An in vitro cytotoxicity test to predict the ocular irritation potential of detergents and detergent products

Scaife, Michael C.

doi:10.1016/0278-6915(85)90025-0

Cited by 53 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In these papers, surfactant cytotoxicity was evaluated by measurement of parameters of cell function that are altered in the presence of surfactants: DNA synthesis (Ferguson andProttey, 1974, 1976), cell membrane integrity and enzyme release (Scaife, 1985), cell detachment and cloning efficiency (Reirihardt et al, 1985) and cell morphological alteration (Borenfreund and Borrero, 1984).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative effects of four surfactants on growth, contraction and adhesion of cultured human fibroblasts

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A range of surfactants, including the anionic sodium dodecyl sulfate, the cationic cetyltrimethylammonium bromide and the non-ionics octylphenoxy polyethoxyethanol (Triton X100) and polyoxyethylene 20 sorbitan monoleate (Tween 80) was studied for effects on proliferation, contractibility and attachment of cultured human fibroblasts. Only ionic surfactants exhibited a stimulatory effect on fibroblast proliferation, whereas all the surfactants tested increased the contraction of collagen gels containing fibroblasts, with the greatest effect from the non-ionic surfactants. This activity was not correlated with an increase of cell population or cell attachment within the collagenous matrix. The activity of the surfactants was seen only at levels close to their LD50 values and in a narrow range of concentrations. Thus, we consider that they are the result of the so-called hormesis phenomenon.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative effects of four surfactants on growth, contraction and adhesion of cultured human fibroblasts

1988

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several cell culture systems have been widely used to assess cellular toxicity as predictive tests for eye irritation (17). Among them, many investigators have proposed in vitro tests to predict the irritation potential of surfactants or shampoos (18)(19)(20). The ability of surfactants to induce phospholipids emulsifying and protein denaturation both involved in membrane disorganization, could explain why the cell membrane can be an important target, related to eye irritative process.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of surfactant cytotoxicity: comparison with the Draize eye test

Tachon

Cotovio

Dossou

et al. 1989

Intern J of Cosmetic Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synopsis We have compared the in vitro cellular toxicity and the in vivo ocular irritation potency of 16 surfactants (7 non ionics, 3 anionics, 2 amphoterics, 4 cationics) ranking from very weakly irritant to strongly irritant. In vitro, the cellular toxicity was estimated on Chinese hamster lung fibroblasts (V79) using a cell mortality test and a cell growth inhibition test. For each surfactant, a lethal concentration 50% without foetal calf serum (LC.50-0) and with 10% foetal calf serum (LC50-I0), as well as the concentration required to reduce 50% of the growth (CI.50) were determined. In vivo, each surfactant was applied directly to the cornea of six albino rabbits. The maximal ocular irritation score (I0 max) and the ocular irritation score obtained seven days later (I0 J7) were collected. Comparison of in vitro results with those obtained in vivo showed good correlations, particularly when I0 max and the difference (LC.50-10 - LC50-0) were considered (r= 0.845, P<0.001). These results suggest that the use of cell culture tests as pre-screening systems to appreciate eye irritation potency of surfactants could be a reliable alternative method in order to reduce the use of the Draize rabbit eye test. They can provide a better knowledge of the irritative process induced by surfactants (cellular toxicity and protein interaction potency).

show abstract

“…The cells were exposed to concentrations of 0.05-0.5% (shampoos) and 1-10,000 pl/ml (surfactants) for an exposure time of 2 h. The names and numbers of shampoos were not given. The in vitro cytotoxicity of a homologous series of purified detergents was assessed in HeLa cells by a test for alkaline phosphatase release (Scaife, 1985). Although, in general, the decreasing order of potency of cationic, anionic, and nonionic detergents was similar in vivo and in vitro, complete agreement was not achieved using cytotoxicity as an end point.…”

Section: S Christian a N D R M Dienermentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The test was concluded to be a good screening procedure but not an alternative for the Draize eye irritation test. Scaife (1985). in his evaluation of the cytotoxicity (as determined in suspension cultures of mouse fibroblasts by FDA/EB after 4 h of exposure to test substance) of a series of completely soluble detergent-based formulations, also found the FDA/EB method acceptable for screening.…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

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

An in vitro cytotoxicity test to predict the ocular irritation potential of detergents and detergent products

Cited by 53 publications

References 20 publications

Comparative effects of four surfactants on growth, contraction and adhesion of cultured human fibroblasts

Comparative effects of four surfactants on growth, contraction and adhesion of cultured human fibroblasts

Assessment of surfactant cytotoxicity: comparison with the Draize eye test

Soaps and Detergents: Alternatives to Animal Eye Irritation Tests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About