Search

Before placing a new cosmetic ingredient on the market, manufacturers must establish its safety profile, in particular assessing the skin sensitization potential, which is a mandatory requirement for topical applications. Since the ban on animal testing in Europe, and its extension to many parts of the world, a battery of in vitro tests covering the key steps of the Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) for skin sensitization is recommended. To date, three in vitro methods are validated in the OECD guidelines (442C, 442D, 442E), and many others are under validation by OECD (2019) and ECVAM. However, there is still no official strategy. Some industrial manufacturers have proposed in vitro strategies with good predictivity, but their studies were mainly based on the testing of simple and "easy to test" substances. This work therefore focused on "difficult to test" ingredients with particular physicochemical properties (i.e. poorly water-soluble components) or with particular intrinsic properties placing them outside the applicability domains of most in vitro models (irritants or cytotoxic like surfactants, complex substances). Furthermore a particular focus was made on weak to moderate sensitizers. The objective was to develop a robust, quick and straightforward testing strategy enabling the evaluation of the skin sensitization potential of "difficult to test" ingredients. In this context, four in vitro test models were used: three validated methods and the Sens-Is® assay, currently in the work plan of the OECD, chosen for its ability to overcome solubility issues and to discriminate irritants from sensitizers. 25 ingredients with particular physicochemical properties were evaluated, chosen among positive or negative sensitizers according to in vivo data (M&K and/or LLNA). Such ingredients, including cleansers, solubilizers, emulsifiers, emollients, active ingredients, preservatives, and antioxidants are indeed essential constituents of cosmetic and dermopharmaceutical formulations. The results analysis on each in vitro test demonstrated that the DPRA model was the less predictive on the chosen ingredients, resulting especially in many false negative responses compared to animal studies, or being unsuited to the mode of action of the selected ingredients. On the contrary, the Sens-Is® assay revealed a real capability to discriminate sensitizers from non-sensitizers. The two other models, KeratinoSens TM and h-CLAT, showed a lower ability to classify the materials correctly than in previously published studies, linked to the particular physicochemical and intrinsic properties of the chosen ingredients and the applicability domains of these in vitro tests. The KeratinoSens TM model tended to overestimate the sensitization potential of the tested ingredients, whereas the h-CLAT model tended to underestimate the sensitizers. Based on these results a new sequential testing strategy was set up combining 1 to 3 models to cover the main key events of the skin sensitization AOP. Sens-Is® model, assessing the first two AOP Key Events with consideration of the ingredient dermal penetration, is chosen as a starting point. The approach is completed, depending on the first response, by the h-CLAT model, assessing Key Event 3, and then potentially KeratinoSens TM assessing Key Event 2, but with a more direct application mode. This new testing strategy increases the accuracy to 88% on the selected ingredients and minimizes the risk of a false negative conclusion, which is crucial from the perspective of the ingredients' users and cosmetic consumers., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Hervé Groux and Françoise Cottrez have filled a patent for the SENS-IS assay, all the other authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Personal care product manufacturers have used a broad spectrum of alternative ocular irritation assays during the past two decades because these tests do not require the use of live animals, they provide reliable predictive data, and they are relatively inexpensive to conduct. To complement these assays, the ex vivo Porcine Corneal Opacity Reversibility Assay (PorCORA) was recently developed using a corneal culture model to predict reversibility of ocular irritants. Three commercially available consumer products (a shampoo, a hair color glaze, and a hair colorant system containing 12% hydrogen peroxide) were each tested in two PorCORA study replicates in order to assess potential ocular damage reversibility for surfactant-, propylene carbonate-, and peroxide-based formulations, respectively. Under the exaggerated, in vitro study conditions, the surfactant-based shampoo may cause irreversible porcine corneal damage (histological changes in the epithelial squamous cell and/or basal cell layers), whereas the hair color glaze and 12% hydrogen peroxide product caused fully reversible ocular irritation (microscopic changes only in the superficial squamous cell layer). The hair color glaze and peroxide product results correlate with established in vivo data for similar compounds, but the shampoo results contradicted previous BCOP results (expected to be only a mild irritant). Therefore, although the PorCORA protocol shows promise in predicting the extent and reversibility of potential ocular damage caused by accidental consumer eye exposure to personal care products, the contradictory results for the surfactant-based shampoo indicate that more extensive validation testing of the PorCORA is necessary to definitively establish the protocol's reliability as a Draize test replacement., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The aim of this study was to evaluate the interest of a new three-dimensional epithelial model cultivated from human corneal cells to replace animal testing in the assessment of eye tolerance. To this end, 65 formulated cosmetic products and 36 chemicals were tested by means of this in vitro model using a simplified toxicokinetic approach. The chemicals were selected from the ECETOC data bank and the EC/HO International validation study list. Very satisfactory results were obtained in terms of concordance with the Draize test data for the formulated cosmetic products. Moreover, the response of the corneal model appeared predictive of human ocular response clinically observed by ophthalmologists. The in vitro scores for the chemicals tested strongly correlated with their respective scores in vivo. For all the compounds tested, the response of the corneal model to irritants was similar regardless of their chemical structure, suggesting a good robustness of the prediction model proposed. We concluded that this new three-dimensional epithelial model, developed from human corneal cells, could be promising for the prediction of eye irritation induced by chemicals and complex formulated products, and that these two types of materials should be tested using a similar protocol. A simple shortening of the exposure period was required for the chemicals assumed to be more aggressively irritant to the epithelial tissues than the cosmetic formulae.

