Development of a Defined Approach for Eye hazard identification of chemicals having surfactant properties according to the three UN GHS categories.

The purpose of this study was to develop a defined approach (DA) for eye hazard identification according to the three UN GHS categories for surfactants (DASF). The DASF is based on a combination of Reconstructed human Cornea-like Epithelium test methods (OECD TG 492; EpiOcular™ EIT and SkinEthic™ HCE EIT) and the modified Short Time Exposure (STE) test method (0.5% concentration of the test substance after a 5-min exposure). DASF performance was assessed by comparing the prediction results with the historical in vivo data classification and against the criteria established by the OECD expert group on eye/skin. The DASF yielded a balanced accuracy of 80.5% and 90.9% of Cat. 1 (N = 22), 75.0% of Cat. 2 (N = 8), and 75.5% of No Cat. (N = 17) surfactants were correctly predicted. The percentage of mispredictions was below the established maximum values except for in vivo No Cat. surfactants that were over-predicted as Cat. 1 (5.6%, N = 17), with a maximum value set at 5%. The percentage of correct predictions did meet the minimum performance values of 75% Cat. 1, 50% Cat. 2, and 70% No Cat. established by the OECD experts. The DASF has shown to be successful for eye hazard identification of surfactants.

Validation of the SkinEthic HCE Time-to-Toxicity test method for eye hazard classification of chemicals according to UN GHS.

This study describes the within- and between-laboratory reproducibility (WLR and BLR) of a Time-to-Toxicity (TTT) approach for chemicals based on the SkinEthic™ HCE tissue construct, capable to distinguish chemicals that do not require classification for serious eye damage/eye irritation (No Cat.) from chemicals that require classification for eye irritation (Cat. 2), and serious eye damage (Cat. 1). The WLR and BLR was assessed with three participating laboratories. Each laboratory tested 40 coded chemicals in three independent runs. The predictive capacity of the method was assessed on a larger set of 150 chemicals (70 liquids and 80 solids) by combining the results of this study with the results of the test method developer. The WLR for the 20 liquids ranged from 85% to 95% with a BLR of 90%. For the 20 solids, a WLR and BLR of 100% was obtained. The test method developer obtained a WLR of 80% and 95%, based on 50 liquids and 48 solids tested in three independent runs, respectively. Regarding the predictive capacity, the SkinEthic™ HCE TTT test method identified 80.8% Cat. 1, 69.2% Cat. 2, and 74.9% No Cat. correctly. An independent peer review panel concluded that based on all available data, the relevance and reliability of the SkinEthic™ HCE TTT has been demonstrated for discriminating the three UN GHS eye hazard categories.

Overall performance of Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability (BCOP) Laser Light-Based Opacitometer (LLBO) test method with regard to solid and liquid chemicals testing.

A prospective study of the Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability (BCOP) Laser Light-Based Opacitometer (LLBO) test method was conducted to evaluate its usefulness to identify chemicals as inducing serious eye damage (Cat. 1) or chemicals not requiring classification for eye irritation (No Cat.) applying United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (UN GHS). The aim was to demonstrate the reproducibility of the BCOP LLBO protocol for liquids and solids and define its predictive capacity. Briefly, 145 chemicals were simultaneously tested with BCOP LLBO and OP-KIT (OECD TG 437), one to two times in one laboratory. When used to identify Cat. 1, the BCOP LLBO has a false negative rate (FNR) of 24.1% (N = 56) compared to 34.8% (N = 56) for the BCOP OP-KIT, with a comparable false positive rate (FPR, N = 89) of 18.5% and 20.8%, respectively. When used to identify chemicals not requiring classification (No Cat.) the BCOP LLBO and BCOP OP-KIT had a FNR (N = 104) of 6.2% and 7.2% and a FPR (N = 41) of 45.1% and 42.7%, respectively. The OP-KIT and LLBO devices are interchangeable at no cost to data quality and reliability. The OP-KIT and LLBO devices are interchangeable at no cost to data quality and reliability. The performance of the LLBO is at least as good as the OP-KIT, both methods can be used to identify UN GHS Cat. 1 and UN GHS No Cat. chemicals.

