defined, to a large extent, by the confidence and precision with which they facilitate extrapolation of data measured at low levels of biological organisation to predicted outcomes at higher levels of organisation and the extent to which they can link biological effect measurements to their specific causes. Within the AOP framework, the predictive relationships that facilitate extrapolation are represented by the KERs. Consequently, the overall WoE for an AOP is a reflection in part, of the level of confidence in the underlying series of KERs it encompasses. Therefore, describing the KERs in an AOP involves assembling and organising the types of information and evidence that defines the scientific basis for inferring the probable change in, or state of, a downstream KE from the known or measured state of an upstream KE. More help

AOPs Referencing Relationship

This table is automatically generated upon addition of a KER to an AOP. All of the AOPs that are linked to this KER will automatically be listed in this subsection. Clicking on the name of the AOP in the table will bring you to the individual page for that AOP. More help
AOP Name Adjacency Weight of Evidence Quantitative Understanding Point of Contact Author Status OECD Status
Covalent Protein binding leading to Skin Sensitisation adjacent High Sharon Munn (send email) Open for citation & comment TFHA/WNT Endorsed
Covalent Binding of Low Molecular Weight Organic Chemicals to Proteins leads to Sensitisation (Sensitization) of the Respiratory Tract adjacent High Not Specified Kristie Sullivan (send email) Under Development: Contributions and Comments Welcome Under Development

Taxonomic Applicability

Select one or more structured terms that help to define the biological applicability domain of the KER. In general, this will be dictated by the more restrictive of the two KEs being linked together by the KER. Authors can indicate the relevant taxa for this KER in this subsection. The process is similar to what is described for KEs (see pages 30-31 and 37-38 of User Handbook) More help
Term Scientific Term Evidence Link
human Homo sapiens High NCBI

Sex Applicability

Authors can indicate the relevant sex for this KER in this subsection. The process is similar to what is described for KEs (see pages 31-32 of the User Handbook). More help
Sex Evidence
Unspecific

Life Stage Applicability

Authors can indicate the relevant life stage for this KER in this subsection. The process is similar to what is described for KEs (see pages 31-32 of User Handbook). More help
Term Evidence
All life stages

Key Event Relationship Description

Provide a brief, descriptive summation of the KER. While the title itself is fairly descriptive, this section can provide details that aren’t inherent in the description of the KEs themselves (see page 39 of the User Handbook). This description section can be viewed as providing the increased specificity in the nature of upstream perturbation (KEupstream) that leads to a particular downstream perturbation (KEdownstream), while allowing the KE descriptions to remain generalised so they can be linked to different AOPs. The description is also intended to provide a concise overview for readers who may want a brief summation, without needing to read through the detailed support for the relationship (covered below). Careful attention should be taken to avoid reference to other KEs that are not part of this KER, other KERs or other AOPs. This will ensure that the KER is modular and can be used by other AOPs. More help

Dendritic cells are activated directly by exposure to haptens in both skin and respiratory sensitization. This portion of the KER description is based only on the OECD document 2012 and needs updating:

As noted in the AOP during allergen contact with the skin, immature epidermal dendritic cells, known as Langerhans cells, and dermal dendritic cells serve as antigen-presenting cells[1];[2];[3]. In this role, they recognize and internalize the hapten-protein complex formed during covalent binding. Subsequently, the dendritic cell loses its ability to seize new hapten-protein complexes and gains the potential to display the allergen-MHC-complex to naive T-cells; this process is often referred to as dendritic cell maturation.

