PharmaTutor (October- 2014)
ISSN: 2347 - 7881
(Volume 2, Issue 10)
Received On: 12/08/2014; Accepted On: 19/08/2014; Published On: 01/10/2014
AUTHORS: Bushra Shamim
Department of Pharmaceutics,
Faculty of Pharmacy,
Hamdard University, New Delhi.
bushrashamim21@gmail.com
ABSTRACT:
Industry and regulatory bodies responsible for public health are actively assessing animal free tests to reduce the requirement for Draize testing. Draize rabbit eye irritation test developed in the 1940’s is even today the only eye toxicity test officially accepted in the OECD countries for regulatory purposes in the classification of slightly and moderately irritating chemicals. The Draize test has been widely criticized for both scientific and ethical reasons, and alternatives have been investigated for several decades. Therefore in an attempt to minimize this conflict alternative methods have been investigated. This article presents those alternative methods that are currently the most developed and the most widely used.
How to cite this article: B Shamim; Alternatives to the Draize Eye Test; PharmaTutor; 2014; 2(10); 45-57
[ABSTRACT WITH CITATION] [VIEW AS HTML]
REFERENCES:
1.Chantra Eskes, Sandrine Bessou, Leon Bruner, Rodger Curren, John Harbell, Penny Jones, Reinhard Kreiling, Manfred Liebsch, Pauline McNamee, Wolfang Pape, Menk K. Prinsen, Troy Seidle, Philippe Vanparys, Andrew Worth, Valerie Zuang: Eye Irritation, Subgroup 3, 3-40
2.Draize JH, Woodard G, Calvery HO: Methods for the study of irritation and toxicity of substances applied topically to the skin and mucous membranes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1944, 82: 377-390.
3.OECD. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals No. 405: Acute Eye Irritation/Corrosion. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 2002, 1-14.
4.Balls M, Berg N, Bruner LH, Curren RD, de Silva O, Earl LK, Esdaile DJ, Fentem JH, Liebsch M, Ohno Y, Prinsen MK, Spielmann H, Worth AP: Eye irritation testing: The way forward. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 34. Altern Lab Anim 1999, 27: 53-77.
5.Worth A, Balls M: Alternative (non-animal) methods for chemical testing: Current status and future prospects. A report prepared by ECVAM and the ECVAM working group on chemicals. Altern Lab Anim 2002, 30 Suppl 1: 1-125.
6.Muir CK, Flower C, Abb‚ NJ van: A novel approach to the search for in vitro alternatives to in vivo eye irritancy testing. Toxicology letters 1983, 18: 1-5.
7.Steiling W, Bracher M, Courtellemont P, De Silva O: Hen’s Egg Chorioallantoic Membrane: The Het-Cam, A Useful In Vitro Assay For Assessing The Eye Irritation Properties Of Cosmetic Formulations And Ingredients (Het-Cam) Test, Toxicology In Vitro 13 1999, 375-384.
8.Huhtala A, Salminen L, Tähti H. and Uusitalo H: Corneal Models for the Toxicity Testing of Drugs and Drug Releasing Materials, Multifunctional Biomaterials and Devices 2008, 1-7.
9.United Nations-Economic Commission for Europe (UN/ECE). Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). In. New York, USA, and Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations, 2003: 107-228.
10.Swanston DW: Assessment of the validity of animal techniques in eye-irritation testing. Food Chem Toxicol 1985, 23: 169-173.
11.Schlatter C, Reinhardt CA: Acute irritation tests in risk assessment. Food Chem Toxicol 1985, 23: 145-148.
12.Sharpe R: The Draize test-motivations for change. Food Chem Toxicol 1985, 23: 139- 143.
13.York M, Steiling W: A critical review of the assessment of eye irritation potential using the Draize rabbit eye test. J Appl Toxicol 1998, 18: 233-240.
14.Weil CS, Scala RA: Study of intra- and interlaboratory variability in the results of rabbit eye and skin irritation tests. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1971, 19: 276-360.
15.Williams SJ, Graepel GJ, Kennedy GL: Evaluation of ocular irritancy potential: intralaboratory variability and effect of dosage volume. Toxicol Lett 1982, 12: 235-241.
16.McCulley JP, Stephens TJ: Alternatives to the Draize eye test including the use of tissue cultured corneal cells. Toxicol Methods 1994, 4: 26-40.
