Report and Recommendations of the CAAT/ERGATT Workshop on the Validation of Toxicity Test Procedures

Balls, Michael; Blaauboer, Bas J.; Brusick, David; Frazier, John M.; Lamb, David G.; Pemberton, Mark; Reinhardt, Christoph A.; Roberfroid, Marcel; Rosenkranz, Herbert S.; Schmid, B.; Spielmann, Horst; Stammati, Annalaura; Walum, Erik

doi:10.1177/026119299001800131.1

Cited by 100 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Already in 1990, an international committee under participation of ZEBET convened to develop a scientific concept for the experimental validation of toxicological testing methods (Balls et al 1990 ). Followed by two similar workshops (Balls et al 1995 ), and two OECD workshops in 1996 and 2002 (Organisation for Economic Co-Operation, Development 1996 , 2002 ), this ultimately led to the OECD Guidance Document No.…”

Section: Current Efforts At Zebetmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternatives to animal testing: current status and future perspectives

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the Center for Alternative Methods to Animal Experiments (ZEBET), an international symposium was held at the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) in Berlin. At the same time, this symposium was meant to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the publication of the book “The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique” by Russell and Burch in 1959 in which the 3Rs principle (that is, Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement) has been coined and introduced to foster the development of alternative methods to animal testing. Another topic addressed by the symposium was the new vision on “Toxicology in the twenty-first Century”, as proposed by the US-National Research Council, which aims at using human cells and tissues for toxicity testing in vitro rather than live animals. An overview of the achievements and current tasks, as well as a vision of the future to be addressed by ZEBET@BfR in the years to come is outlined in the present paper.

show abstract

Section: Current Efforts At Zebetmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alternatives to animal testing: current status and future perspectives

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The future of alternatives research lies in validation. The validation of alternative tests is the process by which the reliability and relevance of a test are established for a particular purpose (Balls et al, ). Over the last 12 years, the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), in cooperation with international experts, has set up guidelines for validation, and five stages in the evolution of a new test were defined: development, prevalidation, validation, peer review , and regulatory acceptance .…”

Section: The Concept Of Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overview of Alternative Methodologies in Toxicology

Gribaldo

2007

CP Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In vitro toxicology generally refers to the study of toxicological phenomena in non-whole-animal models. This broader connotation includes studies utilizing isolated organs, tissue slices, explants cultures, and isolated primary cells, as well as cell lines and subcellular fractions (e.g., microsomes). These model systems have made major contributions to toxicological sciences, particularly in our understanding of the mechanisms of toxicity, xenobiotic metabolism, and species differences in expressions of toxicity. This unit reviews the use of in vitro models and their value in toxicology testing.

show abstract

“…Against a background of good progress in developing some in vitro tests to predict acute eye and skin toxicity (8,9), efforts were focused on defining processes for the validation of new tests -recognising that transparent and rigorous evaluations of the relevance and reliability of these new methods would be essential for their wider scientific and regulatory acceptance and implementation. We started off in a cooperative manner, with the initial workshops on validation principles and processes involving both European and American scientists and regulators (10,11). During this period, the first inhouse company safety testing strategies for minimising or avoiding animal studies for local (eye and skin) effects were also being presented and published (for example, 12).…”

Section: Stage 1: 1990-1994mentioning

confidence: 99%

Working Together to Respond to the Challenges of EU Policy to Replace Animal Testing

Fentem

2006

Altern Lab Anim

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a personal perspective on efforts during the past 15 years to replace animal testing for assessing the safety of chemicals and products. It is based on an invited lecture -the FRAME Annual Lecture -given in October 2005, with the theme of "making progress by working together" (government-industry-academia-NGOs). Where we have achieved some successes, these have clearly been due to effective cooperation and collaboration between the relevant stakeholders. In recent times, there has not been this same level of active commitment and coordination. This needs to change, since, if we are to make good progress in the years to come in responding to the new challenges of the EU policy to replace animal testing, this will undoubtedly require us to work together, hopefully facilitated by effective leadership and coordination from the EU policy-makers themselves.

show abstract

Report and Recommendations of the CAAT/ERGATT Workshop on the Validation of Toxicity Test Procedures

Cited by 100 publications

References 7 publications

Alternatives to animal testing: current status and future perspectives

Alternatives to animal testing: current status and future perspectives

Overview of Alternative Methodologies in Toxicology

Working Together to Respond to the Challenges of EU Policy to Replace Animal Testing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About