Difference between revisions of "Aop:39"
(Migrating page to new template) |
m (Wikibot moved page Respiratory Sensitisation/Allergy induced by covalent binding to proteins to Aop:39) |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 18:50, 28 September 2014
AOP Title
Authors
Kristie Sullivan, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine/ICAPO, Ksullivan@pcrm.org
Darrell Boverhof, Dow Chemical Company
Stella Cochrane, Unilever
Steven Enoch, Liverpool John Moores University
Janine Ezendam, RIVM
Ian Kimber, University of Manchester
Joanna Matheson & Kent Carlson, US CPSC
Grace Patlewicz, DuPont
Erwin Roggen, Novozymes
Katherina Sewald, Fraunhofer ITEM
Status
Alert: The Weight of Evidence column in the Molecular Initiating Event and Key Event tables has changed to Essentiality. Consider re-evaluating the columns in these tables.
Under development: Do not distribute or cite.
Abstract
The assessment of xenobiotics for potential to induce an allergenic response in the respiratory tract is of great regulatory and industrial interest. Currently, however, there are not standardized, validated and accepted regulatory models for detecting these materials, potentially due to remaining uncertainty within the literature as to the exact mechanistic pathway leading to respiratory allergy.
Ongoing work in this area has hypothesized some differences between the dermal and respiratory sensitisation pathways; however in some cases a lack of strong empirical evidence on a variety of chemistries to test these hypothesis. This AOP represents the currently available data with the aim of identifying knowledge gaps which may be filled with directed research.
Summary of the AOP
Molecular Initiating Event
Molecular Initiating Event | Support for Essentiality | |
---|---|---|
Covalent binding to protein, possibly lysine residue, N/A | Strong |
Key Events
Event | Support for Essentiality | |
---|---|---|
Inflammatory cytokines, chemokines, cytoprotective gene pathways, Activation | Moderate |
Adverse Outcome
Adverse Outcome | |
---|---|
Allergic Respiratory Hypersensitivity Response, Increase |
Relationships Among Key Events and the Adverse Outcome
Step | Event | Description | Triggers | Weight of Evidence | Quantitative Understanding | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Covalent binding to protein, possibly lysine residue, N/A | Directly Leads to | Inflammatory cytokines, chemokines, cytoprotective gene pathways, Activation | Moderate | Weak |
Network View
Cytoscape Web will replace the contents of this div with your graph.
Click nodes or edges.
Life Stage Applicability
Life Stage | Evidence | Links |
---|
Taxonomic Applicability
Name | Scientific Name | Evidence | Links |
---|
Sex Applicability
Sex | Evidence | Links |
---|
Graphical Representation
Click to upload graphical representation
Overall Assessment of the AOP
Consider the following criteria (may include references to KE Relationship pages): 1. concordance of dose-response relationships; 2. temporal concordance among the key events and adverse effect; 3. strength, consistency, and specificity of association of adverse effect and initiating event; 4. biological plausibility, coherence, and consistency of the experimental evidence; 5. alternative mechanisms that logically present themselves and the extent to which they may distract from the postulated AOP. It should be noted that alternative mechanisms of action, if supported, require a separate AOP; 6. uncertainties, inconsistencies and data gaps.
Weight of Evidence Summary
Summary Table
Provide an overall summary of the weight of evidence based on the evaluations of the individual linkages from the Key Event Relationship pages.
Essentiality of the Key Events
Molecular Initiating Event Summary,
Key Event Summary
Provide an overall assessment of the essentiality for the key events in the AOP. Support calls for individual key events can be included in the molecular initiating event, key event, and adverse outcome tables above.
Quantitative Considerations
Summary Table
Provide an overall discussion of the quantitative information available for this AOP. Support calls for the individual relationships can be included in the Key Event Relationship table above.
Applicability of the AOP
Life Stage Applicability,
Taxonomic Applicability,
Sex Applicability
Elaborate on the domains of applicability listed in the summary section above. Specifically, provide the literature supporting, or excluding, certain domains.
Considerations for Potential Applications of the AOP (optional)
References
Chipenda I, Hettick JM, Siegal PD (2011) Haptenation: Chemical Reactivity and Protein Binding, Journal of Allergy, vol. 2011, Article ID 839682, 11 pages. doi:10.1155/2011/839682.
Templeton D (2004) Mechanisms of Immunosensitisation to Metals, Pure and Applied Chemistry, 76:1255-1268.
Confidence in the AOP
Information from this section should be moved to the Key Event Relationship pages!
Elaborate on the domains of applicability listed in the summary section above. Specifically, provide the literature supporting, or excluding, certain domains.
Sensitizers which do not fit into this AOP:
There have been a number of studies into the sensitisation (and toxicity) of transition metal complexes; key amongst these is a recent study outlining the evidence for these complexes initiating sensitisation via the formation of co-ordination complexes rather than covalent bond formation (Chipenda et al 2011). The authors of this study present the evidence that these co-ordination complexes are not stable enough to survive the antigen processing that a covalent hapten undergoes, thus cannot sensitise via this MIE. Instead an alternative MIE is outlined in which these complexes bind to cell surface proteins like MHC, bypassing the intracellular antigen process. This MIE fits in with the observed cross-reactivity that appears to transcend the trends one would expect based on the periodic table (for example, complexes of Cr, a group 6 metal, cross sensitising with complexes of Co, a group 9 metal) (Templeton et al 2004). It is thought that the surface protein chelates the metal complex and presents it to T-cells directly. Therefore transition metals would require a separate AOP from chemicals acting via covalent binding to proteins.