Evidence Supporting this KER

Assembly and description of the scientific evidence supporting KERs in an AOP is an important step in the AOP development process that sets the stage for overall assessment of the AOP (see pages 49-56 of the User Handbook). To do this, biological plausibility, empirical support, and the current quantitative understanding of the KER are evaluated with regard to the predictive relationships/associations between defined pairs of KEs as a basis for considering WoE (page 55 of User Handbook). In addition, uncertainties and inconsistencies are considered. More help
Biological Plausibility
Define, in free text, the biological rationale for a connection between KEupstream and KEdownstream. What are the structural or functional relationships between the KEs? For example, there is a functional relationship between an enzyme’s activity and the product of a reaction it catalyses. Supporting references should be included. However, it is recognised that there may be cases where the biological relationship between two KEs is very well established, to the extent that it is widely accepted and consistently supported by so much literature that it is unnecessary and impractical to cite the relevant primary literature. Citation of review articles or other secondary sources, like text books, may be reasonable in such cases. The primary intent is to provide scientifically credible support for the structural and/or functional relationship between the pair of KEs if one is known. The description of biological plausibility can also incorporate additional mechanistic details that help inform the relationship between KEs, this is useful when it is not practical/pragmatic to represent these details as separate KEs due to the difficulty or relative infrequency with which it is likely to be measured (see page 40 of the User Handbook for further information).   More help

It is accepted and experimentally proved that during skin sensitisation process, immature epidermal and dermal dendritic cells recognize and internalize the hapten-protein complex formed during covalent binding and subsequently mature and migrate to the local lymph nodes[1];[2];[3].

Monocyte-derived DCs (Mo-DCs) and THP-1 cells exposed to haptens with cysteine, lysine, or cysteine/lysine reactivity induced the expression of Nrf2 pathway-related genes when exposed to chemical sensitizers having cysteine and cysteine/ lysine affinities, while lysine-reactive chemicals (phthalic anhydride [PA] and TMA) were less efficient. (Migdal et al., 2013) Also, these chemicals did not prod the Mo-DCs to produce maturation markers CD86 and CD83, while PA was able to modify THP-1 cells to produce CD86 and CD54 markers.

(Toebak et al., 2006) used Mo-DCs to investigate the polarization potential of TMA compared to contact and protein allergens. In contrast to 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) and similarly to protein allergen Der p1, TMA led to a decreased IL-12p70/IL-10 ratio and did not induce TNF-a or CXCL10 production, a demonstration of Th2-skewing. TMA was also found to increase the production of the cytokines IL-10 and IL-13, another hallmark of Th2 response, in DCs enriched from human blood. (Holden et al., 2008) Finally, TMA induced increased production of IL-10 when incubated with precision cut lung slices (PCLS) for 24 hours. (Lauenstein et al., 2014)

In BALB/c mice, TDI applied to the skin led to TDI-haptenated protein (TDI-hp) (skin keratins and albumin) localization in the stratum corneum, hair follicles, and sebaceous glands within 3 hours, with intensity of staining following a dose–response relationship. (Nayak et al., 2014) Subsequently, CD11b+, Langerin (CD207)-expressing DCs, and CD103+ cells migrated to regions of TDI-hp staining. These cells are involved in antigen uptake and stimulation of effector T cells.

Migration depends on the expression of chemokine receptors and their respective CCLs, as well as on adhesion molecules, such as integrins. DCs express receptors for, and respond to, constitutive and inflammatory chemokines and other chemoattractants, such as platelet-activating factor and formyl peptides.

Uncertainties and Inconsistencies
In addition to outlining the evidence supporting a particular linkage, it is also important to identify inconsistencies or uncertainties in the relationship. Additionally, while there are expected patterns of concordance that support a causal linkage between the KEs in the pair, it is also helpful to identify experimental details that may explain apparent deviations from the expected patterns of concordance. Identification of uncertainties and inconsistencies contribute to evaluation of the overall WoE supporting the AOPs that contain a given KER and to the identification of research gaps that warrant investigation (seep pages 41-42 of the User Handbook).Given that AOPs are intended to support regulatory applications, AOP developers should focus on those inconsistencies or gaps that would have a direct bearing or impact on the confidence in the KER and its use as a basis for inference or extrapolation in a regulatory setting. Uncertainties that may be of academic interest but would have little impact on regulatory application don’t need to be described. In general, this section details evidence that may raise questions regarding the overall validity and predictive utility of the KER (including consideration of both biological plausibility and empirical support). It also contributes along with several other elements to the overall evaluation of the WoE for the KER (see Section 4 of the User Handbook).  More help

The expression of other cytokines linked to skin sensitisers include IL-1 α, IL-1β, IL-18, and TNF-α form the basis for other dendritic cell assays. In general, an increase in cytokine/chemokine secretion or receptor expression is observed when sensitisers were tested but not when non-sensitisers were tested. However, there is currently only a limited number of chemicals evaluated in more than one assay and results are sometimes contradictory.

