4.5 Article

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

Journal

TOXICOLOGY IN VITRO
Volume 27, Issue 5, Pages 1476-1488

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tiv.2013.02.009

Keywords

SkinEthic; Human corneal epithelium; Eye; Irritation; In vitro; Cosmetics Europe; ECVAM; Pre-validation

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

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 (TM) Reconstituted Human Corneal Epithelium (HCE) as one of two human reconstructed tissue eye irritation test methods. The SkinEthic (TM) 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 (TM) 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 (TM) HCE test method entered into the experimental phase of a formal ECVAM validation program in 2010. (C) 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available