Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol ; 63(1): 40-52, 2012 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22374415

ABSTRACT

Characterisation of skin sensitisation potential is a key endpoint for the safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients especially when significant dermal exposure to an ingredient is expected. At present the mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA) remains the 'gold standard' test method for this purpose however non-animal test methods are under development that aim to replace the need for new animal test data. COLIPA (the European Cosmetics Association) funds an extensive programme of skin sensitisation research, method development and method evaluation and helped coordinate the early evaluation of the three test methods currently undergoing pre-validation. In May 2010, a COLIPA scientific meeting was held to analyse to what extent skin sensitisation safety assessments for cosmetic ingredients can be made in the absence of animal data. In order to propose guiding principles for the application and further development of non-animal safety assessment strategies it was evaluated how and when non-animal test methods, predictions based on physico-chemical properties (including in silico tools), threshold concepts and weight-of-evidence based hazard characterisation could be used to enable safety decisions. Generation and assessment of potency information from alternative tools which at present is predominantly derived from the LLNA is considered the future key research area.


Subject(s)
Allergens/toxicity , Animal Testing Alternatives , Consumer Product Safety , Cosmetics/toxicity , Hypersensitivity/etiology , Skin/drug effects , Risk Assessment/methods , Skin/immunology
2.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol ; 57(2-3): 315-24, 2010.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20382194

ABSTRACT

For the assessment of genotoxic effects of cosmetic ingredients, a number of well-established and regulatory accepted in vitro assays are in place. A caveat to the use of these assays is their relatively low specificity and high rate of false or misleading positive results. Due to the 7th amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive ban on in vivo genotoxicity testing for cosmetics that was enacted March 2009, it is no longer possible to conduct follow-up in vivo genotoxicity tests for cosmetic ingredients positive in in vitro genotoxicity tests to further assess the relevance of the in vitro findings. COLIPA, the European Cosmetics Association, has initiated a research programme to improve existing and develop new in vitro methods. A COLIPA workshop was held in Brussels in April 2008 to analyse the best possible use of available methods and approaches to enable a sound assessment of the genotoxic hazard of cosmetic ingredients. Common approaches of cosmetic companies are described, with recommendations for evaluating in vitro genotoxins using non-animal approaches. A weight of evidence approach was employed to set up a decision-tree for the integration of alternative methods into tiered testing strategies.


Subject(s)
Animal Testing Alternatives/methods , Consumer Product Safety , Cosmetics/toxicity , Mutagens/toxicity , Animals , Cosmetics/standards , Europe , Humans , Mutagenicity Tests/methods , Mutagenicity Tests/standards , Research Design , Sensitivity and Specificity
3.
Photochem Photobiol Sci ; 9(4): 495-509, 2010 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20354643

ABSTRACT

Based on the current weight of evidence of all available data, the risk for humans from the use of nano-structured titanium dioxide (TiO(2)) or zinc oxide (ZnO) currently used in cosmetic preparations or sunscreens is considered negligible. There is a large body of information that when viewed in its entirety is considered as sufficient to demonstrate that these nano-structured ultraviolet (UV) filters, irrespective of various treatments (coatings) or crystalline structure, can be regarded as safe for use at concentrations up to 25% in cosmetic products to protect the skin from harmful effects of solar UV radiation. "Nano" TiO(2) and ZnO formulated in topically applied sunscreen products exist as aggregates of primary particles ranging from 30-150 nm in size. These aggregates are bonded such that the force of sunscreen product application onto the skin would have no impact on their structure or result in the release of primary particles. Multiple studies have shown that under exaggerated test conditions neither nano-structured TiO(2) nor ZnO penetrates beyond the stratum corneum of skin. Further, the distribution and persistence of these nano-structured metal oxides is the same compared to larger pigment-grade (i.e., >100 nm) particles, demonstrating equivalence in the recognition and elimination of such material from the body. Finally, the in vitro genotoxic and photogenotoxic profiles of these nano-structured metal oxides are of no consequence to human health. Whereas the most logical, straightforward conclusion based on data from internationally-recognized guideline studies and current 20+ year history of human use is that nano-structured TiO(2) and ZnO are safe, there will continue to be questions as "nano" conjures images of technology gone awry. Despite this rather sober view, the public health benefits of sunscreens containing nano TiO(2) and/or ZnO outweigh human safety concerns for these UV filters.


Subject(s)
Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions , Nanostructures/chemistry , Nanostructures/toxicity , Titanium/chemistry , Titanium/toxicity , Zinc Oxide/chemistry , Zinc Oxide/toxicity , Animals , Humans , Skin Absorption , Titanium/metabolism , Toxicity Tests , Zinc Oxide/metabolism
4.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol ; 54(2): 188-96, 2009 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19393278

ABSTRACT

Evaluation of the skin irritancy and corrosivity potential of an ingredient is a necessity in the safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients. To date, there are two formally validated alternatives to the rabbit Draize test for skin corrosivity in place, namely the rat skin transcutaneous electrical resistance (TER) assay and the Human Skin Model Test using EpiSkin, EpiDerm and SkinEthic reconstructed human epidermal equivalents. For skin irritation, EpiSkin, EpiDerm and SkinEthic are validated as stand-alone test replacements for the rabbit Draize test. Data from these tests are rarely considered in isolation and are evaluated in combination with other factors to establish the overall irritating or corrosive potential of an ingredient. In light of the deadlines established in the Cosmetics Directive for cessation of animal testing for cosmetic ingredients, a COLIPA scientific meeting was held in Brussels on 30th January, 2008 to review the use of alternative approaches and to set up a decision tree approach for their integration into tiered testing strategies for hazard and safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients and their use in products. In conclusion, the safety assessments for skin irritation/corrosion of new chemicals for use in cosmetics can be confidently accomplished using exclusively alternative methods.


Subject(s)
Animal Testing Alternatives/methods , Consumer Product Safety , Cosmetics/adverse effects , Skin Irritancy Tests/methods , Skin/drug effects , Animals , Congresses as Topic , Cosmetics/standards , Decision Trees , Humans
5.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol ; 54(2): 197-209, 2009 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19393279

ABSTRACT

The need for alternative approaches to replace the in vivo rabbit Draize eye test for evaluation of eye irritation of cosmetic ingredients has been recognised by the cosmetics industry for many years. Extensive research has lead to the development of several assays, some of which have undergone formal validation. Even though, to date, no single in vitro assay has been validated as a full replacement for the rabbit Draize eye test, organotypic assays are accepted for specific and limited regulatory purposes. Although not formally validated, several other in vitro models have been used for over a decade by the cosmetics industry as valuable tools in a weight of evidence approach for the safety assessment of ingredients and finished products. In light of the deadlines established in the EU Cosmetics Directive for cessation of animal testing for cosmetic ingredients, a COLIPA scientific meeting was held in Brussels on 30th January, 2008 to review the use of alternative approaches and to set up a decision-tree approach for their integration into tiered testing strategies for hazard and safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients and their use in products. Furthermore, recommendations are given on how remaining data gaps and research needs can be addressed.


Subject(s)
Animal Testing Alternatives/methods , Consumer Product Safety , Cosmetics/adverse effects , Eye/drug effects , Irritants/adverse effects , Animals , Congresses as Topic , Cosmetics/standards , Decision Trees , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...