Development of a defined approach for eye irritation or serious eye damage for neat liquids based on cosmetics Europe analysis of in vitro RhCE and BCOP test methods.

The focus of Cosmetics Europe's ocular toxicity programme is on development of testing strategies and defined approaches for identification of ocular effects of chemicals in the context of OECD's Guidance Document on an Integrated Approach on Testing and Assessment (IATA) for Serious Eye Damage and Eye Irritation. Cosmetics Europe created a comprehensive database of chemicals for which in vitro data are available with corresponding historical in vivo Draize eye data and physicochemical properties. This database allowed further exploration of the initially proposed strategies from the CON4EI project and to identify opportunities for refinement. One key outcome of this project is that combining in vitro test methods (RhCE and BCOP LLBO) with physicochemical properties in a two-step Bottom-Up approach applicable to neat liquids, resulted in an improvement of the specificity, without reducing the sensitivity, when compared to the combination of in vitro methods alone. The Bottom-Up approach proposed here for neat liquids correctly predicted 58.3% (EpiOcular™ EIT followed by BCOP LLBO) to 62.6% (SkinEthic™ HCE EIT followed by BCOP LLBO) of No Cat., 59.1% to 68.7% of Cat. 2, and 76.5% of Cat. 1. Incorporating specific physicochemical properties with this Bottom-Up approach increased the correct identification of No Cat. neat liquids to between 72.7% and 79.7%.

Development of a defined approach for eye irritation or serious eye damage for liquids, neat and in dilution, based on cosmetics Europe analysis of in vitro STE and BCOP test methods.

The focus of Cosmetics Europe's programme on serious eye damage/eye irritation is on development of testing strategies and defined approaches for identification of ocular effects of chemicals in the context of OECD's Guidance Document on an Integrated Approach on Testing and Assessment (IATA) for Serious Eye Damage and Eye Irritation. Cosmetics Europe created a comprehensive database of chemicals for which in vitro data are available with corresponding historical in vivo Draize eye data. This database allowed further exploration of the initially proposed strategies from the CON4EI project and to identify opportunities for refinement. The current analysis focused on the development of a defined approach, applicable to liquid non-surfactant chemicals, neat and in dilution, that can distinguish between the three UN GHS categories (Cat. 1, Cat. 2, and No Cat.). Combining the modified-protocol Short Time Exposure (STE) test method (OECD TG 491 with extension to highly volatile substances) with the Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability Laser Light-Based Opacitometer (BCOP LLBO) test method in a Bottom-Up approach identified 81.2% Cat. 1, 56.3% Cat. 2, and 85.3% No. Cat correctly, with an NPV of 96.7% and a PPV of 68.6%. Therefore, the performance of the defined approach was better than the standalone test methods.

Reprint of "CON4EI: Selection of the reference chemicals for hazard identification and labelling of eye irritating chemicals".

Assessment of the acute eye irritation potential is part of the international regulatory requirements for testing of chemicals. In the past, several prospective and retrospective validation studies have taken place in the area of serious eye damage/eye irritation testing. Success in terms of complete replacement of the regulatory in vivo Draize rabbit eye test has not yet been achieved. A very important aspect to ensure development of successful alternative test methods and/or strategies for serious eye damage/eye irritation testing is the selection of appropriate reference chemicals. A set of 80 reference chemicals was selected for the CEFIC-LRI-AIMT6-VITO CON4EI (CONsortium for in vitro Eye Irritation testing strategy) project, in collaboration with Cosmetics Europe, from the Draize Reference Database published by Cosmetics Europe based on key criteria that were set in their paper (e.g. balanced by important driver of classification and physical state). The most important goals of the CON4EI project were to identify the performance of eight in vitro alternative tests in terms of driver of classification and to identify similarities/differences between the methods in order the build a successful testing strategy that can discriminate between all UN GHS categories. This paper provides background on selection of the test chemicals.

