In vitro alternatives to the use of animals in ocular toxicology testing

Ocular Surface

Volumn 3, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 126-142

  Ubels, John L ^a,b   Clousing, Daniel P ^a,c  

^a CALVIN COLLEGE   (United States)

^b WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Alternatives to the Draize test; Animal experimentation; Chemical eye injury; Cosmetics; Draize test; In vitro corneal equivalent models; Ocular irritancy testing

Indexed keywords

3 (4,5 DIMETHYL 2 THIAZOLYL) 2,5 DIPHENYLTETRAZOLIUM BROMIDE; AGAROSE; COSMETIC; DOMESTIC CHEMICAL; FLUORESCEIN; INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL; NEUTRAL RED;

CELL CULTURE; CELL PROLIFERATION; CHORIOALLANTOIS; CONJUNCTIVA EPITHELIUM; CORNEA; CORNEA EPITHELIUM; CORNEA OPACITY; CORNEA PERMEABILITY; CYTOTOXICITY; ENUCLEATION; EPITHELIUM CELL; ERYTHROCYTE; EYE INJURY; EYE IRRITATION; EYE TOXICITY; HUMAN; IN VITRO STUDY; IN VIVO STUDY; LABORATORY TEST; NONHUMAN; PREDICTION; REVIEW; SAFETY; TOXICITY TESTING; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 24644434963     PISSN: 15420124     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1542-0124(12)70195-7     Document Type: Article

References (111)

