In this article, we discuss how intellectual property rights affect the validation of alternative methods at ECVAM. We point out recent cases and summarise relevant EU and OECD documents. Finally, we discuss guidelines for dealing with intellectual property rights during the validation of alternative methods at ECVAM.
BallsM., BothamP., BrunerL.H., & SpielmannH. (1995). The EC/HO International Validation Study on Alternatives to the Draize Eye Irritation test. Toxicology in Vitro9, 871–929.
2.
BallsM. (1997). Defined structural and performance criteria would facilitate the validation and acceptance of alternative test procedures. ATLA25, 483–484.
3.
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.
4.
OECD (2005). Draft Guidance Document No. 34 on the Validation and International Acceptance of New or Updated Test Methods for Hazard Assessment (3rd Version), 25 January 2005, 96 pp. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Website http://www.oecd.org/document/30/0,2340,en_2649_34377_1916638_1_1_1_1,00.html (Accessed 18.06.07).
5.
OECD (2004). Guideline No. 431 for the Testing of Chemicals: In Vitro Skin Corrosion Human Skin Model Test, adopted 13 April 2004, 8 pp. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. Website http://www.oecd.org/docment/22/0,2340,en_2649_34377_1916054_1_1_1_1,00.html (Accessed 18.06.07).
6.
BarrattM.D., BrantomP.G., FentemJ., GernerI., WalkerA.P., & WorthA.P. (1998). The ECVAM international validation study on in vitro tests for skin corrosivity. 1. Selection and distribution of the test chemicals. Toxicology in Vitro12, 471–482.
7.
FentemJ.H., ArcherG.E.B., BallsM., BothamP.A., CurrenR.D., EarlL.K., EsdaileD.J., HolzhütterH.G., & LiebschM. (1998). The ECVAM international validation study on in vitro tests for skin corrosivity. 2. Results and evaluation by the management team. Toxicology in Vitro12, 483–524.
8.
ESAC statement on the scientific validity of the EPISKIN™ test (an in vitro test for skin corrosivity), 31 March 1998. Website http://ecvam.jrc.it/index.htm (Accessed 18.06.07).
9.
ESAC statement on the application of the EPI-DERM™ human skin model for skin corrosivity testing, 21 March 2000. Website http://ecvam.jrc.it/index.htm (Accessed 18.06.07).
10.
Anon. (2000). Commission Directive 2000/33/EC, Annex I, B.40 Skin Corrosion. Official Journal of the European CommunitiesL136, 91–97.
11.
ICCVAM (2004). Recommended Performance Standards for In Vitro Test Methods for Skin Corrosion. NIH Pub. No. 04-4510, 100 pp. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.
12.
OECD (2004). Draft Proposal for a New Guideline 435 In Vitro Membrane Barrier Test Method for Skin Corrosion, 20 May 2004, 14 pp. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.
13.
ESAC statement on the application of the CORROSITEX™ assay for skin corrosivity testing, 6 December 2000. Website http://ecvam.jrc.it/index.htm (Accessed 18.06.07).
14.
ESAC statement on the validation of proprietary methods, 15 February 2005. Website http://ecvam.jrc.it/index.htm (Accessed 18.06.07).
15.
Anon. (2002). Regulation (EC) 2321/2002. Official Journal of the European CommunitiesL355, 23–34.
16.
Anon. (2003). Art. II.33: Protection of knowledge. In Annex II of the Model Contract of the Sixth Framework programme for research and technological development, p. 31. Brussels, Belgium: The European Commission.