Much investigation has gone into assessing the specific mechanistic events involved in skin sensitizer-caused DC migration. Ex vivo studies with intact human skin, epidermal sheets, and MUTZ-3-derived Langerhans cells (LC) show that fibroblasts mediate migration of cytokine-matured LC via chemokines, including CXCL12, CXCR4, and dermis-derived CCL2 and CCL5. (Ouwehand et al., 2008, 2011, 2012) The relevance of these studies for respiratory sensitization is not known. Some evidence indicates that IL-10, upregulated by TMA, may block the migration of LC for a short period of time to allow a Th2 phenotype to develop.(Holden et al., 2008, Cumberbatch et al., 2005)

Response-response Relationship
This subsection should be used to define sources of data that define the response-response relationships between the KEs. In particular, information regarding the general form of the relationship (e.g., linear, exponential, sigmoidal, threshold, etc.) should be captured if possible. If there are specific mathematical functions or computational models relevant to the KER in question that have been defined, those should also be cited and/or described where possible, along with information concerning the approximate range of certainty with which the state of the KEdownstream can be predicted based on the measured state of the KEupstream (i.e., can it be predicted within a factor of two, or within three orders of magnitude?). For example, a regression equation may reasonably describe the response-response relationship between the two KERs, but that relationship may have only been validated/tested in a single species under steady state exposure conditions. Those types of details would be useful to capture.  More help
Time-scale
This sub-section should be used to provide information regarding the approximate time-scale of the changes in KEdownstream relative to changes in KEupstream (i.e., do effects on KEdownstream lag those on KEupstream by seconds, minutes, hours, or days?). This can be useful information both in terms of modelling the KER, as well as for analyzing the critical or dominant paths through an AOP network (e.g., identification of an AO that could kill an organism in a matter of hours will generally be of higher priority than other potential AOs that take weeks or months to develop). Identification of time-scale can also aid the assessment of temporal concordance. For example, for a KER that operates on a time-scale of days, measurement of both KEs after just hours of exposure in a short-term experiment could lead to incorrect conclusions regarding dose-response or temporal concordance if the time-scale of the upstream to downstream transition was not considered. More help

Mo-DCs express maturation factors in a few hours following exposure, similar in time-scale to the activation of inflammatory responses. In vivo, DC migration to lymph nodes is typically measured 18 hours after exposure.

Known modulating factors
This sub-section presents information regarding modulating factors/variables known to alter the shape of the response-response function that describes the quantitative relationship between the two KEs (for example, an iodine deficient diet causes a significant increase in the slope of the relationship; a particular genotype doubles the sensitivity of KEdownstream to changes in KEupstream). Information on these known modulating factors should be listed in this subsection, along with relevant information regarding the manner in which the modulating factor can be expected to alter the relationship (if known). Note, this section should focus on those modulating factors for which solid evidence supported by relevant data and literature is available. It should NOT list all possible/plausible modulating factors. In this regard, it is useful to bear in mind that many risk assessments conducted through conventional apical guideline testing-based approaches generally consider few if any modulating factors. More help
Known Feedforward/Feedback loops influencing this KER
This subsection should define whether there are known positive or negative feedback mechanisms involved and what is understood about their time-course and homeostatic limits? In some cases where feedback processes are measurable and causally linked to the outcome, they should be represented as KEs. However, in most cases these features are expected to predominantly influence the shape of the response-response, time-course, behaviours between selected KEs. For example, if a feedback loop acts as compensatory mechanism that aims to restore homeostasis following initial perturbation of a KE, the feedback loop will directly shape the response-response relationship between the KERs. Given interest in formally identifying these positive or negative feedback, it is recommended that a graphical annotation (page 44) indicating a positive or negative feedback loop is involved in a particular upstream to downstream KE transition (KER) be added to the graphical representation, and that details be provided in this subsection of the KER description (see pages 44-45 of the User Handbook).  More help