1. Draize JH, Woodard G, Calvery HO. Methods for the study of irritation and toxicity of substances applied topically to the skin and mucous membranes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1944;82:377-90
2. Marzulli FN, Maibach HI (eds). Dermato-toxicology. Washington, McGraw Hill, Hemisphere Publishing Corp, 1977, pp 555-610
3. Freeberg FE, Nixon GA, Reer PJ, Weaver JE, et al. Human and rabbit eye responses to chemical insult. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1986;7:626-34
4. Bernard C. Introduction to the study of experimental medicine. Dover, New York, 1957
5. Ra'anan AW. Historical overview of the APS and the use of animals in research. Physiologist 1999;42:277-83
6. Singer P. Animal liberation. New York, Random House, ed 2, 1990
7. Earl LK, Dickens AD, Rowson MJ. A critical analysis of the rabbit eye irritation test variability and its impact on the validation of alternative methods. Toxicol In Vitro 1997;11:295-304
8. Borenfreund E, Puerner JA. Toxicity determined in vitro by morphological alterations and neutral red absorption. Toxicol Lett 1985;24:119-24
9. Jones PA, Bracher M, Marenus K, Kojima H. Performance of the neutral red uptake assay in the COLIPA international validation study on alternatives to the rabbit eye irritation test. Toxicol in Vitro 1999;13:325-33
10. Reader SJ, Blackwell V, O'Hara R, et al. Neutral red release from pre-loaded cells as an in vitro approach to testing for eye irritancy potential. Toxicol In Vitro 1990;4:264-66
11. Zuang V. The neutral red release assay: a review. Altern Lab Anim 2001;29:575-99
12. Jones PA, Budynsky E, Cooper KJ, et al. Comparative evaluation of five in vitro tests for assessing the eye irritation potential of hair-care products. Altern Lab Anim 2001;29:669-92
13. Molinari BL, Tasat DR, Palmieri MA, et al. Cell-based quantitative evaluation of the MTT assay. Analyt Quant Cytol Histol 2003;25:254-62
14. Korting HC, Schindler S, Hartinger A, et al. MTT-assay and neutral red release (NRR)-assay: relative role in the prediction of the irritancy potential of surfactants. Life Sci 1994;55:533-40
15. Mosmann T. Rapid colorimetric assay for cellular growth and survival: application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assays. J Immunol Methods 1983;65:55-63
16. Ubels JL, Clousing DP, Van Haitsma TA, et al. Pre-clinical investigation of the efficacy of an artificial tear solution containing hydroxypropyl-guar as a gelling agent. Curr Eye Res 2004;28:437-44
17. Sina JF, Ward GJ, Laszek MA, Gautheron PD. Assessment of cytotoxicity assays as predictors of ocular irritation of pharmaceuticals. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1992;18:515-21
18. Osborne R, Perkins MA, Roberts DA. Development and intralaboratory evaluation of an in vitro human cell-based test to aid ocular irritancy assessments. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1995;28:139-53
19. Espersen RJ, Olsen P, Nicolaisen GM, et al. Assessment of recovery from ocular irritancy using a human tissue equivalent model. Toxicol In Vitro 1997;11:81-88
20. Wallin RF, Hume RD, Jackson EM. The agarose diffusion method for ocular irritancy screening: cosmetic products, part 1. J Toxicol Cut Ocular Toxicol 1987;6:239-50
21. Jackson EM, Hume RD, Wallin RF. The agarose diffusion method for ocular irritancy screening: cosmetic products, part II. J Toxicol Cut Ocular Toxicol 1988;7:187-94
22. O'Brien KA, Jones PA, Rockley J. Evaluation of an agarose overlay assay to determine the eye irritation potential of detergent-based products. Toxicol In Vitro 1990;4:311-13
23. Cottin M, Zanvit A, Faquet B, et al. Critical evaluation of an agarose diffusion method for the assessment of eye irritancy. Altern Lab Anim 1993;21:427-40
24. Pape WJ, Pfannenbecker U, Hoppe U. Validation of the red blood cell test system as in vitro assay for the rapid screening of irritation potential of surfactants. Mol Toxicol 1987;1:525-36
25. Pape WJ, Hoppe U. Standardization of an in vitro red blood cell test for evaluating the acute cytotoxic potential of tensides. Arzneimittelforschung 1990;40:498-502
26. Pape WJ, Pfannenbecker U, Argembeaux H, et al. COLIPA validation project on in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients and finished products (Phase I): the red blood cell test for the estimation of acute eye irritation potentials. Present status. Toxicol In Vitro 1999;13:343-54
27. Shaw AJ, Balls M, Clotheir RH, Bateman ND. Predicting ocular irritancy and recovery from injury using Madin-Darby canine kidney cells. Toxicol In Vitro 1991;5:569-71
28. Cottin M, Zanvit A. Fluorescein leakage test: a useful tool in ocular safety assessment. Toxicol In Vitro 1997;11:399-405
29. Luepke NP. Hen's egg chorioallantoic membrane test for irritation potential. Food Chem Toxicol 1985;2:287-91
30. Steiling W, Bracher M, Courtellemont P, de Silva O. The HET-CAM, a useful in vitro assay for assessing the eye irritation properties of cosmetic formulation and ingredients. Toxicol In Vitro 1999;13:375-84