CON4EI: Evaluation of QSAR models for hazard identification and labelling of eye irritating chemicals.

Assessment of ocular irritation is a regulatory requirement in safety evaluation of industrial and consumer products. Although a number of in vitro ocular irritation assays exist, none are capable of fully categorizing chemicals as stand-alone assays. Therefore, the CEFIC-LRI-AIMT6-VITO CON4EI (CONsortium for in vitro Eye Irritation testing strategy) project was developed to assess the reliability of eight in vitro test methods and computational models as well as establishing an optimal tiered-testing strategy. For three computational models (Toxtree, and Case Ultra EYE_DRAIZE and EYE_IRR) performance parameters were calculated. Coverage ranged from 15 to 58%. Coverage was 2 to 3.4 times higher for liquids than for solids. The lowest number of false positives (5%) was reached with EYE_IRR; this model however also gave a high number of false negatives (46%). The lowest number of false negatives (25%) was seen with Toxtree; for liquids Toxtree predicted the lowest number of false negatives (11%), for solids EYE_DRAIZE did (17%). It can be concluded that the training sets should be enlarged with high quality data. The tested models are not yet sufficiently powerful for stand-alone evaluations, but that they can surely become of value in an integrated weight-of-evidence approach in hazard assessment.

CON4EI: Short Time Exposure (STE) test method for hazard identification and labelling of eye irritating chemicals.

Assessment of ocular irritancy is an international regulatory requirement in the safety evaluation of industrial and consumer products. Although many in vitro ocular irritation assays exist, alone they are incapable of fully categorizing chemicals. Therefore, the CEFIC-LRI-AIMT6-VITO CON4EI consortium was developed to assess the reliability of eight in vitro test methods and establish an optimal tiered-testing strategy. One assay selected was the Short Time Exposure (STE) assay. This assay measures the viability of SIRC rabbit corneal cells after 5min exposure to 5% and 0.05% solutions of test material, and is capable of categorizing of Category 1 and No Category chemicals. The accuracy of the STE test method to identify Cat 1 chemicals was 61.3% with 23.7% sensitivity and 95.2% specificity. If non-soluble chemicals and unqualified results were excluded, the performance to identify Cat 1 chemicals remained similar (accuracy 62.2% with 22.7% sensitivity and 100% specificity). The accuracy of the STE test method to identify No Cat chemicals was 72.5% with 66.2% sensitivity and 100% specificity. Excluding highly volatile chemicals, non-surfactant solids and non-qualified results resulted in an important improvement of the performance of the STE test method (accuracy 96.2% with 81.8% sensitivity and 100% specificity). Furthermore, it seems that solids are more difficult to test in the STE, 71.4% of the solids resulted in unqualified results (solubility issues and/or high variation between independent runs) whereas for liquids 13.2% of the results were not qualified, supporting the restriction of the test method regarding the testing of solids.

CON4EI: Development of testing strategies for hazard identification and labelling for serious eye damage and eye irritation of chemicals.

Assessment of acute eye irritation potential is part of the international regulatory requirements for safety testing of chemicals. In the last decades, many efforts have been made in the search for alternative methods to replace the regulatory in vivo Draize rabbit eye test (OECD TG 405). Success in terms of complete replacement of the regulatory in vivo Draize rabbit eye test has not yet been achieved. The main objective of the CEFIC-LRI-AIMT6-VITO CON4EI (CONsortium for in vitro Eye Irritation testing strategy) project was to develop tiered testing strategies for serious eye damage and eye irritation assessment that can lead to complete replacement of OECD TG 405. A set of 80 reference chemicals (e.g. balanced by important driver of classification and physical state), was tested with seven test methods. Based on the results of this project, three different strategies were suggested. We have provided a standalone (EpiOcular ET-50), a two-tiered and three-tiered strategy, that can be used to distinguish between Cat 1 and Cat 2 chemicals and chemicals that do not require classification (No Cat). The two-tiered and three-tiered strategies use an RhCE test method (EpiOcular EIT or SkinEthic™ EIT) at the bottom (identification No Cat) in combination with the BCOP LLBO (two-tiered strategy) or BCOP OP-KIT and SMI (three-tiered strategy) at the top (identification Cat 1). For our proposed strategies, 71.1% - 82.9% Cat 1, 64.2% - 68.5% Cat 2 and ≥80% No Cat chemicals were correctly identified. Also, similar results were obtained for the Top-Down and Bottom-Up approach.

