Ascorbic acid specifically reduces the misclassification of nonirritating reactive chemicals in the OptiSafe™ macromolecular eye irritation test.

Recently, we showed that the addition of physiological concentrations of ascorbic acid, a tear antioxidant, to the OptiSafe™ macromolecular eye irritation test reduced the false-positive (FP) rate for chemicals that had reactive chemistries, leading to the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and molecular crosslinking. The purpose of the current study was to 1) increase the number of chemicals tested to comprehensibly determine whether the antioxidant-associated reduction in OD is specific to FP chemicals associated with ROS chemistries and 2) determine whether the addition of antioxidants interferes with the detection of true positive (TP) and true negative (TN) ocular irritants. We report that when ascorbic acid is added to the test reagents, retesting of FP chemicals with reactive chemistries show significantly reduced OD values (P < 0.05). Importantly, ascorbic acid had no significant effect on the OD values of TP or TN chemicals regardless of chemical reactivity. These findings suggest that supplementation of ascorbic acid in alternative ocular irritation tests may help improve the detection of TN for those commonly misclassified reactive chemicals.

Eye irritation potential: palm-based methyl ester sulphonates.

AIM: To evaluate eye irritation potential of palm-based methyl ester sulphonates (MES) of different chain lengths; C12, C14, C16, C16:18. METHODS: The Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability test method (BCOP), OECD Test Guideline 437, was used as an initial step to study the inducing effect of palm-based MES on irreversible eye damage. The second assessment involved the use of reconstructed human corneal-like epithelium test method, OECD Test Guideline 492 using SkinEthic™ Human Corneal Epithelium to study the potential effect of palm-based MES on eye irritancy. The palm-based MES were prepared in 10% solution (w/v) in deionized water and tested as a liquid and surfactant test substances whereby both test conducted according to the liquid/surfactant treatment protocol. RESULTS: The preliminary BCOP results showed that palm-based MES; C12, C14, C16, C16:18 were not classified as severe eye irritants test substances with in vitro irritancy score between 3 and the threshold level of 55. The second evaluation using SkinEthic™ HCE model showed that palm-based MES; C12, C14, C16, C16:18 and three commercial samples were potentially irritants to the eyes with mean tissue viability ≤ 60% and classified as Category 2 according to United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals. However, there are some limitations of the proposed ocular irritation classification of palm-based MES due to insolubility of long chain MES in 10% solution (w/v) in deionized water. CONCLUSION: Therefore, future studies to clarify the eye irritation potential of the palm-based MES will be needed, and could include; methods to improve the test substance solubility, use of test protocol for solids, and/or inclusion of a benchmark anionic surfactant, such as sodium dodecyl sulphate within the study design.

Cosmetics Europe compilation of historical serious eye damage/eye irritation in vivo data analysed by drivers of classification to support the selection of chemicals for development and evaluation of alternative methods/strategies: the Draize eye test Reference Database (DRD).

A thorough understanding of which of the effects assessed in the in vivo Draize eye test are responsible for driving UN GHS/EU CLP classification is critical for an adequate selection of chemicals to be used in the development and/or evaluation of alternative methods/strategies and for properly assessing their predictive capacity and limitations. For this reason, Cosmetics Europe has compiled a database of Draize data (Draize eye test Reference Database, DRD) from external lists that were created to support past validation activities. This database contains 681 independent in vivo studies on 634 individual chemicals representing a wide range of chemical classes. A description of all the ocular effects observed in vivo, i.e. degree of severity and persistence of corneal opacity (CO), iritis, and/or conjunctiva effects, was added for each individual study in the database, and the studies were categorised according to their UN GHS/EU CLP classification and the main effect driving the classification. An evaluation of the various in vivo drivers of classification compiled in the database was performed to establish which of these are most important from a regulatory point of view. These analyses established that the most important drivers for Cat 1 Classification are (1) CO mean ≥ 3 (days 1-3) (severity) and (2) CO persistence on day 21 in the absence of severity, and those for Cat 2 classification are (3) CO mean ≥ 1 and (4) conjunctival redness mean ≥ 2. Moreover, it is shown that all classifiable effects (including persistence and CO = 4) should be present in ≥60 % of the animals to drive a classification. As a consequence, our analyses suggest the need for a critical revision of the UN GHS/EU CLP decision criteria for the Cat 1 classification of chemicals. Finally, a number of key criteria are identified that should be taken into consideration when selecting reference chemicals for the development, evaluation and/or validation of alternative methods and/or strategies for serious eye damage/eye irritation testing. Most important, the DRD is an invaluable tool for any future activity involving the selection of reference chemicals.