Domain of Applicability

As for the KEs, there is also a free-text section of the KER description that the developer can use to explain his/her rationale for the structured terms selected with regard to taxonomic, life stage, or sex applicability, or provide a more generalizable or nuanced description of the applicability domain than may be feasible using standardized terms. More help

References

List of the literature that was cited for this KER description using the appropriate format. Ideally, the list of references should conform, to the extent possible, with the OECD Style Guide (OECD, 2015). More help
  1. 1.0 1.1 Ryan CA, Gerberick GF, Gildea LA, Hulette BC, Bettis CJ, Cumberbatch M, Dearman RJ and Kimber I. 2005. Interactions of contact allergens with dendritic cells: opportunities and challenges for the development of novel approaches to hazard assessment. Toxicol. Sci. 88: 4-11.
  2. 2.0 2.1 Ryan CA, Kimber I, Basketter DA, Pallardy M, Gildea LA, Gerberick GF. 2007. Dendritic cells and skin sensitisation. Biological roles and uses in hazard identification. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 221: 384-394.
  3. 3.0 3.1 Kimber I, Basketter DA, Gerberick GF, Ryan CA and Dearman RJ. 2011. Chemical allergy: Translating biology into hazard characterization. Toxicol. Sci. 120(S1): S238-S268.
  4. Gerberick F, Aleksic M, Basketter D, Casati S, Karlberg AT, Kern P, Kimber I, Lepoittevin JP, Natsch A, Ovigne JM, Rovida C, Sakaguchi H and Schultz T. 2008. Chemical reactivity measurement and the predictive identification of skin sensitisers. Altern. Lab. Anim.36: 215-242.
  5. Karlberg AT, Bergström MA, Börje A, Luthman, K, Nilsson JL. 2008. Allergic contact dermatitis- formation, structural requirements, and reactivity of skin sensitizers. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 21: 53-69.
  6. Vocanson M, Hennino A, Rozieres A, Poyet G, Nicolas JF. 2009. Effector and regulatory mechanisms in allergic contact dermatitis. Allergy 64: 1699-1714.
  7. Aeby P, Ashikaga T, Bessou-Touya S, Schapky A, Geberick F, Kern P, Marrec-Fairley M, Maxwell G, Ovigne J-M, Sakaguchi H, Reisinger K, Tailhardat M, Martinozzi-Teisser S, Winkler P. 2010. Identifying and characterizing chemical skin sensitizers without animal testing; Colipa’s research and methods development program. Toxicol. In Vitro 24: 1465-1473.
  8. Basketter DA and Kimber I. 2010. Contact hypersensitivity. In: McQueen, CA (ed) Comparative Toxicology Vol. 5, 2nd Ed. Elsevier, Kidlington, UK, pp. 397-411.
  9. Adler S, Basketter D, Creton S, Pelkonen O, van Benthem J, Zuang V, Ejner-Andersen K, Angers- Loustau A, Aptula A, Bal-Price A, Benfenati E, Bernauer U, Bessems J, Bois FY, Boobis A, Brandon E, Bremer S, Broschard T, Casati S Coecke S Corvi R, Cronin M, Daston G, Dekant W, Felter S, Grignard E, Gundert-Remy U, Heinonen T, Kimber I, Kleinjans J, Komulainen H, Kreiling R, Kreysa J, Batista Leite S, Loizou G, Maxwell G, Mazzatorta P, Munn S, Pfuhler S, Phrakonkham P, Piersma A, Poth A, Prieto P, Repetto G, Rogiers V, Schoeters G, Schwarz M, Serafimova R, Tahti H, Testai E, van Delft J, van Loveren H, Vinken M, Worth A, Zaldivar JM. 2011. Alternative (non-animal) methods for cosmetics testing: current status and future prospects-2010. Arch. Toxicol. 85: 367-485.
  10. Lempertz U, Kühn U, Knop J and Becker D. 1996. An approach to predictive testing of contact sensitizers in vitro by monitoring their influence on endocytic mechanisms. Internat. Arch. Allergy Immunol. 111: 64-70.
  11. Sakaguchi H, Ashikaga T, Miyazawa M, Kosaka N, Ito Y, Yoneyama K, Sono S, Itagaki H, Toyoda H, Suzuki H. 2009. The relationship between CD86/CD54 expression and THP-1 cell viability in an in vitro skin sensitisation test-human cell line activation test (h-CLAT). Cell Biol. Toxicol. 25: 109-126.
  12. Ashikaga T, Sakaguchi H, Sono S, Kosaka N, Ishikawa M, Nukada Y, Miyazawa M, Ito Y, Nishiyama N, Itagaki H. 2010. A comparative evaluation of in vitro skin sensitisation tests: the human cell-line activation test (h-CLAT) versus the local lymph node assay (LLNA). Altern. Lab. Anim. 38:275-84.

