BallsM., BlaauboerB.J., FentemJ.H., BrunerL., CombesR.D., EkwallB., FielderR.J., GuillouzoA., LewisR.W., LovellD.P., ReinhardtC.A., RepettoG., SladowskiD., SpielmannH., & ZuccoF. (1995). Practical aspects of the validation of toxicity test procedures. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 5. ATLA23, 129–147.
2.
BallsM., BlaauboerB., BrusickD., FrazierJ., LambD., PembertonM., ReinhardtC., RoberfroidM., RosenkranzH., SchmidB., SpielmannH., StammatiA-L., & WalumE. (1990). Report and recommendations of the CAAT/ERGATT workshop on the validation of toxicity test procedures. ATLA18, 313–337.
3.
BallsM., & FentemJ.H. (1999). The validation and acceptance of alternatives to animal testing. Toxicology in Vitro13, 837–846.
4.
NIH (1997). Validation and Regulatory Acceptance of Toxicological Test Methods. A Report of the ad hoc Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods, 105 pp. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA: NIEHS.
5.
WorthA.P., & BallsM. (2002). The principles of validation and the ECVAM validation process. ATLA30, Suppl. 2, 15–21.
6.
StokesW.S., SchechtmanL.M., & HillR.N. (2002). The Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM): a review of the ICCVAM test method evaluation process and current international collaborations with the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM). ATLA30, Suppl. 2, 23–32.
7.
BallsM., & KarcherW. (1995). The validation of alternative test methods. ATLA23, 884–886.
8.
OECD (1996). Final Report of the OECD Workshop on Harmonization of Validation and Acceptance Criteria for Alternative Toxicological Test Methods, 60 pp. Paris, France: OECD.
9.
OECD (2001). Draft Guidance Document on the Development, Validation and Regulatory Acceptance of New and Updated Internationally Acceptable Test Methods in Hazard Assessment, Environment Directorate, 43 pp. Paris, France: OECD.
10.
CombesR.D. (1995). Regulatory genotoxicity testing: a critical appraisal. ATLA23, 352–379.
11.
ZeigerE. (1995). Validation of new toxicology test systems: the paradigm of genetic toxicity tests. In Alternative Methods in Toxicology and the Life Sciences, Vol. II, The World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences: Education, Research, Testing (ed. GoldbergA.M., & van ZutphenL.F.M.), pp. 425–432. New York: Mary Ann Liebert.
12.
BallsM., BothamP.A., BrunerL.H., & SpielmannH. (1995). The EC/HO international validation study on alternatives to the Draize eye irritation test. Toxicology in Vitro9, 871–929.
13.
CurrenR.D., SoutheeJ.A., SpielmannH., LiebschM., FentemJ.H., & BallsM. (1995). The role of prevalidation in the development, validation and acceptance of alternative methods. ATLA23, 211–217.
14.
BothamP.A., ChamberlainM., BarrattM.D., CurrenR.D., EsdaileD.J., GardnerJ.R., GordonV.C., HildebrandB., LewisR.W., LiebschM., LogemannP., OsborneR., PonecM., RégnierJ-F., SteilingW., WalkerA.P., & BallsM. (1995). A prevalidation study on in vitro skin corrosivity testing. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 6. ATLA23, 219–255.
15.
BrunerL.H., CarrG.J., ChamberlainM., & CurrenR.D. (1996). Validation of alternative methods for toxicity testing. Toxicology in Vitro10, 479–501.
16.
BrunerL., CarrG., ChamberlainM., & CurrenR. (1996). No prediction model, no validation study. ATLA24, 139–142.
17.
HolzhütterH-G., & SpielmannH. (1996). The use of prediction models in toxicology: what should they predict?ATLA24, 881–884.
18.
ArcherG., BallsM., BrunerL.H., CurrenR.D., FentemJ.H., HolzhütterH-G., LiebschM., LovellD.P., & SoutheeJ.A. (1997). The validation of toxicological prediction models. ATLA25, 505–516.
