Validation and regulatory acceptance of new, revised, and alternative toxicological methods

Principles and Methods of Toxicology: Fifth Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 1103-1130

  Stokes, William S ^a   Schechtman, Leonard M ^b  

^a TARGACEPT INC   (United States)

^b CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85125326924     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (82)

1. Russell, W. M. and Burch, R. L., The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique, Methuen & Co., London, 1959 (reprinted and available from the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare, 8 Hamilton Close, South Mimms, Potters Bar, Herts EN6 3QD England).
2. Zurlo J., Rudacille D., and Goldberg A.M., Animals and Alternatives in Testing: History, Science, and Ethics, Mary Ann Liebert, New York, 1994.
3. 7 U.S.C. §2131 et seq. (P.L. 89-544), as amended (P.L. 91-579, 94-279, 99-198), 1966.
4. 42 U.S.C., Health Research Extension Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-158, Section 495), 1985.
5. Balls, M. et al., The three R's: the way forward, ATLA, 23(6), 838-867, 1995.
6. National Institutes of Health Revitalization Act of 1993, P.L. 103-43, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1993.
7. 42 U.S.C. §2851-2, ICCVAM Authorization Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-545), 2000.
8. USDA, Animal Welfare, Final Rules: Code of Federal Regulations, Title 9, Chapter 1, Subchapter A, Parts l, 2, and 3, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C., 1989.
9. PHS, Public Health Service policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, D. C., 1986.
10. Stokes, W. S., Jensen, D. J., and Latg, B. S., Guidelines for institutional animal care and use committees: consideration of alternatives, Contemp. Top., 34(3), 51-60, 1995.
11. Stokes, W. S., Animal use alternatives in research and testing: obligation and opportunity, Lab. Anim., 26(3), 28-32, 1997.
12. Stokes, W. S., Humane endpoints for laboratory animals used in regulatory testing, ILAR J, 43, S31-S38, 2002.
13. USEPA, Health Effects Test Guidelines, OPPTS 870.1100: Acute Oral Toxicity, Office of Pesticides, Prevention, and Toxic Substances, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1999 (http://www.epa.gov/OPPTS_ Harmonized/870_Health_Effects_Test_Guidelines/Series/870-1100.pdf).
14. OECD, Test Guideline 420, Guideline for Testing of Chemicals: Acute Oral Toxicity-Fixed Dose Method, Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2001.
15. OECD, Test Guideline 423, Acute Oral Toxicity-Acute Toxic Class Method, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2001.
16. OECD, Test Guideline 425, Acute Oral Toxicity-Up and Down Procedure, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2001.
17. OECD, Guidance Document on the Recognition, Assessment, and Use of Clinical Signs as Humane Endpoints for Experimental Animals Used in Safety Evaluations, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2000.
18. Stokes, W. S., Humane endpoints for laboratory animals used in toxicity testing, in Progress in the Reduction, Refinement, and Replacement of Animal Experimentation, Balls, M. et al., Eds., Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2000, pp. 897-906.
19. Stokes, W. S., Reducing unrelieved pain and distress in laboratory animals using humane endpoints, ILAR J., 41, 59-61, 2000.
20. Griffin, G., Stokes, W. S., Paks, S. P., and Gauthier, C., The ICLAS/CCAC International Symposium on Regulatory Testing and Animal Welfare: introduction and overview, ILAR J., 43, S1-S4, 2002.
21. Dean, J. H. et al., ICCVAM evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay. II. Conclusions and recommendations of an independent scientific peer review panel, Reg. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 34, 258-273, 2001.
22. Springer, J. A. et al., Number of animals for sequential testing, Food Chem. Toxicol., 31, 105-109, 1993.
23. OECD, Test Guideline 405, Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals: Acute Eye Irritation/Corrosion, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2002.
24. Botham, P. A., Acute systemic toxicity, ILAR J., 43(S), S7-S30, 2002.
25. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), ICCVAM Evaluation of EPISKIN™, EpiDerm™ (EPI-200), and Rat Skin Transcutaneous Electrical Resistance (TER): In Vitro Test Methods for Assessing Dermal Corrosivity Potential of Chemicals, NIH Publ. No. 02-4502, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2002 (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/epioderm.htm).
26. OECD, Test Guideline 430, In Vitro Skin Corrosion: Transcutaneous Electrical Resistance Test (TER), Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2004.
27. OECD, Test Guideline 431, In Vitro Skin Corrosion: Human Skin Model Test, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2004
28. OECD, OECD Test Guideline 435, In Vitro Membrane Barrier Test Method for Skin Corrosion, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2006.
29. ®: An In Vitro Test Method for Assessing Dermal Corrosivity Potential of Chemicals, NIH Publ. No. 99-4495, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999 (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/doc/reports/corprrep.htm).