31. Bagley DM, Cerven D, Harbell J. Assessment of the chorioallantoic membrane vascular assay (CAMVA) in the COLIPA in vitro eye irritation validation study. Toxicol In Vitro 1999;13:285-93
32. Djabari Z, Bauza E, Dal Farra C, Domloge N. The HET-CAM test combined with histological studies for better evaluation of active ingredient innocuity. Int J Tissue React 2002;24:117-21
33. Spielmann H, Liebsch M, Kalweit S, et al. Results of a validation study in Germany on two in vitro alternatives to the Draize eye irritation test, the HET-CAM test and the 3T3 NRU cytotoxicity test. Altern Lab Anim1996;24:741-858
34. Spielmann H, Liebsch M, Kalweit S, et al. A tiered in vitro/in vivo testing strategy to classify severely eye irritation chemicals using two alternatives to the Draize eye test, the HET-CAM test and the 3T3 NRU cytotoxicity test, in: Clark DH, Lisansky SG, Macmillan R (eds). Alternatives to animal testing II. Cp1 Press, Newberry UK, 1999, pp 205-10
35. Gilleron L, Coecke S, Sysmans M, et al. Evaluation of the HET-CAM-TSA method as an alternative to the Draize eye irritation test. Toxicol In Vitro 1997;11:641-4
36. Bagley DM, Bruner LH, de Silva O, et al. An evaluation of five potential alternatives in vitro to the rabbit eye irritation test in vivo. Toxicol In Vitro 1992;6:275-84
37. Brantom PG, Bruner LH, Chamberlain M, et al. A summary report of the COLIPA international validation study on alternatives to the Draize rabbit eye irritation test. Toxicol In Vitro 1997;11:141-79
38. Leerhoy J. Cytopathic effect of rubella virus in a rabbit-cornea cell line. Science 1965;149:633-4
39. Phillips CA, Melnick JL, Burkhardt M. Isolation, propagation and neutralization of rubella virus in cultures of rabbit cornea (SIRC) cells. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 1966;122:783-6
40. North-Root H, Yackovich F, Demetrulias J, et al. Prediction of the eye irritation potential of shampoos using the in vitro SIRC cell toxicity test. Food Chem Toxicol 1985;23:271-3
41. North-Root H, Yackovich F, Demetrulias J, et al. Evaluation of an in vitro cell toxicity test using rabbit corneal cells to predict the eye irritation potential of surfactants. Toxicol Lett 1982;14:207-12
42. Roguet R, Dossou KG, Rougier A. Prediction of eye irritation potential of surfactants using the SIRC-NRU cytotoxicity test. Altern Lab Anim 1992;20:451-6
43. Tani N, Kinoshita S, Okamoto Y, et al. Interlaboratory validation of the in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients. (8) Evaluation of cytotoxicity tests on SIRC cells. Toxicol In Vitro 1999;13:175-87
44. Adams J, Wilcox MJ, Trousdale MD, et al. Morphologic and physiologic effects of artificial tear formulations on corneal epithelial derived cells. Cornea 1992;11:234-41
45. Pleyer U, Grammer J, Kosmidis P, Ruckert DG. Analysis of interactions between the corneal epithelium and liposomes: qualitative and quantitative fluorescence studies of a corneal epithelial cell line. Surv Ophthalmol 1995;39:Suppl 1:S3-16
46. Niederkorn JY, Meyer DR, Ubelaker JE, Martin JH. Ultrastructural and immunohistological characterization of the corneal cell line. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 1990;26:923-30
47. Kahn CR, Young E, Lee IH, Rhim JS. Human corneal epithelial primary cultures and cell lines with extended life span: in vitro model for ocular studies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993;34:3429-41
48. Araki-Sasaki K, Ohashi Y, Sasabe T, et al. An SV40-immortalized human corneal epithelial cell line and its characterization. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1995;36:614-21
49. Offord EA, Sharif NA, Mace K, et al. Immortalized human corneal epithelial cells for ocular toxicity and inflammation studies. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1999;40:1091-101
50. Gipson IK, Spurr-Michaue S, Argueso P, et al. Mucin gene expression in immortalized human corneal-limbal and conjunctival epithelial cell lines. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:2496-2506
51. Huhtala A, Mannerstrom M, Alajuuma P, et al. Comparison of an immortalized human corneal epithelial cell line and rabbit corneal epithelial cell culture in cytotoxicity testing. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2002;18:163-75
52. Huhtala A, Alajuuma P, Burgalassi S, et al. A collaborative evaluation of the cytotoxicity of two surfactants by using the human corneal epithelial cell line and the EST-1 test. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 2003;19:11-21
53. Kruszewski FH, Walker TL, Ward SL, DiPasquale LC. Progress in the use of human ocular tissues for in vitro alternative methods. Comm Toxicol 1995;5:203-24
54. Kruszewski FH, Walker TL, DiPasquale LC. Evaluation of a human corneal epithelial cell line as an in vitro model for assessing ocular irritation. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1997;36:130-40
55. Ward SL, Walker TL, Dimitrijevich SD. Evaluation of chemically induced toxicity using an in vitro model of human corneal epithelium. Toxicol In Vitro 1997;11:121-39
