Framework for Validation and Implementation of In Vitro Toxicity Tests: Report of the Validation and Technology Transfer Committee of the Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing

Abstract

In toxicology the development and application of in vitro alternatives to reduce or replace animal testing, or to lessen the distress and discomfort of laboratory animals, is a rapidly developing trend. However, at present there is no formal administrative process to organize, coordinate, or evaluate these activities. A framework capable of fostering the validation of new methods is essential for the effective transfer of new technology from the research laboratory to practical use. This committee has identified four essential validation resources: chemical bank(s), cell and tissue banks, a data bank, and reference laboratories. We recommend the creation of a Scientific Advisory Board of experts in toxicity testing, representing the academic, industrial and regulatory communities. Test validation acceptance is contingent upon broad buy-in by disparate groups in the scientific community: academia, industry and government. We believe that this can be achieved by early and frequent communication among the parties and agreement upon common goals. The committee hopes that the creation of a validation infrastructure built with the elements described in this report will facilitate scientific acceptance and utilization of alternative methodologies and speed implementation of reduction, refinement and replacement alternatives in toxicity testing.

References

ANON. (1990). On the road to validation. Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing Newsletter, vol. 8, no. 1.

Balls, M. , Blaauboer, B. , Brusick, D. , Frazier, J. , et al. (1990). Report and recommendations of the Caat/Ergatt Workshop on the Validation of Toxicity Test Procedures. Atla 18:313–338.

Balls, M. , Botham, P. , Cordier, A. , et al. (1990). Report and recommendations of an international workshop on promotion of the regulatory acceptance of validated non animal toxicity test procedures. Atla 18:339–344.

Balls, M. , Southee, J. and Bridges, J. (1990). Animals and Alternatives: Present Status and Future Prospects. London: Macmillan.

Balls, M. and Clothier, R.H. (1991). Comments on the scientific validation and regulatory acceptance of in vitro toxicity tests. Toxicol. In Vitro 5:535–538.

Balls, M. , Flint, O. , and Wallum, E. (eds.). Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, vols. 1–20, 1980–1992.

Balls, M., Riddell, R.J., Horner, S.A., and Clothier, R.H. (1987). The Frame approach to the development, validation and evaluation of in vitro alternative methods. In: Approaches to Validation, pp. 45–58. (Goldberg, A.M., ed. Alternative Methods in Toxicology, vol. 5).

Bondesson, I. , et al. (1989). Meic—a new international multicenter project to evaluate the relevance to human toxicity of in vitro cytotoxicity tests. Cell Biol. Toxicol. 5:331–348.

Brusick, D.J. (1985). Technology transfer in toxicology. In: In Vitro Toxicology: A Progress Report from Caat. New York: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., pp. 427–436. (Goldberg, A.M.,-ed. Alternative Methods in Toxicology, vol. 3).

10.

Brusick, D.J. (ed). In Vitro Toxicology: A Journal of Molecular and Cellular Toxicology. New York: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., Vols. 1–5, 1986–1992.

11.

Ekwall, B. (1980). Preliminary studies on the validity of in vitro measurement of drug toxicity using HeLa cells: Lethal action to man of 43 drugs related to the HeLa cell toxicity of the lethal drug concentrations. Toxicol. Lett. 5:319–331.

12.

Ekwall, B. , Bondesson, I. , Hellberg, S. , et al. (1991). Validation of in vitro cytotoxicity tests—past and present strategies. Atla 19:226–233.

13.

Frazier, J.F. (1990). Scientific Criteria for Validation of In Vitro Toxicity Tests. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (Oecd) Environment Monograph no. 36.

14.

FRAZIER, J.F. (ed.). Report on the CAAT/TCA Workshop on the International Status of Validation of In Vitro Toxicity Tests. CAAT Technical Report no. 5 (in press).

15.

Gad, S.C. (1990). Recent developments in replacing, reducing and refining animal use in toxicologic research. Fundam. Appl. Toxicol. 15:8–16.