Introduction: Red blood cell assay (RBC) is used to estimate potential irritation of tensioactive agents and detergents. Cell membrane lysis and cell protein denaturation are measured photometrically. This study was aimed to determine if rat blood cells can be used to predict eye potential irritation in the same way of calves blood cells in RBC assay., Methods: We evaluated 20 cosmetic formulations using rat and calves blood according to INVITOX protocol No 37. Data of media hemolysis concentration, denaturation index and the ratio of both parameters were compared with in vivo data of eye irritancy., Results: There was a significant difference (p<0.01) between H50 value when evaluated the standard SDS with red blood cell method in rat and calves blood. According to the exact probability of Fisher taking as approach the acceptance or rejection of the substance there are no significant differences between in vitro assay with calves blood and in vivo results. Not happening the same way for the RBC assay with rat blood where significant differences were obtained (p<0.01) among the classification of in vitro and in vivo test., Discussion: The RBC assay using calves blood showed better results. Several test substances were false negatives with rat blood. This high false negative rate would be correctly identified by the animal test but it may also lead to increased animal consumption. For that RBC assay with calf blood cells is preferable to the employment of rat blood as screening method with a reduction and refinement strategy.

We have introduced the 3T3 NRU cytotoxicity test for methodological, economical and ethical reasons as a regular part of tier pre-marketing testing to assess local tolerance of raw materials for cosmetics, household chemicals and final cosmetic products. Using the 3T3 cell line according to the standard INVITTOX protocol No.64 (NRU Assay) the borderline concentration, relevant to the highest tolerated dose, is determined for each material. The toxic effect is reached at different concentration levels specific for individual cosmetics categories, depending on their chemical characteristics. Typical ranges of cytotoxicity for specific categories of cosmetics were established after testing of hundreds of materials. The range lies between 1 microg/ml (anti-dandruff shampoos), up to 2000 microg/ml (toothpastes and mouthwashes). The 3T3 NRU cytotoxicity test is a sensitive tool able to identify more aggressive products, that are also more likely to evoke irritation in human skin. It was even possible to detect protective effects of one natural herbal ingredient. The comparative study of cytotoxicity test results and human patch test results from a group of essential oils is presented. Cytotoxicity tests represent a highly ethical approach for estimation of irritancy. On the basis of in vitro test results suggesting low risk we can proceed to confirmatory tests in human volunteers.