19.
GenschowE., ScholzG., BrownN., PiersmaA., BradyM., ClemannN., HuuskonenH., PaillardF., BremerS., BeckerK., & SpielmannH. (2000). Development of prediction models for three embryotoxicity tests in an ECVAM validation study. In Vitro and Molecular Toxicology13, 15–65.
20.
WorthA.P., & BallsM. (2001). The importance of the prediction model in the validation of alternative tests. ATLA29, 135–143.
21.
Cooper-HannanR., HarbellJ.W., CoeckeS., BallsM., BoweG., CervinkaM., ClothierR., HermannF., KlahmL.K., de LangeJ., LiebschM., & VanparysP. (1999). The principles of Good Laboratory Practice: application to in vitro toxicological studies. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 37. ATLA27, 539–577.
22.
HartungT., BallsM., BardouilleC., BlanckO., CoeckeS., GstraunthalerG., & LewisD. (2002). Good Cell Culture Practice. ECVAM Good Cell Culture Practice Task Force Report 1. ATLA30, 407–414.
23.
SpielmannH., BallsM., DupuisJ., PapeW.J., PechovitchG., de SilvaO., HolzhütterH-G., ClothierR., DesolleP., GerberickF., LiebschM., LovellW.W., MaurerT., PfannenbeckerU., PotthastJ.M., CsatoM., SladowskiD., SteilingW., & BrantomP. (1998). The international EU/COLIPA phototoxicity validation study: results of phase II (blind trial). Part 1: the 3T3 NRU phototoxicity test. Toxicology in Vitro12, 305–327.
24.
FentemJ.H., ArcherG.E.B., BallsM., BothamP.A., CurrenR.D., EarlL.K., EsdaileD.J., HolzhütterH-G., & LiebschM. (1998). The ECVAM international validation study on tests for skin corrosivity. II. Results and evaluation by the management team. Toxicology in Vitro12, 483–524.
25.
GenschowE., SpielmannH., ScholzG., SellerA., BrownN., PiersmaA., BradyM., ClemannN., HuuskonenH., PaillardF., BremerS., & BeckerK. (2002). The ECVAM international validation study on in vitro embryotoxicity tests: results of the definitive phase and evaluation of prediction models. ATLA30, 151–176.
26.
Anon. (1998). Statement on the scientific validity of the 3T3 NRU PT test (an in vitro test for phototoxic potential). ATLA26, 7–8.
27.
SCCNFP (1998). Opinion on in vitro methods to assess phototoxicity in the safety evaluation of cosmetic ingredients or mixtures of ingredients adopted by the plenary session of the SCCNFP of 25 November 1998. SCCNFP/0069/98. Web site http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/sccp/out46_en.html (Accessed 1.6.03).
28.
Anon. (2000). European Commission: EU Directive 2000/33/EU for the 21st Amendment of Annex V of the EU Directive 86/906/EEC for classification and labelling of hazardous chemicals: Test Guideline B-40 “skin corrosivity — in vitro method” and Test Guideline B-41 “phototoxicity — in vitro 3T3 NRU phototoxicity test”. Official Journal of the European CommunitiesL136, 90–107.
29.
OECD (2002). Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals: Draft Proposal for a New Guideline 432 “In Vitro 3T3 NRU Phototoxicity Test”.Paris, France: OECD.
30.
OECD (2002). Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals: Draft Proposal for a New Guideline 430 “In Vitro Corrosivity Test: Rat Skin Transcutaneous Electrical Resistance (TER) Test”.Paris, France: OECD.
31.
OECD (2002). Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals: Draft Proposal for a New Guideline 431 “In Vitro Corrosivity Test Using Human Skin Models”.Paris, France: OECD.
32.
SpielmannH., & LiebschM. (2001). Lessons learned from validation of toxicity tests: from failure to acceptance into regulatory practice. Toxicology in Vitro5, 585–590.
33.