Retrospective analysis of the Draize test for serious eye damage/eye irritation: importance of understanding the in vivo endpoints under UN GHS/EU CLP for the development and evaluation of in vitro test methods.

For more than two decades, scientists have been trying to replace the regulatory in vivo Draize eye test by in vitro methods, but so far only partial replacement has been achieved. In order to better understand the reasons for this, historical in vivo rabbit data were analysed in detail and resampled with the purpose of (1) revealing which of the in vivo endpoints are most important in driving United Nations Globally Harmonized System/European Union Regulation on Classification, Labelling and Packaging (UN GHS/EU CLP) classification for serious eye damage/eye irritation and (2) evaluating the method's within-test variability for proposing acceptable and justifiable target values of sensitivity and specificity for alternative methods and their combinations in testing strategies. Among the Cat 1 chemicals evaluated, 36-65 % (depending on the database) were classified based only on persistence of effects, with the remaining being classified mostly based on severe corneal effects. Iritis was found to rarely drive the classification (<4 % of both Cat 1 and Cat 2 chemicals). The two most important endpoints driving Cat 2 classification are conjunctiva redness (75-81 %) and corneal opacity (54-75 %). The resampling analyses demonstrated an overall probability of at least 11 % that chemicals classified as Cat 1 by the Draize eye test could be equally identified as Cat 2 and of about 12 % for Cat 2 chemicals to be equally identified as No Cat. On the other hand, the over-classification error for No Cat and Cat 2 was negligible (<1 %), which strongly suggests a high over-predictive power of the Draize eye test. Moreover, our analyses of the classification drivers suggest a critical revision of the UN GHS/EU CLP decision criteria for the classification of chemicals based on Draize eye test data, in particular Cat 1 based only on persistence of conjunctiva effects or corneal opacity scores of 4. In order to successfully replace the regulatory in vivo Draize eye test, it will be important to recognise these uncertainties and to have in vitro tools to address the most important in vivo endpoints identified in this paper.

An analysis of ISO intracutaneous reactivity test results to justify a reduction in animal requirements.

The ISO intracutaneous reactivity test is the standard protocol for determining a medical device's potential for causing irritation. The authors present data indicating that the number of animals required per test can be reduced from three rabbits to two.

A two-centre evaluation of the human organotypic skin explant culture model for screening contact allergens.

Animal models are considered to be the "gold standard" for determining the potential contact allergenicity of low molecular weight chemicals. However, governmental regulations and ethical considerations limit the use of animals for such purposes. There is therefore a need for in vitro alternative models. The human organotypic skin explant culture (HOSEC) model is reported to be a promising alternative method for the predictive testing of contact allergens. The accelerated migration of Langerhans cells from the epidermis upon exposure to contact allergens is used to identify chemicals that are potentially capable of inducing a delayed-type hypersensitivity. In the study described in this paper, the model was further refined, and used, in two independent laboratories, to screen 23 low molecular weight compounds of known classification for their allergenicity. Each laboratory was able to accurately detect the contact allergens, despite small variations in the protocols used. However, the classification of dermal irritants, which have often been falsely classified as allergens, varied between the two laboratories. Despite the current limitations of the HOSEC model, the accuracy of the predictions made (sensitiser or non-sensitiser) compare favourably with classifications obtained with commonly used animal models. The HOSEC model has the potential to be developed further as an in vitro alternative to animal models for screening for contact allergens.

Evaluation of modified methods for determining skin irritation.