56. Ward SL, Gacula Jr M, Edelhauser HF: The human corneal epithelial HCE-T TEP assay for eye irritation: scientific relevance and summary of prevalidation study results, in: Salem H, Katz SA (eds). Alternative toxicological methods. CRC Press, New York, 2003, pp161-86
57. Watsky MA, Jablonski MM, Edelhauser HF. Comparison of conjunctival and corneal surface areas in rabbit and human. Curr Eye Res 1988;7:483-6
58. Smit EE, Sra SK, Grabowski LR et al. Modulation of IL-8 and RANTES release in human conjunctival epithelial cells. Cornea 2003;22:332-7
59. Diebold Y, Calonge M, de Salamanca AE, et al. Characterization of a spontaneously immortalized cell line (IOBA-NHC) from normal human conjunctiva. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2003;44:4263-74
60. Ang LP, Tan DT, Phan TT, et al. The in vitro and in vivo proliferative capacity of serum-free cultivated human conjunctival epithelial cells. Curr Eye Res 2004;28:307-17
61. De Saint Jean M, Baudouin C, Di Nolfo, M, et al. Comparison of morphological and functional characteristics of primary-cultured human conjunctival epithelium and of Wong-Kilbourne derivative of Chang conjunctival cell line. Exp Eye Res 2004;78:257-7462.
62. Wong SC, Kilbourne ED. Changing viral susceptibility of a human cell line in continuous cultivation. I. Production of infective virus in a variant of the Chang conjunctival cell following infection with swine or N-WS influenza viruses. J Exp Med 1961;113:95-110
63. Lavappa KS, Macy ML, Shannon JE. Examination of ATCC stocks for HeLa marker chromosomes in human cell lines. Nature 1976;259:211-3
64. Ang LPK, Tan DT, Beurman RW, Lavker RM. Development of a conjunctival epithelial equivalent with improved proliferative properties using a multistep serum-free culture system. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 2004;45:1789-95
65. Stern M, Klausner M, Alvarado R, et al. Evaluation of the EpiOcular Tissue model as an alternative to the Draize eye irritation test. Toxicol In Vitro 1998;12:455-62
66. Klausner M, Hayden PJ, Breyfogel BA, et al. The EpiOcular prediction model: A reproducible in vitro means of assessing ocular irritancy in Salem H, Katz SA (eds). Alternative toxicologic methods. CRC Press, New York, 2003, pp 131-46
67. Nguyen DH, Beuerman RW, DeWever B, Rosdy M. Three-dimensional construct of the human corneal epithelium for in vitro toxicology, in: Salem H, Katz SA (eds) Alternative toxicologic methods. CRC Press, New York, 2003, pp 147-59
68. Burton AB, York M, Lawrence RS. The in vitro assessment of severe eye irritants. Food Cosmet Toxicol 1981;19:471-480
69. Prinsen MK, Koeter HB. Justification of the enucleated eye test with eyes of slaughterhouse animals as an alternative to the Draize eye irritation test with rabbits. Food Chem Toxicol 1993;31:69-76
70. Chamberlain M, Gad SC, Gautheron P, Prinsen MK. Organotypic models for the assessment/prediction of ocular irritation. Food Chem Toxicol 1997;35:23-37
71. Cooper KJ, Earl LK, Harbell J, Raabe H. Prediction of ocular irritancy of prototype shampoo formulations by the isolated rabbit eye (IRE) test and bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) assay. Toxicol In Vitro 2001;15:95-103
72. Prinsen MK. The chicken enucleated eye test (CEET): a practical (pre)screen for the assessment of eye irritation/corrosion potential of test materials. Food Chem Toxicol 1996;34:291-6
73. Balls M, Botham PA, Bruner LH, Spielmann H. The EC/HO international validation study on alternatives to the Draize eye irritation test. Toxicol In Vitro 1995;9:871-929
74. Muir CK. A simple method to assess surfactant-induced bovine corneal opacity in vitro: preliminary findings. Toxicol Lett 1984;22:199-203
75. Gautheron P, Dukic M, Alix D, Sina JF. Bovine corneal opacity and permeability test: an in vitro assay of ocular irritancy. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1992;18:442-9
76. Vanparys PH, Deknudt GH, Sysmans M, et al. Evaluation of the bovine corneal opacity-permeability assay as an in vitro alternative to the Draize eye irritation test. Toxicol In Vitro 1993;7:471-76
77. Sina JF. Validation of the bovine corneal opacity-permeability assay as a predictor of ocular irritation potential. In Vitro Mol Toxicol 1994;7:283-90
78. Gautheron P, Giroux J, Cottin M, et al. Interlaboratory assessment of the bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) assay Toxicol In Vitro 1994;8:381-92
79. Christian MS, Diener RM. Soaps and detergents: alternatives to animal eye irritation tests. J Am Coll Toxicol 1996;15:1-44
80. Casterton PL, Potts LF, Klein BD. A novel approach to assessing eye irritation using the bovine corneal opacity and permeability test. J Toxicol Cut Ocular Toxicol 1996;15:147-63
81. Ubels JL, Erickson AM, Zylstra U, et al. The effect of corneal hydration on opacity in the bovine cornea opacity and permeability assay. J Toxicol Cut Ocular Toxicol 1998;17:197-220
82. Bruner LH, Evans MG, McPherson JP, et al. Investigation of ingredient interactions in cosmetic formulations using isolated bovine corneas. Toxicol In Vitro 1998;12:669-90
