First alternative method validated by a retrospective weight-of-evidence approach to replace the Draize eye test for the identification of non-irritant substances for a defined applicability domain.

ALTEX Pub Date : 2010-01-01 DOI:10.14573/altex.2010.1.43
Thomas Hartung, Leon Bruner, Rodger Curren, Chantra Eskes, Alan Goldberg, Pauline McNamee, Laurie Scott, Valérie Zuang
{"title":"First alternative method validated by a retrospective weight-of-evidence approach to replace the Draize eye test for the identification of non-irritant substances for a defined applicability domain.","authors":"Thomas Hartung,&nbsp;Leon Bruner,&nbsp;Rodger Curren,&nbsp;Chantra Eskes,&nbsp;Alan Goldberg,&nbsp;Pauline McNamee,&nbsp;Laurie Scott,&nbsp;Valérie Zuang","doi":"10.14573/altex.2010.1.43","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A replacement alternative to the rabbit eye irritation test has been sought for many years. First published in 1944 by FDA toxicologist J. H. Draize, the test, now known as the Draize Eye Test, has been used extensively to assess eye safety. It has also been a focal point for concern regarding its animal use. In 1992, Molecular Devices developed the Cytosensor Microphysiometer (CM) technology, an automated potentiometric online measurement of pH changes in cells, and evaluated it also for chemically induced irritation. The method was included in some of the six major validation studies for eye irritation from 1991-1997. The results for CM were inconclusive as were those from other tests evaluated as stand-alone methods to fully replace the animal test. In 2002, the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) started applying concepts from evidence-based medicine, and opened validation to retrospective meta-analysis. This activity was done in collaboration with US counterpart ICCVAM/NICEATM, and the European Cosmetics Association, Colipa. After a new, comprehensive evaluation of the prior available data, the ECVAM scientific advisory committee (ESAC) has recently accepted the CM as capable of identifying non-irritants for testing limited to water-soluble surfactants and water-soluble surfactant-containing mixtures. This 25-year development is remarkable and instructive in many respects. The authors see this as opening the door, at last, for an end to the use of animals as a standard requirement for eye irritation. Here, several of the people critically involved in this processes have summarized the important aspects of this history.</p>","PeriodicalId":520550,"journal":{"name":"ALTEX","volume":" ","pages":"43-51"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"48","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ALTEX","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14573/altex.2010.1.43","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 48

Abstract

A replacement alternative to the rabbit eye irritation test has been sought for many years. First published in 1944 by FDA toxicologist J. H. Draize, the test, now known as the Draize Eye Test, has been used extensively to assess eye safety. It has also been a focal point for concern regarding its animal use. In 1992, Molecular Devices developed the Cytosensor Microphysiometer (CM) technology, an automated potentiometric online measurement of pH changes in cells, and evaluated it also for chemically induced irritation. The method was included in some of the six major validation studies for eye irritation from 1991-1997. The results for CM were inconclusive as were those from other tests evaluated as stand-alone methods to fully replace the animal test. In 2002, the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM) started applying concepts from evidence-based medicine, and opened validation to retrospective meta-analysis. This activity was done in collaboration with US counterpart ICCVAM/NICEATM, and the European Cosmetics Association, Colipa. After a new, comprehensive evaluation of the prior available data, the ECVAM scientific advisory committee (ESAC) has recently accepted the CM as capable of identifying non-irritants for testing limited to water-soluble surfactants and water-soluble surfactant-containing mixtures. This 25-year development is remarkable and instructive in many respects. The authors see this as opening the door, at last, for an end to the use of animals as a standard requirement for eye irritation. Here, several of the people critically involved in this processes have summarized the important aspects of this history.

通过回顾性证据权重方法验证的第一种替代方法,可取代Draize眼科测试,用于在确定的适用范围内识别非刺激性物质。
寻找替代兔眼刺激试验的方法已经有很多年了。1944年,FDA毒理学家j.h. Draize首次发表了这项测试,现在被称为Draize视力测试,已被广泛用于评估眼睛安全。它也一直是关注其动物使用的焦点。1992年,Molecular Devices开发了细胞传感器微生理仪(CM)技术,这是一种自动电位在线测量细胞pH变化的技术,并对化学诱导的刺激进行了评估。1991-1997年间,该方法被纳入了六个主要的眼睛刺激验证研究中的一些。CM的结果是不确定的,其他试验的结果也是不确定的,这些试验被评估为完全取代动物试验的独立方法。2002年,欧洲替代方法验证中心(ECVAM)开始应用循证医学的概念,并向回顾性荟萃分析开放验证。这项活动是与美国ICCVAM/NICEATM以及欧洲化妆品协会Colipa合作完成的。ECVAM科学咨询委员会(ESAC)在对之前的可用数据进行了新的综合评估后,最近接受了CM能够识别非刺激物,用于仅限于水溶性表面活性剂和含水溶性表面活性剂混合物的测试。这25年的发展在许多方面都是引人注目和具有指导意义的。作者们认为,这最终打开了一扇门,结束了将动物作为眼睛刺激的标准要求。在这里,几位批判性地参与这一进程的人总结了这段历史的重要方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信