30. OECD, OECD Series on Principles of Good Laboratory Practice and Compliance Monitoring, No. 14: The Application of the Principles of GLP to In Vitro Studies, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2004.
31. Stokes, W. S. and Marafante, E., Alternative testing methodologies: the 13th meeting of the scientific group on methodologies for the safety evaluation of chemicals-introduction and summary, Environ. Health Perspect, 106(2), 405-112, 1998.
32. Stokes, W. S., Validation of in vitro methods for toxicology studies, in Biological Concepts and Techniques in Toxicology, Riviere, J. E., Ed., Taylor & Francis, New York, 2006.
33. Corvi, R. et al., Validation of toxicogenomics-based test systems: ECVAM-ICCVAM/NICEATM considerations for regulatory use, Environ. Health Perspect, 44, 111-117, 2006.
34. United Nations, Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS), United Nations, Geneva, 2003.
35. OECD, Test Guideline 404, Acute Dermal IrritationlCorrosion, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2002.
36. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), Validation and Regulatory Acceptance of Toxicological Test Methods: A Report of the Ad Hoc Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods, NIH Publ. No. 97-3981, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1997 (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/docs/docs.htm#general).
37. OECD, Guidance Document No. 34, Guidance Document on the Validation and International Acceptance of New or Updated Test Methods for Hazard Assessment, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2005.
38. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), Guidelines for the Nomination and Submission of New, Revised, and Alternative Test Methods, NIH Publ. No. 03-4508, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2003 (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/docs/guide-lines/subguide.htm).
39. Balls, M. et al., Practical aspects of the validation of toxicity test procedures, the report and recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 5, ATLA, 23, 129-147, 1995.
40. OECD, Guidance Document for the Development of OECD Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 1995
41. ISO, Biological Evaluation of Medical Devices, Part 11. Test for Systemic Toxicity, Ref. No. ISO 10993-11:1993(E), International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1993.
42. OECD, OECD Principles of Good Laboratory Practice, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 1998.
43. EPA, EPA-FIFRA Good Laboratory Practice Standards (GLPs) Enforcement Policy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C. (http://www.epa.gov/com-pliance/resources/policies/civil/fifra/fifraglp).
44. FDA, Good Laboratory Practices, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Washington, D.C. (http://www.fda.gov/ora/compliance:ref/bimo/glp/default.htm).
45. Paris, M. W. et al., Reproducibility analyses for in vitro neutral red uptake methods from a validation study to evaluate in vitro cytotoxicity assays for estimating rodent acute systemic toxicity, Toxicologist, 90(S-1), 403, 2006.
46. Statutory Instrument 2002 No. 473, The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, as amended (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20020473.htm.)
47. Stokes, W. S. et al., The use of test method performance standards to streamline the validation process, in Proc. of the 5th World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences, August 21-25, 2005, Berlin, Germany.
48. Blaauboeur, B. J., Barratt, M. D., and Houston, J. B., The integrated use of alternative methods in toxicological risk evaluations: ECVAM integrated testing strategies task force report I, ATLA, 27, 229-237, 1999.
49. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), Recommended Performance Standards for In Vitro Test Methods for Skin Corrosion, NIH Publ. No. 04-4510, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2004 (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/docs/docs.htm#invitro).
50. Balls, M., Defined structural and performance criteria would facilitate the validation and acceptance of alternative test procedures [editorial], ATLA, 25, 483-484, 1997.
51. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), The Murine Local Lymph Node Assay: A Test Method for Assessing the Allergic Contact Dermatitis Potential of ChemicalslCompounds, NIH Publ. No. 99-4494, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 1999 (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods.llna.htm).
52. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), The Revised Up-and-Down Procedure: A Test Method for Determining the Acute Oral Toxicity of Chemicals, NIH Publ. No. 02-4501, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2001 (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/docs/docs.htm#udp).
53. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), ICCVAM Evaluation of In Vitro Test Methods for Detecting Potential Endocrine Disruptors: Estrogen and Androgen Receptor Binding and Transcriptional Activation Assays, NIH Publ. No. 03-4503, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2003 (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/endodocs/edfinrpt/edfinrpt.pdf).
54. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), ICCVAM Biennial Progress Report: 2004-2005, NIH Publ. No. 06-4516, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2006.
55. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), Report of the International Workshop on In Vitro Methods for Assessing Acute Systemic Toxicity: Results of an International Workshop Organized by the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods and the National Toxicology Program Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM), NIH Publ. No. 01-4499, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2001 (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/invidocs/finalall.pdf.)
56. Balls, M., The establishment of ECVAM and its progress since 1993, ATLA, 30(Suppl. 2), 5-11, 2002.
57. Hartung, T. et al., ECVAM's response to the changing political environment for alternatives: consequences of the European Union Chemicals and Cosmetics Policies, ATLA, 31, 473-481, 2003.
58. Eskes, C. and Zuang, V., Eds., Alternative (non-animal) methods for cosmetics testing: current status and future prospects, a report prepared in the context of the 7th amendment to the cosmetics directive for establishing the timetable for phasing out animal testing, ATLA, 33, S1, 2005.
59. Stokes, W. S. and Schechtman, L. M., The Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM): a review of the ICCVAM test method evaluation process and current international collaborations with the European centre for the validation of alternative methods (ECVAM), ATLA, 30(Suppl. 2), 23-32, 2002.
60. Schechtman, L. M. and Stokes, W. S., ECVAM-ICCVAM: prospects for future collaboration, ATLA, 30(Suppl. 2), 227-236, 2002.
61. Ohno, Y., ICH Guidelines, implementation of the 3Rs (refinement, reduction, and replacement): incorporating best scientific practices into the regulatory process, ATLA, 43(Suppl.), S95-S98, 2002.
62. Spielmann, H. and Liebsch, M., Validation successes: chemicals, ATLA, 30(Suppl. 2), 33-40, 2002.
63. Basketter, D. A. et al., Dinitrohalobenzenes: evaluation of relative skin sensitization potential using the local lymph node assay, Cont. Dermat., 36, 97-100, 1997.
64. Basketter, D. A., Gerberick, G. F., and Kimber, I., Applying immunology to allergen identification: the local lymph node assay, Trends Pharmacol. Sci., 22, 264-265, 2001.
65. Sailstad, D., Hattan, D., Hill, R., and Stokes, W., Evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA). I. The ICCVAM review process, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 34(3), 249-257, 2001.
66. Dean, J., Twerdok, L., Tice, R., Sailstad, D., Hattan, D., and Stokes, W., Evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA). II. Conclusions and recommendations of an independent scientific peer review panel, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 34(3), 258-273, 2001.
67. Haneke, K. Tice, R., Carson, B., Margolin, B., and Stokes, W. S., Evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA). III. Data analyses completed by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM), Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 34(3), 274-286, 2001.
68. OECD, Test Guideline 429, Skin Sensitization: Local Lymph Node Assay, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 2002.
69. Landsteiner, K. and Jacobs, J., Studies on sensitization of animals with simple chemical compounds, J. Exp. Med., 61, 643-656,1935.
70. Marzulli, F. N. and Maibach, H. I., Eds., Dermatotoxicology, 5th ed., Taylor & Francis, New York, 1996.
71. Selgrade, M. J. K. et al., Immunotoxicity. In: Introduction to Biochemical Toxicology, 3rd ed., Hodgson, E. and Smart, R. C., Eds., John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2001, pp. 597-561.
72. Sailstad, D. M., The murine local lymph node assay: an alternative test method for skin hypersensitivity testing, Lab. Anim., 31, 1-6, 2002.
73. Kimber, I. and Basketter, D. A., The murine local lymph node assay: a commentary on collaborative studies and new direction, Food Chem. Toxicol., 30, 165-196, 1992.
74. Loveless, S. E. et al., Further evaluation of the local lymph node assay in the final phase of an international collaborative trial, Toxicology, 108, 141-152, 1996
75. Kimber, L. et al., An international evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay and comparison of modified procedures, Toxicology, 103, 63-73, 1995.
76. Basketter, D. A. et al., The local lymph node assay: a viable alternative to currently accepted skin sensitization tests, Food Chem. Toxicol., 34, 985-997, 1996.
77. Kimber, I. et al., The local lymph node assay: developments and applications, Toxicology, 93, 13-31, 1994.
78. Tilney, N. L., Patterns of lymphatic drainage in the adult laboratory rat, J. Anat., 109, 369-383, 1971.
79. Fentem, J. H. et al., The ECVAM international validation study on in vitro tests for skin corrosivity. 2. Results and evaluation by the management team, Toxicol. In Vitro, 12, 483-524, 1998.
80. Balls, M. and Corcelle, G., Statement on the scientific validity of the rat skin transcutaneous electrical resistance (TER) test (an in vitro test for skin corrosivity), ATLA, 26, 275-277, 1998.
81. Balls, M. and Hellsten, E., Statement on the application of the EpiDerm™ human skin model for corrosivity testing, ATLA, 28, 365-367, 2000.
82. Balls, M. and Corcelle, G., Statement on the scientific validity of the EPISKIN™ test (an in vitro test for skin corrosivity), ATLA, 26, 278-280, 1998.