OECD (1997). OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, No. 420. Acute Oral Toxicity — Fixed Dose Procedure, 14 pp. Paris, France: OECD.
34.
OECD (1997). OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, No. 423. Acute Oral Toxicity — Acute Toxic Class Method, 14 pp. Paris, France: OECD.
35.
OECD (1997). OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, No. 425. Acute Oral Toxicity — Up-and-Down Procedure, 26 pp. Paris, France: OECD.
36.
KimberI., PichowskiJ.S., BettsC.J., CumberbatchM., BasketterD.A., & DearmanR.J. (2001). Alternative approaches to the identification and characterisation of chemical allergens. Toxicology in Vitro15, 307–312.
Anon. (2000). Statement on the validity of the local lymph node assay for skin sensitisation testing. ATLA28, 366–367.
39.
KimberI. (2002). Reduction, refinement and replacement: putting the immune system to work. ATLA30, 569–580.
40.
CombesR.D. (2000). Endocrine disruptors: a critical review of and in vivo testing strategies for assessing their toxic hazard to humans. ATLA28, 81–118.
41.
BakerV. (2001). Endocrine disruptors: testing strategies to assess human hazard. Toxicology in Vitro15, 413–419.
42.
PurchaseI.F. (1999). Ethical review of regulatory toxicology guidelines involving experiments on animals: the example of endocrine disruptors. Toxicological Sciences52, 141–147.
43.
AshbyJ. (2000). Validation of in vitro and in vivo methods for assessing endocrine disrupting chemicals. Toxicological Pathology28, 432–437.
BallsM. (2003). Are animal tests inherently valid? Proceedings of the Fourth World Congress.ATLA, in press.
46.
Anon. (2001). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of the Community strategy for endocrine disruptors — a range of substances suspected of interfering with the hormone systems of humans and wildlife. COM(2001)262. Web site http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/docum/01262_en.htm (Accessed 14.6.03).
47.
BallsM. (1997). Defined structural and performance criteria would facilitate the validation and acceptance of alternative test procedures. ATLA25, 483–484.
48.
LiebschM., TraueD., BarrabasC., SpielmannH., UphillP., WilkinsS., McPhersonJ.P., WiemannC., KaufmannT., RemmeleM., & HolzhütterH-G. (2000). The ECVAM prevalidation study on the use of EpiDerm for skin corrosivity testing. ATLA28, 371–401.
49.
KannoJ., OnyonL., HasemanJ., Fenner-CrispP., AshbyJ., & OwensW. (2001). The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioassay to screen compounds for in vivo estrogenic responses: phase 1. Environmental Health Perspectives109, 785–794.
50.
KannoJ., OnyonL., PeddadaS., AshbyJ., JacobE., & OwensW. (2003). The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioassay: phase 2 — coded single dose studies. Environmental Health Perspectives, in press.
51.
KannoJ., OnyonL., PeddadaS., AshbyJ., JacobE., & OwensW. (2003). The OECD program to validate the rat uterotrophic bioassay: phase 2 — dose response studies. Environmental Health Perspectives, in press.
52.
AshbyJ., OwensW., & LefevreP.A. (1993). Concept evaluation: androgen-stimulated immature intact male rats as an assay for antiandrogens. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology35, 280–285.
53.
AshbyJ., LefevreP.A., DeghenghiR., & WallisN. (2001). Replacement of surgical castration by GnRH-inhibition of Leydig cell ablation in the male rat Hershberger antiandrogen assay. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology34, 188–203.
54.
SpielmannH. (2001). International cooperation: an essential requirement for replacing animal toxicity tests. ATLA29, 635–648.
55.
van ZellerA-M., & CombesR.D. (1999). Transgenic mouse bioassays for carcinogenicity testing: a step in the right direction?ATLA27, 839–846.
56.
Anon. (2001). The ILSI collaborative study: evaluation program on alternative models for carcinogenicity assessment. Toxicological Sciences29, Suppl. 1, 1–339.