17.Earl LK, Dickens AD, Rowson MJ: A critical analysis of the rabbit eye irritation test variability and its impact on the validation of alternative methods. Toxicol In Vitro 1997, 11: 295-304.
18.Balls M, Brantom PG, Cassidy S, Esdaile D, Fentem J, Liebsch M, McPherson J, Pfannenbecker U, Prinsen M: Preliminary evaluation of the application of reference standards in the prevalidation and validation of in vitro test for eye irritation. In: DG Clark, SG Lisansky and R Macmillan: Alternatives to animal testing II, proceedings, Brussels. CPL Press, Berkshire 1999, 201-204.
19.Curren RD, Harbell JW: Ocular safety: A silent (in vitro) success story. Altern. Lab Anim 2002, 30 Suppl 2: 69-74.
20.Balls M, Fentem JH: The validation and acceptance of alternatives to animal testing. Toxicol In Vitro 1999, 13: 837-846.
21.Maurer JK, Parker RD, Jester JV: Extent of initial corneal injury as the mechanistic basis for ocular irritation: Key findings and recommendations for the development of alternative assays. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2002, 36: 106-117.
22.OECD/OCDE: OECD guidelines for the testing of chemicals, Adopted: 26 July 2013, 438.
23.OECD. Chemicals Testing - Guidelines: New and Revised Test Guidelines Published.http://www.oecd.org/document/40/0,2340,en_2649_34377_33906280_1_1_1_1,00.html, 2005.
24.Pinto T J A, Ikeda T I, Miyamaru L L, Santa M.C, Santos Bárbara R P, Cruz A S, Cosmetic Safety: Proposal for the Replacement of In Vivo (Draize) by In Vitro Test. The Open Toxicology Journal, 2009, 3:1-7 1
25.Guess WL, Rosenbluth SA, Schmidt B, Autian J: Agar diffusion method for toxicity screening of plastics on cultured cell monolayers. J Pharm Sci 1965, 54: 1545-7.
26.United States Pharmacopeial Convention. United States Pharmacopeia. 28th ed. Rockville 2008, 1:102-3.
27.Barrela C, Roque J, Silva T: Métodos alternativos à experimentação animal na indústria de cosméticos. Available from: http://www.fmv.utl.pt/democ/sft/ sem0001/G23. html.
28.Test for cytotoxicity: in vitro methods. International Organization For Standartization. ISO 10.993-5: Biological evaluation of medical devices. Part 5. Geneva: ISO 1999, 12.
29.Lee JK, Kim DB, Kim JI, Kim PY: In vitro cytotoxicity tests on cultured human skin fibroblasts to predict skin irritation potential of surfactants. Toxicol In Vitro 2000, 14: 345-9.
30.Watanabe M, Watanabe K, Suzuki K: Use of primary rabbit cornea cells to replace the Draize rabbit eye irritancy test. Toxicol In Vitro 1989, 3(4): 329-34.
31.Burton ABG, York M, Lawrence RS: The in vitro assessment of severe eye irritants. Food and cosmetics toxicology 1981, 19: 471-480.
32.Earl L, The rabbit enucleated eye test: Invittox Protocol 1994, 85.
33.Whittle E, Basketter D, York M, Kelly L, McCall J, Botham P, Esdaile D, Gardner J: Findings of an interlaboratory trial of the enucleated eye method as an alternative eye irritation test. Toxicology Methods 1992, 2: 30-41.
34.York M, Wilson AP, Newsome CS: The classification of soluble silicates for eye hazard using the enucleated rabbit eye test. Toxicology in vitro1994, 8 (6): 1265-1268.
35.Lewis RW, McCall JC, Botham PA: Use of an in vitro test battery as a prescreen in the assessment of ocular irritancy. Toxicology in Vitro 1994, 8: 75-79.
36.Cooper KJ, Earl LK, Harbell J, Raabe H: Prediction of ocular irritancy of prototype shampoo formulations by the isolated rabbit eye (IRE) test and bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) assay. Toxicology in vitro 2001, 15(2): 95-103
37.Jones PA, Budynsky E, Cooper KJ, Decker D, Griffiths HA, Fentem JH: Comparative evaluation of five in vitro tests for assessing the eye irritation potential of hair-care products. ATLA 2001, 29: 669-692.
38.Chamberlain M, Gad SC, Gautheron P, Prinsen MK: IRAG (Interagency Regulatory Alternatives Group) working group 1. Organotypic models for the assessment/prediction of ocular irritation. Food and chemical toxicology 1997, 35(1): 23-37.
