Search
Home
Contact Us
Glossary
Site Map
Tag Cloud
Human Health
Animal Alternatives
Antimicrobial Resistance
Consumer Research
Hygiene
Biomonitoring
Enzyme Safety
Methods Methodologies
Environmental Health
Ingredient Information
Data Management
Chemicals Management Policy
Oleochemical
Risk Assessment
Presentations
iSTREEM
Human Health
>
Animal Alternatives
Animal Alternatives
Information and data related to the development of methods which are alternatives to animal tests are provided below.
Supporting Documents
Filter
Abstract
by
Filter
Year
Name
Author
Journal
File Name
Abstract
by
Find it!
Records 1-5 of 5
page size
10
20
50
Year
Name
2005
Comparative assessment of the acute skin irritation potential of detergent formulations using a novel 4-h patch test method
Author: Robinson, Michael K., Francis H. Kruszewski, Jenan Al-Atrash, Mark E. Blazka, Ralph Gingell, Fred A. Heitfeld, David Mallon, Neil K. Snyder, Judith E. Swanson and Phillip L. Casterton
Journal: Food and Chemical Toxicology
Abstract
Close
Comparative assessment of the acute skin irritation potential of detergent formulations using a novel 4-h patch test method
Predictive skin irritation test methods, which do not require use of animals, are needed for the pre-market assessment of detergent formulations. The utility of a novel and ethical human acute skin irritation patch test method, originally developed for chemical skin irritation assessment, was evaluated. In this IRB-approved method, subjects were patched under occlusion for increasing periods of time up to 4 h in duration. The total incidence of positive skin reactions for test products was compared to a positive control (20% aqueous sodium dodecyl sulfate [SDS]). Acutely irritating formulas were defined as those showing a significantly increased or equal incidence of positive responders compared with that of SDS. The time of exposure required for 50% of subjects to show a positive skin reaction (TR50 value) was calculated for each product and enabled test product comparisons within and between studies. Using this approach, 24 detergent formulations of various types were tested in seven individual studies. The skin irritation profiles were generally consistent within product types, which could be categorized as follows (by decreasing irritancy): mold/mildew removers (average TR50 = 0.37 h) > disinfectants/sanitizers (0.64 h) > fabric softener concentrate (1.09 h) = aluminum wash (1.20 h) > 20% SDS (1.81 h) > liquid laundry detergents (3.48 h) > liquid dish detergents (4.16 h) = liquid fabric softeners (4.56 h) = liquid hand soaps (4.58 h) = shampoos (5.40 h) = hard surface cleaners (6.34 h) > powder automatic dish detergents (>16 h) = powder laundry detergents (>16 h). In addition to formulation effects, some seasonal effects were noted; particularly greater winter-time reactivity to 20% SDS and the hard surface cleaner and liquid laundry formulations. These results demonstrate the utility of this patch test method for the comparative skin irritation assessment of these different product types.
1994
The SDA Alternatives Program Phase III: Comparison of In Vitro Data With Animal Eye Irritation Data on Solvents, Surfactants, Oxidizing Agents and Prototype Cleaning Products
Author: Bagley, Daniel, Keith A. Booman, Leon H. Bruner, Phillip L. Casterton, Janis Demetrulias, John E. Heinze, J. David Innis, William C. McCormick III, David J. Neun, Arthur S. Rothenstein and Richard I. Sedlak
Journal: Journal of Toxicology: Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology
Abstract
Close
The SDA Alternatives Program Phase III: Comparison of In Vitro Data With Animal Eye Irritation Data on Solvents, Surfactants, Oxidizing Agents and Prototype Cleaning Products
Nine in vitro candidate tests for estimating eye irritation potential were evaluated as potential replacements for the Draize test. The tests examined were a cell protein assay, the chorioallantoic membrane vascularization assay, a cell protein assay, a fibroblast cytotoxicity assay, the Living Dermal Model and Living Skin Equivalent, two neutral red assays, an SIRC cytotoxicity assay, and a Tetrahymena thermophila motility assay. The results from these in vitro tests were compared to results from a modified Draize test with 22 test materials. The test materials were selected to represent various classes of cleaning products and ingredients. Ingredients were tested at concentrations representative of concentrations typically found in cleaning products. The correlation coefficients with all test materials considered ranged from 0.58 to 0.91. When only nonalkaline materials are considered, the correlation coefficients of all 10 tests were not significantly different from one another, ranging from 0.8 to 0.9. The assays least affected by the alkalinity of the test substances were the corneal epithelial plasminogen activator assay, the chorioallantoic membrane vascular assay, and the Tetrahymena motility assay. Further, six of the 10 tests were able to identify the five nonirritants in the study, although the relative irritation potentials of the irritants were not accurately predicted by any of the tests. Results from a low-volume eye irritation test (LVET) were also compared to results from a modified Draize test with the same 22 test materials. The LVET had a high correlation with the modified Draize test and will be useful for future comparison with other alternative eye irritation tests. Based on these data, a number of alternative tests developed to replace the Draize eye irritation test included in this phase of research are useful for screening the eye irritation potential of nonalkaline cleaning products, although some tests are better for identifying the eye irritation potential of test materials with alkaline or oxidation potential. Although the ability of the eye to recover from damage was not measured by any test, the tests show promise for the use of determining eye irritation potential.
