Peer review of validation studies: An assessment of the role of the OECD by reference to the validation of the uterotrophic assay for endocrine disruptors

Alternatives to Laboratory Animals

Volumn 32, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 111-117

  Combes, Robert D ^a  

^a RUSSELL AND BURCH HOUSE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

OECD; Peer review; Uterotrophic assay; Validation

Indexed keywords

ENDOCRINE DISRUPTOR; HORMONE; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ASSAY; DOCUMENTATION; IN VIVO STUDY; ORGANIZATION; PEER REVIEW; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; REVIEW; UTEROTROPHIC ASSAY; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 3342920932     PISSN: 02611929     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/026119290403200208     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Combes, R.D. (2003). A critical assessment of the OECD collaborative study to validate the uterotrophic assay for the detection of oestrogenic and anti-oestrogenic chemicals. ATLA 31, 489-499.
2. OECD (2002). Draft report of the Stockholm Conference on Validation and Regulatory Acceptance of New and Updated Methods in Hazard Assessment, 84pp. Paris, France: OECD.
3. OECD (2003). Draft Guidance Document on the Validation and International Acceptance of New or Updated Test Methods for Hazard Assessment. OECD Environment, Health and Safety Publications Series on Testing and Assessment No. 34, 117pp. Paris, France: OECD.
4. Balls, M., Blaauboer, B., Brusick, D., Frazier, J., Lamb, D., Pemberton, M., Reinhardt, C., Roberfroid, M., Rosenkranz, H., Schmid, B., Spielmann, H., Stammati, A-L. & Walum, E. (1990). Report and recommendations of the CAAT/ERGATT workshop on the validation of toxicity test procedures. ATLA 18, 313-337.
5. Balls, M., Blaauboer, B.J., Fentem, J.H., Bruner, L., Combes, R.D., Ekwall, B., Fielder, R.J., Guillouzo, A., Lewis, R.W., Lovell, D.P., Reinhardt, C.A., Repetto, G., Sladowski, D., Spielmann, H. & Zucco, F. (1995). Practical aspects of the validation of toxicity test procedures. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 5. ATLA 23, 129-147.
6. OECD (1996). Final Report of the OECD Workshop on Harmonization of Validation and Acceptance Criteria for Alternative Toxicological Test Methods, 60pp. Paris, France: OECD.
7. Spielmann, H. & Liebsch. M. (2001). Lessons learned from validation of toxicity tests: from failure to acceptance into regulatory practice. Toxicology in Vitro 5, 585-590.
8. OECD (2001). Draft Guidance Document on the Development, Validation and Regulatory Acceptance of New and Updated Internationally Acceptable Test Methods in Hazard Assessment. Environment Directorate, 43pp. Paris, France: OECD.
9. OECD (2004). Achievements made as part of the OECD work on endocrine disrupter testing and assessment. Website http://www.oecd.org/document/39/0, 2340,en_2649_201185_2348839_119820_1_1_1,00.html (Accessed 8.6.04).
10. Combes, R.D. (2000). Endocrine disruptors: a critical review of in vitro and in vivo testing strategies for assessing their toxic hazard to humans. ATLA 28, 81-118.
11. Kanno, J., Onyon, L., Haseman, J., Fenner-Crisp, P., Ashby, J. & Owens, W. (2001). The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioassay to screen compounds for in vivo estrogenic responses: Phase 1. Environmental Health Perspectives 109, 785-794.
12. Kanno, J., Onyon, L., Peddada, S., Ashby, J., Jacob, E. & Owens, W. (2003). The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioassay. Phase 2: dose-response studies. Environmental Health Perspectives 111, 1530-1549.
13. Kanno, J., Onyon, L., Peddada, S., Ashby, J., Jacob, E. & Owens, W. (2003). The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioasssay. Phase 2: coded single-dose studies. Environmental Health Perspectives 111, 1550-1558.
14. Owens, W. & Koeter, H.B.W.M. (2003). The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioassay: an overview. Environmental Health Perspectives 111, 1527-1529.
15. Worth, A.P. & Balls, M. (2002). The principles of validation and the ECVAM validation process. ATLA 30, Suppl. 2, 15-21.
16. NIH (1997). Validation and Regulatory Acceptance of Toxicological Test Methods. A Report of the Ad Hoc Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods, 105pp. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA: NIEHS.
17. Combes, R. & Balls, M. (2003). How much flexibility is possible when validating new in vivo and in vitro toxicity test methods? ATLA 31, 225-232.
18. Koeter, H.B.W.M. (2002). Dialogue and collaboration: a personal view on laboratory animal welfare developments in general, and on ECVAM's first decade in particular. ATLA 30, Suppl. 2, 207-210.