39.Gautheron P: The bovine corneal opacity and permeability assay. Invittox Protocol 1996, 98.
40.Gautheron, P, Dukic, M, Alix, D, and Sina, J F: Bovine corneal opacity and permeability test: an in vitro assay of ocular irritancy. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology 1992, 18:442-449.
41.Gautheron P, Giroux J, Cottin M, Audegond L, Morilla A, Mayordomo-Blanco L, Tortajada A, Haynes G, Vericat JA: Interlaboratory assessment of the bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) assay. Toxicology in vitro 1994, 8(3):381-392.
42.Sina J.F, D.M. Galer, R.G. Sussman, P.D. Gautheron, E.V. Sargent, B. Leong, P.V. Shah, R.D. Curren, and K. Miller: A Collaborative Evaluation of Seven Alternatives to the Draize Eye Irritation Test Using Pharmaceutical Intermediates. Fundamental and Applied Toxicology 1995, 26:20-31.
43.Casterton PL, Potts LF, Klein BD: A novel approach to assessing eye irritation potential using the bovine corneal opacity and permeability assay. Journal of toxicology / Cutaneous and ocular toxicology 1996, 15(2): 147-163.
44.Kahn CR, Young E, Lee IH, Rhim JS: Human corneal epithelial primary cultures and cell lines with extended life span: in vitro model for ocular studies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993, 34 (12): 3429-41.
45.Tchao R: Trans-epithelial permeability of fluorescein in vitro as an assay to determine eye irritants. In: A.M. Goldberg (Ed.): Alternative Methods in Toxicology. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc, New York 1988, 6: 271-283.
46.Maurice DM: The use of fluorescein in ophthalmological research. Invest Ophthalmo 1967, l6(5): 464-77.
47.Hagino S, Kinoshita S, Tani N, Nakamura T, Ono N, Konishi K, Iimura H, Kojima H, Ohno Y:Interlaboratory validation of in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients. (2) Chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) test. Toxicology in vitro 1999, 13(1): 99-113.
48.Steiling W: The Hen's EggTest on the Chorioallantoic Membrane (HET-CAM). INVITTOX Protocol 1994, 96.
49.Spielmann H: Target 2000 - case studies - chemicals testing - reducing animal experiments by 50 %. Proceedings conference 14 and 15 April 1997. Brussels. Ideal Conferences, London, UK 1998, 1-12.
50.Vinardell M P, García L: The quantitive chlorioallantoic membrane test using trypan blue stain to predict the eye irritancy of liquid scintillation cocktails. Toxicology in Vitro 2000, 14:551-555.
51.Okamoto Y, Ohkoshi K, Itagaki H, Tsuda T, Kakishima H, Ogawa T, Kasai Y, Ohuchi J, Kojima H, Kurishita A, Kaneko T, Matsushima Y, Iwabuchi Y, Ohno Y: Interlaboratory validation of the in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients. (3) Evaluation of the haemolysis test. Toxicology in vitro 1999, 13(1): 115-124.
52.Lewis RW, McCall JC, Botham PA: A comparison of two cytotoxicity tests for predicting the ocular irritancy of surfactants. Toxicology in vitro, 7: 155-158, 1993
53.Lewis W: Red blood cell lysis and protein denaturation. Invittox Protocol 1994, 99.
54.Pape WJW, Hoppe U: In vitro methods for the assessment of primary local effects of topically applied preparations. Skin pharmacology 1991, 4: 205-212.
55.Pape WJW, Hoppe U: Standardization of an in vitro red blood cell test for evaluating the acute cytotoxic potential of tensides. Arzneimittelforschung, 40(I)1990, 4: 498-502.
56.Pape WJW, Pfannenbecker U, Argembeaux H, Bracher M, Esdaile DJ, Hagino S, Kasai Y, Lewis RW: COLIPA validation project on in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients and finished products (phase I): the red blood cell test for the estimation of acute eye irritation potentials. Present status, Toxicology in vitro1999, 13(2): 343-354.
57.Pape WJW, Pfannenbecker U, Hoppe U: Validation of the red blood cell test system as in vitro assay for the rapid screening of irritation potential of surfactants. Molecular toxicology 1987, 1(4): 525-536.
58.Pape WJW, Pfannenbecker U: Red Blood Cell Test System, Invittox Protocol 1992, 37.
.png)