CON4EI: SkinEthic™ Human Corneal Epithelium Eye Irritation Test (SkinEthic™ HCE EIT) for hazard identification and labelling of eye irritating chemicals.

Assessment of ocular irritancy is an international regulatory requirement and a necessary step in the safety evaluation of industrial and consumer products. Although a number of in vitro ocular irritation assays exist, none are capable of fully categorizing chemicals as a stand-alone assay. Therefore, the CEFIC-LRI-AIMT6-VITO CON4EI (CONsortium for in vitro Eye Irritation testing strategy) project was developed with the goal of assessing the reliability of eight in vitro/alternative test methods as well as establishing an optimal tiered-testing strategy. One of the in vitro assays selected was the validated SkinEthic™ Human Corneal Epithelium Eye Irritation Test method (SkinEthic™ HCE EIT). The SkinEthic™ HCE EIT has already demonstrated its capacity to correctly identify chemicals (both substances and mixtures) not requiring classification and labelling for eye irritation or serious eye damage (No Category). The goal of this study was to evaluate the performance of the SkinEthic™ HCE EIT test method in terms of the important in vivo drivers of classification. For the performance with respect to the drivers all in vivo Cat 1 and No Cat chemicals were 100% correctly identified. For Cat 2 chemicals the liquids and the solids had a sensitivity of 100% and 85.7%, respectively. For the SkinEthic™ HCE EIT test method, 100% concordance in predictions (No Cat versus No prediction can be made) between the two participating laboratories was obtained. The accuracy of the SkinEthic™ HCE EIT was 97.5% with 100% sensitivity and 96.9% specificity. The SkinEthic™ HCE EIT confirms its excellent results of the validation studies.

CON4EI: Selection of the reference chemicals for hazard identification and labelling of eye irritating chemicals.

Assessment of the acute eye irritation potential is part of the international regulatory requirements for testing of chemicals. In the past, several prospective and retrospective validation studies have taken place in the area of serious eye damage/eye irritation testing. Success in terms of complete replacement of the regulatory in vivo Draize rabbit eye test has not yet been achieved. A very important aspect to ensure development of successful alternative test methods and/or strategies for serious eye damage/eye irritation testing is the selection of appropriate reference chemicals. A set of 80 reference chemicals was selected for the CEFIC-LRI-AIMT6-VITO CON4EI (CONsortium for in vitro Eye Irritation testing strategy) project, in collaboration with Cosmetics Europe, from the Draize Reference Database published by Cosmetics Europe based on key criteria that were set in their paper (e.g. balanced by important driver of classification and physical state). The most important goals of the CON4EI project were to identify the performance of eight in vitro alternative tests in terms of driver of classification and to identify similarities/differences between the methods in order the build a successful testing strategy that can discriminate between all UN GHS categories. This paper provides background on selection of the test chemicals.

Multi-laboratory evaluation of SkinEthic HCE test method for testing serious eye damage/eye irritation using solid chemicals and overall performance of the test method with regard to solid and liquid chemicals testing.

