A novel approach to the search for in vitro alternatives to in vivo eye irritancy testing

Muir, C.K.; Flower, Cindy; Abbé, N.J. Van

doi:10.1016/0378-4274(83)90062-0

Cited by 38 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To incorporate this aspect, Muir et al (1983) developed an assay using sections of rabbit ileum as an alternative to the Draize test. The ileum of the rabbit has a penetration barrier, and this feature allows it to be a good in vitro model to determine barrier related problems for toxicity assessment.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Discussion of alternatives to the draize eye irritancy test /

Prior¹,

Yee²

1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Criticisms of the use of enucleated eyes have focused on the inability of the procedure to measure long-term and reparative effects. As well, animal usage cannot be reduced since one animal can only provide two eyes for testing as is the case in the Draize test (Muir et al, 1983).…”

Section: Critiquementioning

confidence: 99%

Discussion of alternatives to the draize eye irritancy test /

Prior¹,

Yee²

1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Formation of methemoglobin (percentage induction of methemoglobin from hemoglobin), hemolysis (H50), and the denaturation of oxyhemoglobin have all been used as end points in the assay. Hemolysis of bovine erythrocytes in isotonic buffer was used by Muir et al (1983) to evaluate the ocular irritation potential of eight surfactants; the results of the assay did not correlate well with in vivo rankings. Pape et al (1987) and Pape and Hoppe (1990) also used bovine erythrocytes to assess the irritancy potential of a large number of ionic and nonionic surfactants (exposure for 10 min).…”

Section: Red Blood Cell Lysislmetheriioglobin Formationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soaps and Detergents: Alternatives to Animal Eye Irritation Tests

Christian

Diener

1996

Journal of the American College of Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 falsepositive results. New assays will continue to be developed and should be included in future evaluations, when sufficient data are available.

show abstract

“…The ocular irritation potential of 0.1 mol/L sodium decyl sulfate was determined by instilling 0.1 mL directly on the corneas of the right eyes of 6 white rabbits. 41 The eyes were scored 24 hours after instillation. A total irritation score of 7.37/20 was observed.…”

Section: In Vivo Ocular Irritationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Sodium Cetearyl Sulfate and Related Alkyl Sulfates as Used in Cosmetics

Fiume¹,

Bergfeld

Belsito

et al. 2010

Int J Toxicol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sodium cetearyl sulfate is the sodium salt of a mixture of cetyl and stearyl sulfate. The other ingredients in this safety assessment are also alkyl salts, including ammonium coco-sulfate, ammonium myristyl sulfate, magnesium coco-sulfate, sodium cetyl sulfate, sodium coco/hydrogenated tallow sulfate, sodium coco-sulfate, sodium decyl sulfate, sodium ethylhexyl sulfate, sodium myristyl sulfate, sodium oleyl sulfate, sodium stearyl sulfate, sodium tallow sulfate, sodium tridecyl sulfate, and zinc coco-sulfate. These ingredients are surfactants used at concentrations from 0.1% to 29%, primarily in soaps and shampoos. Many of these ingredients are not in current use. The Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel previously completed a safety assessment of sodium and ammonium lauryl sulfate. The data available for sodium lauryl sulfate and ammonium lauryl sulfate provide sufficient basis for concluding that sodium cetearyl sulfate and related alkyl sulfates are safe in the practices of use and concentration described in the safety assessment.

show abstract

A novel approach to the search for in vitro alternatives to in vivo eye irritancy testing

Cited by 38 publications

References 9 publications

Discussion of alternatives to the draize eye irritancy test /

Discussion of alternatives to the draize eye irritancy test /

Soaps and Detergents: Alternatives to Animal Eye Irritation Tests

Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Sodium Cetearyl Sulfate and Related Alkyl Sulfates as Used in Cosmetics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About