16.

Goldberg, A.M. (ed.). (1983–1993). Alternative Methods in Toxicology. Vols. 1–9.

17.

McKeehan, W.L. (ed.). In Vitro: Cellular and developmental biology. Journal of the Tissue Culture Association. Volumes 1–28, 1965–1992.

18.

OCULAR IRRITATION—VALIDATION OF ALTERNATIVES: BAGLEY, D.M. Eye irritation, reference chemicals data bank. Toxicol. In Vitro (in press).;

19.

Blein, O. , and Adolphe, M. (1991). A French project of correlation and validation of alternatives to the Draize eye irritation test. Toxicol. In Vitro 5:555–557.;

20.

Bruner, L.H. , Shadduck, J. , and Essex-Sorlie, D. (1991). Alternative methods for assessing the effects of chemicals in the eye, in Dermal and Ocular Toxicology: Fundamentals and Methods. W. Hobson (ed.). Boca Raton, La: Crc Press, 585–606;

21.

Gad, S.C. (1989). Acute ocular irritation evaluation: In vivo and in vitro alternatives and making them the standard for testing, in Benchmarks: Alternative Methods in Toxicology. Ma Mehlman (ed.). Princeton, Nj: Princeton University Press; pp. 137–193;

22.

Gettings, S.D. , Dipasquale, L.C. , Bagely, D.M. , et al. (1990). The Ctfa evaluation of alternatives program: An evaluation of in vitro alternatives to the Draize primary eye irritation test. (Phase I) Hydroalcoholic formulations; A preliminary communication. In Vitro Toxicol. 3:292–302.;

23.

Goldberg, A.M., (ed.) (1987). A Critical Evaluation of Alternatives to Acute Ocular Irritation Testing. Alt. Methods Toxicol. Vol. 4.;

24.

Green, S. (in press). Criteria for in vitro alternatives for the eye irritation test. Fundam. Cosmet. Toxicol.;

25.

Jacobs, M.E. (1980). Scientific issues in a regulatory evaluation of a new ocular safety test. Proc. Ctfa Ocular Safety Testing Workshop: In Vivo and In Vitro Approaches. Washington, D.C.: Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association, pp. 74–78.;

26.

Koch, W.H. (1989). Validation criteria for ocular irritation in vitro alternative tests. J. Toxicol. Cut. Ocular 8:17–22;

27.

Spielman, H. , Gerner, I. , Kalweit, S. , and Wirnsberger, T. (1991). Validation project of alternatives to the Draize test in Germany. Toxicol. In Vitro 5:539–542.;

28.

Weil,C.S. , and Scala, R.A. (1971). Study of intra and interlaboratory variability in the results of rabbit eye and skin irritation tests. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 19:276–360.;

29.

Zanielli, P. and Pirovano, R. (in press) Interlaboratory validation exercise on various in vitro cytotoxicity tests to be used for regulatory purposes for irritation labelling. Atla.

30.

Purchase, I.F.H. (1990). An international reference chemical data bank would accelerate the development, validation and regulatory acceptance of alternative toxicology tests. Atla 18:345–348.

31.

Purchase, I.F.H., and Hard, G.C. (eds.). (1987–1992). Toxicology in vitro. Vols. 1–6.

32.

Rundell, J.O. (1987). Validation as applied to in vitro toxicology. In, Approaches to Validation. A.M. Goldberg (ed.). Alternative Methods in Toxicology Vol. 5, pp. 11–16.

33.

Scala, R.A. (1987). Theoretical approaches to validation. In Approaches to Validation. A.M. Goldberg (ed.). Alternative Methods in Toxicology Vol. 5, pp 1–10.

34.

Stark, D.M. , Shopsis, C. , Borenfreund, E. , and Babich, H. (1986). Progress and problems in evaluating and validating alternative assays in toxicology. Food Chem. Toxicol. 24:449–455.