The status of eye irritancy testing: a regulatory perspective.

Lens and eye toxicity research Pub Date : 1992-01-01
N L Wilcox
{"title":"The status of eye irritancy testing: a regulatory perspective.","authors":"N L Wilcox","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Eye irritation testing is a salient public issue and continues to escalate on the public agenda. Issues relevant to this milieu include legislative proposals to ban animal use for cosmetic testing, adequacy of the current standard (viz., the Draize Eye Irritancy Test), availability of non-animal methodologies, validation paradigm for new testing models, international harmonization of testing standards and methods, and the regulatory role in product testing and enforcement. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) feels that enactment of legislation proposed to ban animal use from testing products for safety would pose serious problems from a public health perspective. FDA encourages the development of alternative test methods and is aware that many such tests are in various stages of evolution. At this time, however, none of these tests has been accepted by the scientific community as total replacement to the Draize test. FDA's basic positions on the use of non-animal alternatives are as follows: 1) The use of animal tests by industry to establish the safety of regulated products is necessary to minimize the risks from such products to humans, 2) The Draize eye irritancy test is currently the most valuable and reliable method for evaluating the hazard or safety of a substance introduced into or around the human eye, and 3) No non-animal tests are presently available to completely replace the Draize. FDA is actively involved with U.S. and international groups to harmonize protocols for product development, evaluate the current status of non-whole animal methodologies, and standardize testing requirements. The Agency has recently participated in several scientific symposia evaluating the status of non-whole animal methods in toxicity testing. Moreover, FDA representatives are currently scheduled to participate in international meetings and workshops planned for the immediate future addressing several issues in product safety determination.</p>","PeriodicalId":17964,"journal":{"name":"Lens and eye toxicity research","volume":"9 3-4","pages":"259-71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1992-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lens and eye toxicity research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Eye irritation testing is a salient public issue and continues to escalate on the public agenda. Issues relevant to this milieu include legislative proposals to ban animal use for cosmetic testing, adequacy of the current standard (viz., the Draize Eye Irritancy Test), availability of non-animal methodologies, validation paradigm for new testing models, international harmonization of testing standards and methods, and the regulatory role in product testing and enforcement. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) feels that enactment of legislation proposed to ban animal use from testing products for safety would pose serious problems from a public health perspective. FDA encourages the development of alternative test methods and is aware that many such tests are in various stages of evolution. At this time, however, none of these tests has been accepted by the scientific community as total replacement to the Draize test. FDA's basic positions on the use of non-animal alternatives are as follows: 1) The use of animal tests by industry to establish the safety of regulated products is necessary to minimize the risks from such products to humans, 2) The Draize eye irritancy test is currently the most valuable and reliable method for evaluating the hazard or safety of a substance introduced into or around the human eye, and 3) No non-animal tests are presently available to completely replace the Draize. FDA is actively involved with U.S. and international groups to harmonize protocols for product development, evaluate the current status of non-whole animal methodologies, and standardize testing requirements. The Agency has recently participated in several scientific symposia evaluating the status of non-whole animal methods in toxicity testing. Moreover, FDA representatives are currently scheduled to participate in international meetings and workshops planned for the immediate future addressing several issues in product safety determination.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
眼刺激测试的现状:监管视角。
眼睛刺激测试是一个突出的公共问题,并在公共议程上不断升级。与这一环境相关的问题包括禁止使用动物进行化妆品测试的立法建议、现行标准(即Draize眼睛刺激测试)的充充性、非动物方法的可用性、新测试模型的验证范例、测试标准和方法的国际协调以及产品测试和执法中的监管作用。美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)认为,从公共卫生的角度来看,立法禁止用动物来测试产品的安全性将带来严重的问题。FDA鼓励替代测试方法的发展,并意识到许多这样的测试处于不同的发展阶段。然而,在这个时候,这些测试还没有被科学界接受为完全取代德莱兹测试。FDA的基本立场保守的使用方法如下:1)使用动物测试行业建立监管产品安全的需要这样的产品对人类的风险最小化,2)眼刺激眼刺激试验是目前最有价值的和可靠的方法来评估风险或安全的物质引入或人类的眼睛,和3)没有无动物测试是目前完全取代眼刺激。FDA积极参与美国和国际组织协调产品开发协议,评估非全动物方法的现状,并标准化测试要求。该机构最近参加了几次科学专题讨论会,评估非整体动物方法在毒性试验中的地位。此外,FDA代表目前计划参加国际会议和研讨会,计划在不久的将来解决产品安全确定中的几个问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Role of toxic ingredients in silicone oils in the induction of increased corneal endothelial permeability. Induction of experimental proliferative vitreoretinopathy in the rabbit eye by intravitreal injections of fibroblast growth factor. Effects of Gingko biloba extracts in a model of tractional retinal detachment. The role of viscoelastics, cannulas, and irrigating solution additives in post-cataract surgery corneal edema: a brief review. Cytotoxicity of ophthalmic preservatives on human corneal epithelium.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1