Author/Authors :
Macfarlane، نويسنده , , Martin and Jones، نويسنده , , Penny and Goebel، نويسنده , , Carsten and Dufour، نويسنده , , Eric and Rowland، نويسنده , , Joanna and Araki، نويسنده , , Daisuke and Costabel-Farkas، نويسنده , , Margit and Hewitt، نويسنده , , Nicola J. and Hibatallah، نويسنده , , Jalila and Kirst، نويسنده , , Annette and McNamee، نويسنده , , Pauline and Schellauf، نويسنده , , Florian and Scheel، نويسنده , , Julia، نويسنده ,
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.