The premarket testing of household cleaning products for dermal irritancy is best achieved via human testing. Animal dermal irritation testing is generally limited to screening for possible dermal hazard of totally new or unique products or ingredients prior to human testing or to meeting regulatory requirements of government bodies. Alternatives to animal tests are being sought; however, until such time that these alternatives are identified, validated, and accepted by government bodies, the judicious use of animal testing remains a necessity. Modifications to standard animal skin irritation test procedures have been evaluated against human skin irritation results with the objective of defining one method that could be used in place of current standard procedures that differ slightly from one another, and thereby avoid excessive and redundant use of animals. Hill Top Chambers (19 mm) and standard gauze patches (U.S. Department of Transportation procedure) were used to obtain comparative irritation responses for 24 cleaning products, common caustics, and acids in rabbits and humans. Exposure times were 1 or 4 hr, and responses were graded over a 72-hr period. Results indicate that use of the Chamber offers the potential to (1) reduce the number of animals used for skin irritation screening (smaller group size and up to eight test substances/concentrations per animal); (2) eliminate the need for conducting multiple tests to satisfy different governmental requirements; and (3) reduce animal stress by reducing exposure times without compromising the value of the irritancy patch test as a screening tool. When animal data are required, it is suggested that the use of a Chamber and other modifications of traditional test procedures offers advantages that could result in using fewer animals and/or have less potential for producing unnecessarily severe responses in animals.

Acute irritation tests in risk assessment.

The two most important elements in assessing the risk of topical injury from a chemical are its biological properties, in the context of skin and mucous membrane damage, and the likelihood and likely nature of topical contact with the chemical. Appropriate biological tests in model systems should be based on the probable circumstances of exposure. Topical contact takes place under two distinct sets of circumstances--intentional and accidental. Chemicals that are intended to come into contact with skin and mucous membranes include cosmetics and dermatological preparations. For such compounds the frequency and extent of skin contact is predictable and any irritant effects are unacceptable. The absence of irritant effects is established by testing in human volunteers or experimental animals. Since animal skin and mucous membranes are more susceptible to irritants than those of man, the amounts or concentrations tested need not be greater than those intended for human use. It is hoped that validated alternatives to animal models will soon be available. For household or industrial chemicals where skin and/or mucous-membrane contact occurs accidentally, topical contact should generally be avoided. In such cases the objective of irritancy testing should be to establish which compounds are particularly irritant and therefore need extra care in handling. We are convinced that this latter objective can be achieved by simpler and less cruel tests than the Draize eye-irritation test.

Overview of animal test methods for skin irritation.

Determining the irritant effects of chemicals in experimental animals provides the public with information on and protection against possible hazards that may arise from exposure of the human skin. Furthermore, the data obtained are used for registration and classification purposes. This paper reviews the methods proposed in the most important guidelines (OECD, EEC and FIFRA guidelines) and points out the critical experimental points. It shows that the introduction of OECD Guideline No. 404 can lead to a reduction in the number of test animals used for skin irritation testing.

Statistical consequences of reducing the number of rabbits utilized in eye irritation testing: data on 67 petrochemicals.

Data from 67 six-rabbit eye irritation tests were used to generate two-, three-, and four-rabbit Draize scores. The 15 two-rabbit, 20 three-rabbit, and 15 four-rabbit "subsample" scores for each of the 67 petrochemicals tested were used to establish prediction intervals for the original six-rabbit scores. Prediction interval length shortens with increasing sample size, is widest in the middle portion of the Draize scale, and can be used to select the minimum number of rabbits necessary to satisfy a required level of precision. Also, the ability of each subsample size to correctly classify the test materials according to an in-house irritation classification system was evaluated. Results indicate that subsamples of size 2, 3, 4, and 5 were 88, 93, 95%, and 96% accurate, respectively (compared to six rabbits), at correctly classifying the irritation potential of the materials tested.

The topically irritant substance: essentials - bio-tests - predictions.

The paper describes a method for judging the irritative potentialities of substances; proposes a scoring system with which the 'ordinary' risks of many of the abundant marketed products for washing, cleaning etc. may be predicted without biological testing; discusses pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic aspects of topical irritancy and points to the problems of extrapolating from animal experiments to man.