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 Jun;38(2):141-155.
doi: 10.1080/15569527.2018.1540494. Epub 2018 Dec 26.

United States regulatory requirements for skin and eye irritation testing

Affiliations
Review

United States regulatory requirements for skin and eye irritation testing

Neepa Y Choksi et al. Cutan Ocul Toxicol. 2019 Jun.

Abstract

Purpose: Eye and skin irritation test data are required or considered by chemical regulation authorities in the United States to develop product hazard labelling and/or to assess risks for exposure to skin- and eye-irritating chemicals. The combination of animal welfare concerns and interest in implementing methods with greater human relevance has led to the development of non-animal skin- and eye-irritation test methods. To identify opportunities for regulatory uses of non-animal replacements for skin and eye irritation tests, the needs and uses for these types of test data at U.S. regulatory and research agencies must first be clarified.

Methods: We surveyed regulatory and non-regulatory testing needs of U.S. Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) agencies for skin and eye irritation testing data. Information reviewed includes the type of skin and eye irritation data required by each agency and the associated decision context: hazard classification, potency classification, or risk assessment; the preferred tests; and whether alternative or non-animal tests are acceptable. Information on the specific information needed from non-animal test methods also was collected.

Results: A common theme across U.S. agencies is the willingness to consider non-animal or alternative test methods. Sponsors are encouraged to consult with the relevant agency in designing their testing program to discuss the use and acceptance of alternative methods for local skin and eye irritation testing.

Conclusions: To advance the implementation of alternative testing methods, a dialog on the confidence of these methods to protect public health and the environment must be undertaken at all levels.

Keywords: Eye irritation testing; alternative approaches; corrosive; non-animal methods; regulatory requirements; skin irritation testing.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Definitions. 16 CFR 1500.3 (2015).
    1. Verstraelen S, Jacobs A, De Wever B, et al. Improvement of the bovine corneal opacity and permeability (bcop) assay as an in vitro alternative to the draize rabbit eye irritation test. Toxicol In Vitro 2013; 27(4):1298–311. - PubMed
    1. Adriaens E, Barroso J, Eskes C, et al. Retrospective analysis of the Draize test for serious eye damage/eye irritation: importance of understanding the in vivo endpoints under UN GHS/EU CLP for the development and evaluation of in vitro test methods. Arch Toxicol 2014; 88(3):701–723. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Luechtefeld T, Maertens A, Russo DP, et al. Analysis of Draize eye irritation testing and its prediction by mining publicly available 2008–2014 REACH data. ALTEX 2016; 33(2):123–134. - PMC - PubMed
    1. National Institute of Environmental Health Science. Strategic roadmap: New approaches to evaluate the safety of chemicals and medical products [Internet]. 2018 [accessed February 8, 2018]. Available from: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/pubhealth/evalatm/natl-strategy/index.html.

LinkOut - more resources