A prospective multicentre study of the reconstructed human corneal epithelial tissue-based in vitro test method (SkinEthic™ HCE) was conducted to evaluate its usefulness to identify chemicals as either not classified for serious eye damage/eye irritation (No Cat.) or as classified (Cat. 1/Cat. 2) within UN GHS. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the transferability and reproducibility of the SkinEthic™ HCE EITS protocol for solids and define its predictive capacity. Briefly, 60 chemicals were three times tested (double blinded) in 3 laboratories and 35 additional chemicals were tested three times in one laboratory. Good within laboratory reproducibility was achieved of at least 95% (57/60) and 96.8% (92/95) for the extended data set. Furthermore, the overall concordance between the laboratories was 96.7% (58/60). The accuracy of the SkinEthic™ HCE EITS for the extended dataset, based on bootstrap resampling, was 81.0% (95% CI: 78.9% to 83.2%) with a sensitivity of 90.5% (95% CI: 88.1% to 92.9%) and specificity of 73.6% (95% CI: 71.7% to 75.5%). Overall, 200 chemicals were tested (105 liquids (EITL protocol) and 95 solids (EITS protocol)) resulting in a sensitivity of 95.2%, specificity of 72.1% and accuracy of 83.7%, thereby meeting all acceptance criteria for predictive capacity.

Assessment of cosmetic ingredients in the in vitro reconstructed human epidermis test method EpiSkin™ using HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry in the MTT-reduction assay.

Cosmetics Europe recently established HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry as a suitable alternative endpoint detection system for measurement of formazan in the MTT-reduction assay of reconstructed human tissue test methods irrespective of the test system involved. This addressed a known limitation for such test methods that use optical density for measurement of formazan and may be incompatible for evaluation of strong MTT reducer and/or coloured chemicals. To build on the original project, Cosmetics Europe has undertaken a second study that focuses on evaluation of chemicals with functionalities relevant to cosmetic products. Such chemicals were primarily identified from the Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) 2010 memorandum (addendum) on the in vitro test EpiSkin™ for skin irritation testing. Fifty test items were evaluated in which both standard photometry and HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry were used for endpoint detection. The results obtained in this study: 1) provide further support for Within Laboratory Reproducibility of HPLC-UPLC-spectrophotometry for measurement of formazan; 2) demonstrate, through use a case study with Basazol C Blue pr. 8056, that HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry enables determination of an in vitro classification even when this is not possible using standard photometry and 3) addresses the question raised by SCCS in their 2010 memorandum (addendum) to consider an endpoint detection system not involving optical density quantification in in vitro reconstructed human epidermis skin irritation test methods.

Multi-laboratory validation of SkinEthic HCE test method for testing serious eye damage/eye irritation using liquid chemicals.

A prospective multicentric study of the reconstructed human corneal epithelial tissue-based in vitro test method (SkinEthic™ HCE) was conducted to evaluate its usefulness to identify chemicals as either not classified for serious eye damage/eye irritation (No Cat.) or as classified (Cat. 1/Cat. 2) within UN GHS. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the transferability and reproducibility of the SkinEthic™ HCE EITL protocol for liquids and define its predictive capacity. Briefly, 60 chemicals were three times tested (double blinded) in 3 laboratories and 45 additional chemicals were tested three times in one laboratory. Good within laboratory reproducibility was achieved of at least 88.3% (53/60) and 92.4% (97/105) for the extended data set. Furthermore, the overall concordance between the laboratories was 93.3% (56/60). The accuracy of the SkinEthic™ HCE EITL for the extended dataset, based on bootstrap resampling, was 84.4% (95% CI: 81.9% to 87.6%) with a sensitivity of 99.0% (95% CI: 96.4% to 100%) and specificity of 68.5% (95% CI: 64.0% to 74.0%), thereby meeting all acceptance criteria for predictive capacity. This efficient transferable and reproducible assay is a promising tool to be integrated within a battery of assays to perform an eye irritation risk assessment.

Prospective multicentre study of the U-SENS test method for skin sensitization testing.

