Guiding principles for the implementation of non-animal safety assessment approaches for cosmetics: skin sensitisation.

Characterisation of skin sensitisation potential is a key endpoint for the safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients especially when significant dermal exposure to an ingredient is expected. At present the mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA) remains the 'gold standard' test method for this purpose however non-animal test methods are under development that aim to replace the need for new animal test data. COLIPA (the European Cosmetics Association) funds an extensive programme of skin sensitisation research, method development and method evaluation and helped coordinate the early evaluation of the three test methods currently undergoing pre-validation. In May 2010, a COLIPA scientific meeting was held to analyse to what extent skin sensitisation safety assessments for cosmetic ingredients can be made in the absence of animal data. In order to propose guiding principles for the application and further development of non-animal safety assessment strategies it was evaluated how and when non-animal test methods, predictions based on physico-chemical properties (including in silico tools), threshold concepts and weight-of-evidence based hazard characterisation could be used to enable safety decisions. Generation and assessment of potency information from alternative tools which at present is predominantly derived from the LLNA is considered the future key research area.

Report of the EPAA-ECVAM workshop on the validation of Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS).

The use of Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS) permits the combination of diverse types of chemical and toxicological data for the purposes of hazard identification and characterisation. In November 2008, the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA), together with the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), held a workshop on Overcoming Barriers to Validation of Non-animal Partial Replacement Methods/Integrated Testing Strategies, in Ispra, Italy, to discuss the extent to which current ECVAM approaches to validation can be used to evaluate partial replacement in vitro test methods (i.e. as potential ITS components) and ITS themselves. The main conclusions of these discussions were that formal validation was only considered necessary for regulatory purposes (e.g. the replacement of a test guideline), and that current ECVAM approaches to validation should be adapted to accommodate such test methods. With these conclusions in mind, a follow-up EPAA-ECVAM workshop was held in October 2009, to discuss the extent to which existing validation principles are applicable to the validation of ITS test methods, and to develop a draft approach for the validation of such test methods and/or overall ITS for regulatory purposes. This report summarises the workshop discussions that started with a review of the current validation methodologies and the presentation of two case studies (skin sensitisation and acute toxicity), before covering the definition of ITS and their components, including their validation and regulatory acceptance. The following main conclusions/recommendations were made: that the validation of a partial replacement test method (for application as part of a testing strategy) should be differentiated from the validation of an in vitro test method for application as a stand-alone replacement, especially with regard to its predictive capacity; that, in the former case, the predictive capacity of the whole testing strategy (rather than of the individual test methods) would be more important, especially if the individual test methods had a high biological relevance; that ITS allowing for flexible and ad hoc approaches cannot be validated, whereas the validation of clearly defined ITS would be feasible, although practically quite difficult; and that test method developers should be encouraged to develop and submit to ECVAM not only full replacement test methods, but also partial replacement methods to be placed as parts of testing strategies. The added value from the formal validation of testing strategies, and the requirements needed in view of regulatory acceptance of the data, require further informed discussion within the EPAA forum on the basis of case studies provided by industry.

A tiered approach to the use of alternatives to animal testing for the safety assessment of cosmetics: eye irritation.

The need for alternative approaches to replace the in vivo rabbit Draize eye test for evaluation of eye irritation of cosmetic ingredients has been recognised by the cosmetics industry for many years. Extensive research has lead to the development of several assays, some of which have undergone formal validation. Even though, to date, no single in vitro assay has been validated as a full replacement for the rabbit Draize eye test, organotypic assays are accepted for specific and limited regulatory purposes. Although not formally validated, several other in vitro models have been used for over a decade by the cosmetics industry as valuable tools in a weight of evidence approach for the safety assessment of ingredients and finished products. In light of the deadlines established in the EU Cosmetics Directive for cessation of animal testing for cosmetic ingredients, a COLIPA scientific meeting was held in Brussels on 30th January, 2008 to review the use of alternative approaches and to set up a decision-tree approach for their integration into tiered testing strategies for hazard and safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients and their use in products. Furthermore, recommendations are given on how remaining data gaps and research needs can be addressed.

Skin sensitisation: the Colipa strategy for developing and evaluating non-animal test methods for risk assessment.

Allergic contact dermatitis is a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction induced by small reactive chemicals (haptens). Currently, the sensitising potential and potency of new chemicals is usually characterised using data generated via animal studies, such as the local lymph node assay (LLNA). There are, however, increasing public and political concerns regarding the use of animals for the testing of new chemicals. Consequently, the development of in vitro, in chemico or in silico models for predicting the sensitising potential and/or potency of new chemicals is receiving widespread interest. The Colipa Skin Tolerance task force currently collaborates with and/or funds several academic research groups to expand our understanding of the molecular and cellular events occurring during the acquisition of skin sensitisation. Knowledge gained from this research is being used to support the development and evaluation of novel alternative approaches for the identification and characterisation of skin sensitizing chemicals. At present three non-animal test methods (Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA), Myeloid U937 Skin Sensitisation Test (MUSST) and human Cell Line Activation Test (hCLAT)) have been evaluated in Colipa interlaboratory ring trials for their potential to predict skin sensitisation potential and were recently submitted to ECVAM for formal pre-validation. Data from all three test methods will now be used to support the study and development of testing strategy approaches for skin sensitiser potency prediction. This publication represents the current viewpoint of the cosmetics industry on the feasibility of replacing the need for animal test data for informing skin sensitisation risk assessment decisions.