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
. 2019 Feb;93(2):273-291.
doi: 10.1007/s00204-018-2341-6. Epub 2018 Oct 30.

Skin sensitization testing needs and data uses by US regulatory and research agencies

Affiliations
Review

Skin sensitization testing needs and data uses by US regulatory and research agencies

Judy Strickland et al. Arch Toxicol. 2019 Feb.

Abstract

United States regulatory and research agencies may rely upon skin sensitization test data to assess the sensitization hazards associated with dermal exposure to chemicals and products. These data are evaluated to ensure that such substances will not cause unreasonable adverse effects to human health when used appropriately. The US Consumer Product Safety Commission, the US Environmental Protection Agency, the US Food and Drug Administration, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and the US Department of Defense are member agencies of the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM). ICCVAM seeks to identify opportunities for the use of non-animal replacements to satisfy these testing needs and requirements. This review identifies the standards, test guidelines, or guidance documents that are applicable to satisfy each of these agency's needs; the current use of animal testing and flexibility for using alternative methodologies; information needed from alternative tests to fulfill the needs for skin sensitization data; and whether data from non-animal alternative approaches are accepted by these US federal agencies.

Keywords: Alternative approaches; Non-animal methods; Regulatory requirements; Skin sensitization testing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The adverse outcome pathway for skin sensitization initiated by covalent binding to proteins, with notations indicating accepted OECD test guidelines (TG) for non-animal methods that measure key events in the AOP. Figure reprinted from Strickland et al. (2016).

References

    1. ASTM (2013) F 2148-13, Standard Practice for Evaluation of Delayed Contact Hypersensitivity Using the Murine Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA). American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA
    1. Casati S, Aschberger K, Barroso J, Casey W, Delgado I, Kim TS, Kleinstreuer N, Kojima H, Lee JK, Lowit A, Park HK, Regimbald-Krnel MJ, Strickland J, Whelan M, Yang Y, Zuang V (2018) Standardisation of defined approaches for skin sensitisation testing to support regulatory use and international adoption: position of the International Cooperation on Alternative Test Methods. Arch Toxicol 92(2):611–617 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Casey W (2016) Advances in the development and validation of test methods in the United States. Toxicological Research 32(1):9–14 - PMC - PubMed
    1. CPSC (2012) Recommended Procedures Regarding the CPSC’s Policy on Animal Testing. In. https://www.cpsc.gov/business--manufacturing/testing-certification/recom... Accessed 10 July 2018
    1. CPSC (2013) CPSC Staff’s Strong Senstizer Guidance Document. In. https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/pdfs/blk_pdf_strongsensitizerguidance.pdf Accessed 10 July 2018

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources