Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2010 Mar-Apr;61(2):136-45.
doi: 10.1016/j.vascn.2010.01.001. Epub 2010 Jan 22.

Validating and troubleshooting ocular in vitro toxicology tests

Frank A Barile  1
Affiliations
Review

Validating and troubleshooting ocular in vitro toxicology tests

Frank A Barile. J Pharmacol Toxicol Methods. 2010 Mar-Apr.

Abstract

In vitro organotypic models for testing ocular irritants have warranted sufficient interest as methods to replace in vivo ocular testing. The in vitro organotypic models claim to maintain short-term normal physiological and biochemical functions of the mammalian cornea in an isolated system. In these test methods, damage by the test substance is assessed by quantitative measurements of changes in corneal opacity and permeability using opacitometry and spectrophotometry, respectively. Both measurements are used quantitatively for irritancy classification for prediction of the in vivo ocular irritation potential of a test substance. Examples of organotypic models that incorporate these criteria include: the bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) assay, the isolated chicken eye (ICE) test method and the isolated rabbit eye (IRE) assay. A fourth method, the hen's egg test-chorioallantoic membrane (HET-CAM) assay, differs in the evaluation criteria but is also normally included among this class of in vitro protocols. Each of these protocols is discussed in detail as representative candidate in vitro methods for assessing ocular irritation and corrosion. The methodologies, protocol details, applications, and their validation status are discussed. A brief historical perspective of the development of original in vitro ocular testing models is also mentioned. More importantly, improving and troubleshooting the current techniques, in order to present the models as stand-alone in vitro tools for ocular toxicity assessment, is emphasized.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

9. Conflict of Interest Statement: The author declares that there is no conflict of interest with the submission or contents of this manuscript and with any private or public affiliations.

References

    1. Balls M, Amcoff P, Bremer S, Casati S, Coecke S, Clothier R, Combes R, Corvi R, Curren R, Eskes C, Fentem J, Gribaldo L, Halder M, Hartung T, Hoffmann S, Schectman L, Scott L, Spielmann H, Stokes W, Tice R, Wagner D, Zuang V. The principles of weight of evidence validation of test methods and testing strategies. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals (ATLA) 2006;34:603–620. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Balls M, Botham PA, Bruner LH, Spielmann H. The EC/HO international validation study on alternatives to the Draize eye irritation test. Toxicology In Vitro. 1995;9:871–929. - PubMed
    1. Barile FA. Continuous cell lines as a model for drug toxicity assessment. In: Castell JV, Gómez-Lechón MJ, editors. In Vitro Methods in Pharmaceutical Research. Academic Press; London, UK: 1997. pp. 33–54.
    1. Barile FA. Chapter 13. Cell Culture Methods for Acute Toxicology Testing. In: Barile FA, editor. Principles of Toxicology Testing. Informa HealthCare; New York: 2007. pp. 175–202.
    1. Barile FA, Cardona M. Acute cytotoxicity testing with cultured human lung and dermal cells. In vitro Cell & Developmental Biology. 1998;34:631–635. - PubMed

Publication types