In-house assessment of a modified in vitro cytotoxicity assay for higher throughput estimation of acute toxicity.

The main objective of this study was to assess an in-house 3T3 NRU cytotoxicity assay for compatibility with a prediction model for acute rodent oral toxicity endorsed by an NIEHS-ICCVAM workshop. The aim is to use the NRU assay as one test component of HTS strategies for both acute oral toxicity and acute skin irritation, enabling the rejection of the most toxic materials and prioritisation of other materials for further testing. Groups of model cytotoxins and irritants were tested using the NRU assay and their EC50 values obtained from dose-response curves. These values were compared with those estimated from a limited (three)-dose protocol, deemed more suitable for HTS. A good correlation was observed between the EC50 values from both dose-response curves (R2=0.94). The relationships between EC50 values and acute rodent oral toxicity were compared by application of the prediction model to the model cytotoxins. The results from both full and limited dose-responses fitted within the acceptance limits of the prediction model, with regression lines similar to that of the model. Results indicated that the performance of the currently used 3T3 NRU cytotoxicity assay was similar to that of the assays used to generate the data employed in developing the prediction model. This prediction model can be applied with both the standard and HT assays to estimate acute rodent oral toxicity.

High throughput screening (HTS) for phototoxicity hazard using the in vitro 3T3 neutral red uptake assay.

Testing for phototoxic hazard is usually carried out for product ingredients intended for use on skin, which may be exposed to sunlight. Unilever currently uses the validated in vitro 3T3 Neutral Red Uptake phototoxicity test (NRU PT). This protocol involves 2-3 experiments, each taking 3 days to perform. One person can test up to seven test materials plus positive control at any one time, requiring approximately 0.5 g test material. Higher throughput is required where libraries of potential actives are being generated and screening for potential phototoxicants is required. A proposed HTS protocol would use the NRU PT, but only one concentration (10 microg/ml) in a single experiment. The validity of the HTS protocol was investigated by a retrospective examination of data from 86 materials previously tested. Phototoxic hazard predictions made using the conventional NRU PT were compared with those obtained if only data at 10 microg/ml were considered. A majority of 73 materials (84.9%) gave agreement in predictions between the two protocols; for 13 materials (15.1%) the assessments did not agree. There were no false positives; however, there were some false negatives, i.e., predicted as phototoxic from the conventional assay, but non-phototoxic at 10 microg/ml. As this protocol is intended for screening purposes only it is considered that this would be acceptable at this stage in material selection. One person could screen 128 test materials in 3 days, requiring <1 mg test material, giving a substantial increase in productivity. Any material selected for further development and inclusion in a formulation may require further confirmatory testing, e.g. using a human skin model assay for phototoxicity.

An assessment of the phototoxic hazard of a personal product ingredient using in vitro assays.

Where substances are intended for use in personal products applied to the skin an assessment of potential phototoxic hazard is required. This report describes a tiered testing strategy involving in vitro assays used for the phototoxic hazard assessment of a personal product ingredient (Ingredient X). The initial assay was measurement of a UV/visible absorption spectrum to identify absorption at relevant wavelengths. This was followed by in vitro assays for phototoxicity (3T3 cell neutral red uptake phototoxicity test) and photoallergy (photobinding to human serum albumin). These in vitro screens gave equivocal results for Ingredient X which appeared to suggest a weak phototoxic reaction. To further evaluate the phototoxic hazard of Ingredient X to human skin, a phototoxicity assay using a 3-D human skin model was conducted. Ingredient X did not cause phototoxicity in this assay. Overall conclusions from these studies were that although Ingredient X showed slight intrinsic potential for photoactivation, it was unlikely to present a hazard to human skin. This report illustrates the value in a step-wise strategy of the use of human skin models to help interpret the results of other in vitro phototoxicity assays.