1996
Soaps and Detergents: Alternatives to Animal Eye Irritation Tests
Author: Christian, Mildred S., and Robert M. Diener
Journal: International Journal of Toxicology
Abstract
Close
Soaps and Detergents: Alternatives to Animal Eye Irritation Tests
An extensive computer search was conducted, and a comprehensive overview of the current status of alternatives to animal eye irritation tests was obtained. A search of Medline and Toxline databases (1988 to present) was supplemented with references from sources regarding in vitro eye irritation. Particular attention was paid to soap and detergent products and related ingredients. Eighty-five references are included in the review; the in vitro assays are categorized, and their predictive values for assessing acute ocular irritation are evaluated and compared with the Draize rabbit eye irritation assay and with each other. The present review shows that the increased activity of scientists from academia, industry, and regulatory agencies has resulted in substantial progress in developing alternative in vitro procedures and that a number of large, interlaboratory evaluations and international workshops have assisted in the selection process. However, none of these methodologies has obtained acceptance for regulatory classification purposes. Conclusions drawn from this review include that (a) no single in vitro assay is considered capable of replacing the Draize eye irritation test; (b) the chorioallantoic membrane vascular assay (CAMVA) or the hen egg test-chorioallantoic membrane test (HET-CAM), the chicken or bovine enucleated eye test, the neutral red and plasminogen activation assays for cytotoxicity, and the silicon microphysiometer appear to have the greatest potential as screening tools for eye irritation; and (c) choosing a specific assay or series of assays will depend on the type of agent tested and the impact of false-negative or false-positive results. New assays will continue to be developed and should be included in future evaluations, when sufficient data are available.
2009
Use of Read-Across of Existing Hazard Data to Fulfill HPV Chemical Program Requirements without the Need for New Animal Testing
Author: Kruszewski, F., P. DeLeo, K. Stanton, R. Sedlak
Summary
Close
Use of Read-Across of Existing Hazard Data to Fulfill HPV Chemical Program Requirements without the Need for New Animal Testing
Poster presentation given to the 7th World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences on August 31, 2009 in Rome, Italy.
The Soap and Detergent Association (SDA) is a leading manager of chemical consortia fulfilling commitments to the voluntary global International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) high production volume (HPV) chemical programs. SDA’s commitment to compile and make publicly available a baseline set of health and environmental effects data covers 291 chemicals sponsored by 62 companies within ten chemical consortia. The chemical categories represented by these consortia include: aliphatic acids, alkoxides, alkyl sulfates, amine oxides, glycerides, hydrotropes, LAS/ABS, long chain alcohols,methyl esters, and triclocarban. Due to the structural similarity of the chemicals within a category their physiochemical and toxicological properties are likely to be similar. This has allowed the utilization of the read-across technique where the data available for some substances satisfy the data need for member chemicals without data. SDAhas found read-across to be especially useful in assigning data for ecotoxicity and human health endpoints tomany chemicals among its 143 completed chemical commitments to date. Consequently, the use of read-across has eliminated the need for new animal testing while allowing SDA consortia to meet those data requirements. The use of thousands of test animals has been avoided. SDA anticipates additional reductions in animal testing by utilizing read-across in ongoing efforts to complete the data sets for the balance of its sponsored chemicals.
1994
In Vitro Eye Irritation Tests
Author: SDA
Summary
Close
In Vitro Eye Irritation Tests
For almost 50 years the Draize eye irritation test (Draize, 1944) has been the accepted standard for substantiating the safety of consumer products, ocular medications and chemicals that might accidentally be splashed into the eyes of workers (McCulley and Stephens, 1993). The purpose of this rabbit eye test was to assess the potential of a chemical to cause ocular irritation to predict the effect such chemicals might have on the human eye.