CUMBERBATCH, M., CLELLAND, K., DEARMAN, R. J. & KIMBER, I. 2005. Impact of cutaneous IL-10 on resident epidermal Langerhans' cells and the development of polarized immune responses. J Immunol, 175, 43-50.

HOLDEN, N. J., BEDFORD, P. A., MCCARTHY, N. E., MARKS, N. A., IND, P. W., JOWSEY, I. R., BASKETTER, D. A. & KNIGHT, S. C. 2008. Dendritic cells from control but not atopic donors respond to contact and respiratory sensitizer treatment in vitro with differential cytokine production and altered stimulatory capacity. Clin Exp Allergy, 38, 1148-59.

MIGDAL, C., BOTTON, J., EL ALI, Z., AZOURY, M. E., GULDEMANN, J., GIMÉNEZ-ARNAU, E., LEPOITTEVIN, J. P., KERDINE-RÖMER, S. & PALLARDY, M. 2013. Reactivity of chemical sensitizers toward amino acids in cellulo plays a role in the activation of the Nrf2-ARE pathway in human monocyte dendritic cells and the THP-1 cell line. Toxicol Sci, 133, 259-74.

NAYAK, A. P., HETTICK, J. M., SIEGEL, P. D., ANDERSON, S. E., LONG, C. M., GREEN, B. J. & BEEZHOLD, D. H. 2014. Toluene diisocyanate (TDI) disposition and co-localization of immune cells in hair follicles. Toxicol Sci, 140, 327-37.

OUWEHAND, K., SANTEGOETS, S. J., BRUYNZEEL, D. P., SCHEPER, R. J., DE GRUIJL, T. D. & GIBBS, S. 2008. CXCL12 is essential for migration of activated Langerhans cells from epidermis to dermis. Eur J Immunol, 38, 3050-9.

OUWEHAND, K., SPIEKSTRA, S. W., WAAIJMAN, T., BREETVELD, M., SCHEPER, R. J., DE GRUIJL, T. D. & GIBBS, S. 2012. CCL5 and CCL20 mediate immigration of Langerhans cells into the epidermis of full thickness human skin equivalents. Eur J Cell Biol, 91, 765-73.

OUWEHAND, K., SPIEKSTRA, S. W., WAAIJMAN, T., SCHEPER, R. J., DE GRUIJL, T. D. & GIBBS, S. 2011. Technical advance: Langerhans cells derived from a human cell line in a full-thickness skin equivalent undergo allergen-induced maturation and migration. J Leukoc Biol, 90, 1027-33.

TOEBAK, M. J., MOED, H., VON BLOMBERG, M. B., BRUYNZEEL, D. P., GIBBS, S., SCHEPER, R. J. & RUSTEMEYER, T. 2006. Intrinsic characteristics of contact and respiratory allergens influence production of polarizing cytokines by dendritic cells. Contact Dermatitis, 55, 238-45.