The U-SENS™ is a test method based on the human myeloid U937 cell line to assess the skin sensitisation potential of substances. To demonstrate its robustness, a multicentre validation study with four laboratories testing 24 coded substances has been conducted according to internationally agreed principles. The primary objective of the study was to enlarge the U-SENS™'s reproducibility database. Secondary objectives were to provide additional evidence on its transferability and its predictive capability. Reproducibility within laboratories was approximately 92%, while the reproducibility between laboratories was 87.5%. Predictivity for the 24 validation substances was high, with sensitivity, specificity and accuracy being on average at least 93.8%. Similar performances are obtained for 38 substances when combining the study results with those of an earlier multicentre study, as well as with an automated version of the U-SENS™. With reliability and relevance similar to comparable non-animal skin sensitisation test methods, which have achieved regulatory acceptance, it is concluded that the U-SENS™ is a well reproducible and predictive test method. This profiles the U-SENS™ as a valuable addition to the suite of non-animal testing methods for skin sensitisation with the potential to significantly contribute to the development of integrated testing strategies.

Use of HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry for detection of formazan in in vitro Reconstructed human Tissue (RhT)-based test methods employing the MTT-reduction assay to expand their applicability to strongly coloured test chemicals.

A number of in vitro test methods using Reconstructed human Tissues (RhT) are regulatory accepted for evaluation of skin corrosion/irritation. In such methods, test chemical corrosion/irritation potential is determined by measuring tissue viability using the photometric MTT-reduction assay. A known limitation of this assay is possible interference of strongly coloured test chemicals with measurement of formazan by absorbance (OD). To address this, Cosmetics Europe evaluated use of HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry as an alternative formazan measurement system. Using the approach recommended by the FDA guidance for validation of bio-analytical methods, three independent laboratories established and qualified their HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry systems to reproducibly measure formazan from tissue extracts. Up to 26 chemicals were then tested in RhT test systems for eye/skin irritation and skin corrosion. Results support that: (1) HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry formazan measurement is highly reproducible; (2) formazan measurement by HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry and OD gave almost identical tissue viabilities for test chemicals not exhibiting colour interference nor direct MTT reduction; (3) independent of the test system used, HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry can measure formazan for strongly coloured test chemicals when this is not possible by absorbance only. It is therefore recommended that HPLC/UPLC-spectrophotometry to measure formazan be included in the procedures of in vitro RhT-based test methods, irrespective of the test system used and the toxicity endpoint evaluated to extend the applicability of these test methods to strongly coloured chemicals.

Sub-categorisation of skin corrosive chemicals by the EpiSkin™ reconstructed human epidermis skin corrosion test method according to UN GHS: revision of OECD Test Guideline 431.

The EpiSkin™ skin corrosion test method was formally validated and adopted within the context of OECD TG 431 for identifying corrosive and non-corrosive chemicals. The EU Classification, Labelling and Packaging Regulation (EU CLP) system requires the sub-categorisation of corrosive chemicals into the three UN GHS optional subcategories 1A, 1B and 1C. The present study was undertaken to investigate the usefulness of the validated EpiSkin™ test method to identify skin corrosive UN GHS Categories 1A, 1B and 1C using the original and validated prediction model and adapted controls for direct MTT reduction. In total, 85 chemicals selected by the OECD expert group on skin corrosion were tested in three independent runs. The results obtained were highly reproducible both within (>80%) and between (>78%) laboratories when compared with historical data. Moreover the results obtained showed that the EpiSkin™ test method is highly sensitive (99%) and specific (80%) in discriminating corrosive from non-corrosive chemicals and allows reliable and relevant identification of the different skin corrosive UN GHS subcategories, with high accuracies being obtained for both UN GHS Categories 1A (83%) and 1B/1C (76%) chemicals. The overall accuracy of the test method to subcategorise corrosive chemicals into three or two UN GHS subcategories ranged from 75% to 79%. Considering those results, the revised OECD Test Guideline 431 permit the use of EpiSkin™ for subcategorising corrosive chemicals into at least two classes (Category 1A and Category 1B/1C).

Cosmetics Europe multi-laboratory pre-validation of the SkinEthic™ reconstituted human corneal epithelium test method for the prediction of eye irritation.

