Search

Increased expectations from a number of regulatory agencies, e.g., Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMEA), and the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) of Japan, call for the evaluation of potential adverse effects on the immune system. As recently summarized in the ICH S8 guideline, the T-cell-dependent antibody response (TDAR) has been identified in a regulatory context as a main functional test of immunotoxicity. While the characterization of immunotoxic potential is pertinent to both the chemical and pharmaceutical industries, the use of immunotoxicology data for hazard identification and/or risk assessment in each case is different. Therefore, multiple approaches to immunotoxicity testing have evolved. The assays that evaluate TDAR function include both well-established tests, e.g., anti-sheep red blood cell plaque-forming cell (PFC) assay, and newer models, e.g., anti-keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH) antibody ELISA. These tests vary in the study design, antigen application and analytical methods. However, they all evaluate the same endpoint - a competent immune (e.g., antibody) response to an antigen. Numerous issues have been identified in the application of TDAR tests, including high animal to animal variability; differences in antigen source and potency; a lack of established "normal range" of the immune response and uncertainty about the degree of inhibition of the TDAR to be considered toxicologically important. As such, the need for a forum to discuss these issues was recognized by the immunotoxicology community, and was addressed at the 2006 Society of Toxicology (SOT) Workshop. A series of papers will summarize that forum with the ultimate objectives being to build a consensus among immunotoxicologists on the implications of these factors on using TDAR results in hazard identification and/or risk assessment, and to establish a criteria to classify compounds as immunotoxicants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]