Literature DB >> 21533817

Alternative (non-animal) methods for cosmetics testing: current status and future prospects-2010.

Sarah Adler1, David Basketter, Stuart Creton, Olavi Pelkonen, Jan van Benthem, Valérie Zuang, Klaus Ejner Andersen, Alexandre Angers-Loustau, Aynur Aptula, Anna Bal-Price, Emilio Benfenati, Ulrike Bernauer, Jos Bessems, Frederic Y Bois, Alan Boobis, Esther Brandon, Susanne Bremer, Thomas Broschard, Silvia Casati, Sandra Coecke, Raffaella Corvi, Mark Cronin, George Daston, Wolfgang Dekant, Susan Felter, Elise Grignard, Ursula Gundert-Remy, Tuula Heinonen, Ian Kimber, Jos Kleinjans, Hannu Komulainen, Reinhard Kreiling, Joachim Kreysa, Sofia Batista Leite, George Loizou, Gavin Maxwell, Paolo Mazzatorta, Sharon Munn, Stefan Pfuhler, Pascal Phrakonkham, Aldert Piersma, Albrecht Poth, Pilar Prieto, Guillermo Repetto, Vera Rogiers, Greet Schoeters, Michael Schwarz, Rositsa Serafimova, Hanna Tähti, Emanuela Testai, Joost van Delft, Henk van Loveren, Mathieu Vinken, Andrew Worth, José-Manuel Zaldivar.   

Abstract

The 7th amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive prohibits to put animal-tested cosmetics on the market in Europe after 2013. In that context, the European Commission invited stakeholder bodies (industry, non-governmental organisations, EU Member States, and the Commission's Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety) to identify scientific experts in five toxicological areas, i.e. toxicokinetics, repeated dose toxicity, carcinogenicity, skin sensitisation, and reproductive toxicity for which the Directive foresees that the 2013 deadline could be further extended in case alternative and validated methods would not be available in time. The selected experts were asked to analyse the status and prospects of alternative methods and to provide a scientifically sound estimate of the time necessary to achieve full replacement of animal testing. In summary, the experts confirmed that it will take at least another 7-9 years for the replacement of the current in vivo animal tests used for the safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients for skin sensitisation. However, the experts were also of the opinion that alternative methods may be able to give hazard information, i.e. to differentiate between sensitisers and non-sensitisers, ahead of 2017. This would, however, not provide the complete picture of what is a safe exposure because the relative potency of a sensitiser would not be known. For toxicokinetics, the timeframe was 5-7 years to develop the models still lacking to predict lung absorption and renal/biliary excretion, and even longer to integrate the methods to fully replace the animal toxicokinetic models. For the systemic toxicological endpoints of repeated dose toxicity, carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity, the time horizon for full replacement could not be estimated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21533817     DOI: 10.1007/s00204-011-0693-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Toxicol        ISSN: 0340-5761            Impact factor:   5.153


  81 in total

1.  Comparison of toxicogenomic responses to phthalate ester exposure in an organotypic testis co-culture model and responses observed in vivo.

Authors:  Sean Harris; Sanne A B Hermsen; Xiaozhong Yu; Sung Woo Hong; Elaine M Faustman
Journal:  Reprod Toxicol       Date:  2015-10-22       Impact factor: 3.143

2.  Assessment of cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and 7-ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) induction in sediment extracts from New Zealand urban estuaries.

Authors:  Patrick Heinrich; Lara L Petschick; Grant L Northcott; Louis A Tremblay; James M Ataria; Thomas Braunbeck
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 2.823

3.  Characterization of a human skin equivalent model to study the effects of ultraviolet B radiation on keratinocytes.

Authors:  Tara L Fernandez; Derek R Van Lonkhuyzen; Rebecca A Dawson; Michael G Kimlin; Zee Upton
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods       Date:  2014-06-03       Impact factor: 3.056

4.  Design and fabrication of human skin by three-dimensional bioprinting.

Authors:  Vivian Lee; Gurtej Singh; John P Trasatti; Chris Bjornsson; Xiawei Xu; Thanh Nga Tran; Seung-Schik Yoo; Guohao Dai; Pankaj Karande
Journal:  Tissue Eng Part C Methods       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 3.056

5.  Probabilistic hazard assessment for skin sensitization potency by dose-response modeling using feature elimination instead of quantitative structure-activity relationships.

Authors:  Thomas Luechtefeld; Alexandra Maertens; James M McKim; Thomas Hartung; Andre Kleensang; Vanessa Sá-Rocha
Journal:  J Appl Toxicol       Date:  2015-06-05       Impact factor: 3.446

6.  In vivo-in vitro-in silico pharmacokinetic modelling in drug development: current status and future directions.

Authors:  Olavi Pelkonen; Miia Turpeinen; Hannu Raunio
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 6.447

7.  Application of in silico and in vitro methods in the development of adverse outcome pathway constructs in wildlife.

Authors:  Judith C Madden; Vera Rogiers; Mathieu Vinken
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 8.  Challenges in working towards an internal threshold of toxicological concern (iTTC) for use in the safety assessment of cosmetics: Discussions from the Cosmetics Europe iTTC Working Group workshop.

Authors:  Corie A Ellison; Karen L Blackburn; Paul L Carmichael; Harvey J Clewell; Mark T D Cronin; Bertrand Desprez; Sylvia E Escher; Steve S Ferguson; Sébastien Grégoire; Nicola J Hewitt; Heli M Hollnagel; Martina Klaric; Atish Patel; Sabrina Salhi; Andreas Schepky; Barbara G Schmitt; John F Wambaugh; Andrew Worth
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  2019-01-15       Impact factor: 3.271

9.  Predicting chemically-induced skin reactions. Part I: QSAR models of skin sensitization and their application to identify potentially hazardous compounds.

Authors:  Vinicius M Alves; Eugene Muratov; Denis Fourches; Judy Strickland; Nicole Kleinstreuer; Carolina H Andrade; Alexander Tropsha
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2015-01-03       Impact factor: 4.219

10.  Chemical safety without animals.

Authors:  Carl Westmoreland; Paul L Carmichael
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 54.908

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.