Cosmetics Europe, The Personal Care Association, known as Colipa before 2012, conducted a program of technology transfer and assessment of Within/Between Laboratory (WLV/BLV) reproducibility of the SkinEthic™ Reconstituted Human Corneal Epithelium (HCE) as one of two human reconstructed tissue eye irritation test methods. The SkinEthic™ HCE test method involves two exposure time treatment procedures - one for short time exposure (10 min - SE) and the other for long time exposure (60 min - LE) of tissues to test substance. This paper describes pre-validation studies of the SkinEthic™ HCE test method (SE and LE protocols) as well as the Eye Peptide Reactivity Assay (EPRA). In the SE WLV study, 30 substances were evaluated. A consistent outcome with respect to viability measurement across all runs was observed with all substances showing an SD of less than 18%. In the LE WLV study, 44 out of 45 substances were consistently classified. These data demonstrated a high level of reproducibility within laboratory for both the SE and LE treatment procedures. For the LE BLV, 19 out of 20 substances were consistently classified between the three laboratories, again demonstrating a high level of reproducibility between laboratories. The results for EPRA WLV and BLV studies demonstrated that all substances analysed were categorised similarly and that the method is reproducible. The SkinEthic™ HCE test method entered into the experimental phase of a formal ECVAM validation program in 2010.

Cosmetics Europe multi-laboratory pre-validation of the EpiOcular™ reconstituted human tissue test method for the prediction of eye irritation.

Cosmetics Europe, The Personal Care Association (known as Colipa before 2012), conducted a program of technology transfer and within/between laboratory reproducibility of MatTek Corporation's EpiOcular™ Eye Irritation Test (EIT) as one of the two human reconstructed tissue test methods. This EIT EpiOcular™ used a single exposure period for each chemical and a prediction model based on a cut-off in relative survival [ ≤60%=irritant (I) (GHS categories 2 and 1); >60%=no classification (NC)]. Test substance single exposure time was 30 min with a 2-h post-exposure incubation for liquids and 90 min with an 18-h post-exposure incubation for solids. Tissue viability was determined by tetrazolium dye (MTT) reduction. Combinations of 20 coded chemicals were tested in 7 laboratories. Standardized laboratory documentation was used by all laboratories. Twenty liquids (11 NC/9 I) plus 5 solids (3 NC/2 I) were selected so that both exposure regimens could be assessed. Concurrent positive (methyl acetate) and negative (water) controls were tested in each trial. In all, 298 independent trials were performed and demonstrated 99.7% agreement in prediction (NC/I) across the laboratories. Coefficients of variation for the% survival for tissues from each treatment group across laboratories were generally low. This protocol has entered in 2010 the experimental phase of a formal ECVAM validation program.

Report from the EPAA workshop: in vitro ADME in safety testing used by EPAA industry sectors.

There are now numerous in vitro and in silico ADME alternatives to in vivo assays but how do different industries incorporate them into their decision tree approaches for risk assessment, bearing in mind that the chemicals tested are intended for widely varying purposes? The extent of the use of animal tests is mainly driven by regulations or by the lack of a suitable in vitro model. Therefore, what considerations are needed for alternative models and how can they be improved so that they can be used as part of the risk assessment process? To address these issues, the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) working group on prioritization, promotion and implementation of the 3Rs research held a workshop in November, 2008 in Duesseldorf, Germany. Participants included different industry sectors such as pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, industrial- and agro-chemicals. This report describes the outcome of the discussions and recommendations (a) to reduce the number of animals used for determining the ADME properties of chemicals and (b) for considerations and actions regarding in vitro and in silico assays. These included: standardisation and promotion of in vitro assays so that they may become accepted by regulators; increased availability of industry in vivo kinetic data for a central database to increase the power of in silico predictions; expansion of the applicability domains of in vitro and in silico tools (which are not necessarily more applicable or even exclusive to one particular sector) and continued collaborations between regulators, academia and industry. A recommended immediate course of action was to establish an expert panel of users, developers and regulators to define the testing scope of models for different chemical classes. It was agreed by all participants that improvement and harmonization of alternative approaches is needed for all sectors and this will most effectively be achieved by stakeholders from different sectors sharing data.