83. Ubels JL, Pruis RM, Sybesma JT, Casterton PL. Corneal opacity, hydration, and endothelial morphology in the bovine cornea opacity and permeability assay using reduced treatment times. Toxicol In Vitro 2000;14:379-86
84. Ubels JL, Paauw JD, Casterton PL, Kool, DJ. A redesigned corneal holder for the bovine cornea opacity and permeability assay that maintains normal corneal morphology. Toxicol in Vitro 2002;16:621-28
85. Ubels JL, Ditlev JA, Clousing DP, Casterton PL. Corneal permeability in a redesigned corneal holder for the bovine cornea opacity and permeability assay. Toxicol In Vitro 2004;18:853-7
86. Igarashi H, Sato C, Chiba Y, et al. The development of corneal opacity, increased hydration and increased thickness in isolated porcine corneas in response to timolol maleate solutions containing various preservatives. Altern Lab Anim 1996;24:21-9
87. Xu KP, Li XF, Yu FS. Corneal organ culture model for assessing epithelial responses to surfactants. Toxicol Sci 2000;58:306-14
88. Yu F-SX, Xu KP. Corneal organ culture for ocular toxicity test, in Salem H, Katz SA (eds.). Alternative toxicologic methods. CRC Press, New York, 2003, pp 117-24
89. Xu KP, Zhang J, Yu FS. Corneal organ culture model for assessing epithelial recovery after surfactant exposure. J Toxicol Cut Ocular Toxicol 2004;23:29-40
90. Minami Y, Sugihara H, Oono S. Reconstruction of cornea in three dimensional collagen gel matrix culture. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1993;34:2316-24
91. Zieske JD, Mason VS, Wasson ME, et al. Basement membrane assembly and differentiation of cultured corneal cells: importance of culture environment and endothelial cell interaction. Exp Cell Res 1994;214:621-33
92. Schneider AI, Maier-Reif K, Graeve T. Constructing an in vitro cornea from cultures of the three specific corneal cell types. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Anim 1999;35:515-26
93. Schneider AI, Maier-Reif K, Graeve T. The use of an in vitro cornea for predicting ocular toxicity. In Vitro Mol Toxicol 1997;10:309-318
94. Parnigotto PP, Bassani V, Montesi F, Conconi MT. Bovine corneal stroma and epithelium reconstructed in vitro: characterization and response to surfactants. Eye 1998;12:304-10
95. Zieske JD, Chung EH, Guo X, Hutcheon AE. Human corneal organotypic cultures. J Toxicol Cut Ocular Toxicol 2004;23:19-28
96. Griffith M, Osborne R, Munger R, et al. Functional human corneal equivalents constructed from cell lines. Science 1999;286:2169-72
97. Doillon CJ, Watsky MA, Hakim M, et al. A collagen-based scaffold for a tissue engineered human cornea: physical and physiological properties. Int J Artif Organs 2003;8:764-73
98. Suuronen EJ, Nakamura M, Watsky MA, et al. Innervated human corneal equivalents as in vitro models for nerve-target cell interactions. FASEB J 2004;18:170-72
99. Bruner LH, de Silva O, Earl LK, et al. Report on the COLIPA workshop on mechanisms of eye irritation. Altern Lab Anim 1998;26:811-20
100. Balls M, Berg N, Bruner LH, et al. Eye irritation testing: the way forward. Altern Lab Anim 1999;27:53-77
101. Bruner LH, Kain DJ, Roberts DA, Parker RD. Evaluation of seven in vitro alternatives for ocular safety testing. Fundam Appl Toxicol 1991;17:136-49
102. Rougier A, Cottin M, de Silva O, et al. In vitro methods: their relevance and complementarity in ocular safety assessment. Lens Eye Toxic Res 1992;9:229-45
103. Atkinson KA, Fentem JH, Clothier RH, Balls M. Alternatives to ocular irritation testing in animals. Lens Eye Tox Res 1992;9:247-58
104. Bruner LH, Carr GJ, Chamberlain M, Currens RD. Validation of alternative methods for toxicity testing. Toxicol In Vitro 1996;10:479-501
105. Osgood TB. Surfactant ethoxylation and use of anti-irritant additives in reducing surfactant toxicity to the corneal epithelium: a comparison of in vitro and in vivo methods. M.S. Thesis, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WL, 1993
106. Fentem JH, Balls M. Validation and regulatory acceptance of alternative test methods: current situation in the European Union, in Salem H, Katz SA (eds). Alternative toxicological methods. CRC Press, New York, 2003, pp 31-41
107. Stokes WS. The interagency coordinating committee on the validation of alternative methods (ICCVAM): recent progress in the evaluation of alternative toxicity testing methods, in Salem H, Katz SA (eds). Alternative toxicological methods. CRC Press, New York, 2003, pp 15-30
108. Ward SL. Meeting industry and regulatory needs for alternative test methods to the Draize rabbit eye irritation test, in: Salem H, Katz SA (eds). Alternative toxicological methods. CRC Press, New York, 2003, pp 77-87
109. Nussenblatt RB, Bron A, Chambers W et al. Ophthalmologic perspectives on eye irritation testing. J Toxicol Cut Ocular Toxicol 1998;17:103-9
110. Murer JK, Parker RD, Jester JV. Extent of initial corneal injury as the mechanistic basis for ocular irritation: key findings and recommendations for the development of alternative assays. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2002;36:106-17
111. Jester JV, Li L, Molai A, Maurer JK. Extent of initial corneal injury as a basis for alternative eye irritation tests. Toxicol In Vitro. 2001;15:115-30