A State-of-the-Art Review on the Alternatives to Animal Testing for the Safety Assessment of Cosmetics

Almost a decade after the stipulated deadline in the 7th amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive, which bans the marketing of animal-tested cosmetics in the EU from 2013, animal experimentation for cosmetic-related purposes remains a topic of animated debate. Cosmetic industry continues to be scrutinised for the practice, despite its leading role in funding and adopting innovation in this field. This paper aims to provide a state-of-the-art review of the field on alternative testing methods, also known as New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), with the focus on assessing the safety of cosmetic ingredients and products. It starts with innovation drivers and global regulatory responses, followed by an extensive, endpoint-specific overview of accepted/prospective NAMs. The overview covers main developments in acute toxicity, skin corrosion/irritation, serious eye damage/irritation, skin sensitisation, repeated dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity/endocrine disruption, mutagenicity/genotoxicity, carcinogenicity, photo-induced toxicity, and toxicokinetics. Specific attention was paid to the emerging in silico methodology. This paper also provides a brief overview of the studies on public perception of animal testing in cosmetics. It concludes with a view that educating consumers and inviting them to take part in advocacy could be an effective tool to achieve policy changes, regulatory acceptance, and investment in innovation.

[1]  Anna S. Mitchell,et al.  Openness about animal research increases public support , 2022, Nature Neuroscience.

[2]  C. Grulke,et al.  A Systematic Review of Published Physiologically-based Kinetic Models and an Assessment of their Chemical Space Coverage , 2021, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[3]  C. Rovida,et al.  Continuing Animal Tests on Cosmetic Ingredients for REACH in the EU. , 2021, ALTEX.

[4]  Guideline No. 497: Defined Approaches on Skin Sensitisation , 2021, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[5]  Test No. 498: In vitro Phototoxicity - Reconstructed Human Epidermis Phototoxicity test method , 2021, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[6]  TG 494: Vitrigel-Eye Irritancy Test Method for Identifying Chemicals Not Requiring Classification and Labelling for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage , 2021, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[7]  Test No. 442C: In Chemico Skin Sensitisation , 2021, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[8]  Test No. 455: Performance-Based Test Guideline for Stably Transfected Transactivation In Vitro Assays to Detect Estrogen Receptor Agonists and Antagonists , 2021, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[9]  Test No. 439: In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Test Method , 2021, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[10]  G. Lemkine,et al.  Safety Testing of Cosmetic Products: Overview of Established Methods and New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) , 2021, Cosmetics.

[11]  F. Madia,et al.  Integration of data across toxicity endpoints for improved safety assessment of chemicals: the example of carcinogenicity assessment , 2021, Archives of Toxicology.

[12]  Nisha S. Sipes,et al.  NAM-supported read-across: From case studies to regulatory guidance in safety assessment. , 2021, ALTEX.

[13]  Martina Klaric,et al.  Development of a next generation risk assessment framework for the evaluation of skin sensitisation of cosmetic ingredients. , 2020, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[14]  Alicia Paini,et al.  A Review of In Silico Tools as Alternatives to Animal Testing: Principles, Resources and Applications , 2020, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[15]  Test No. 458: Stably Transfected Human Androgen Receptor Transcriptional Activation Assay for Detection of Androgenic Agonist and Antagonist Activity of Chemicals , 2020, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[16]  Test No. 471: Bacterial Reverse Mutation Test , 2020, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[17]  Test No. 491: Short Time Exposure In Vitro Test Method for Identifying i) Chemicals Inducing Serious Eye Damage and ii) Chemicals Not Requiring Classification for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage , 2020, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[18]  OECD GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS , 2017 .

[19]  Martin Paparella,et al.  Chemical carcinogen safety testing: OECD expert group international consensus on the development of an integrated approach for the testing and assessment of chemical non-genotoxic carcinogens , 2020, Archives of Toxicology.

[20]  H. M. Ueno,et al.  Green cosmetics: perspectives and challenges in the context of green chemistry , 2020, Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente.

[21]  Gerhard F. Ecker,et al.  In silico toxicology: From structure–activity relationships towards deep learning and adverse outcome pathways , 2020, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Computational molecular science.

[22]  T. Vanhaecke,et al.  The way forward for assessing the human health safety of cosmetics in the eu workshop proceedings. , 2020, Toxicology.

[23]  V. Ligade,et al.  Ban of Cosmetic Testing on Animals: A Brief Overview , 2020 .

[24]  Bertrand Desprez,et al.  A mode-of-action ontology model for safety evaluation of chemicals: Outcome of a series of workshops on repeated dose toxicity. , 2019, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[25]  Fiona Sewell,et al.  Regulatory acceptance of in silico approaches for the safety assessment of cosmetic-related substances , 2019, Computational Toxicology.

[26]  Test No. 431: In vitro skin corrosion: reconstructed human epidermis (RHE) test method , 2019, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[27]  TG 495: Ros (Reactive Oxygen Species) Assay for Photoreactivity , 2019, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[28]  Test No. 432: In Vitro 3T3 NRU Phototoxicity Test , 2019, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[29]  Rebecca Ram,et al.  Extrapolation of Animal Research Data to Humans: An Analysis of the Evidence , 2019, Animal Experimentation: Working Towards a Paradigm Change.

[30]  Test No. 496: In vitro Macromolecular Test Method for Identifying Chemicals Inducing Serious Eye Damage and Chemicals Not Requiring Classification for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage , 2019 .

[31]  Jingwen Wu,et al.  The current status of alternative methods for cosmetics safety assessment in China. , 2019, ALTEX.

[32]  OECD GUIDELINE FOR THE TESTING OF CHEMICALS , 2016 .

[33]  Kevin Achberger,et al.  Stem cell-based retina models. , 2019, Advanced drug delivery reviews.

[34]  Test No. 442B: Skin Sensitization , 2018, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[35]  Test No. 442E: In Vitro Skin Sensitisation , 2018, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[36]  Test No. 442D: In Vitro Skin Sensitisation , 2018, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[37]  Test No. 438: Isolated Chicken Eye Test Method for Identifying i) Chemicals Inducing Serious Eye Damage and ii) Chemicals Not Requiring Classification for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage , 2018, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4.

[38]  A. Colacci,et al.  The transformics assay: first steps for the development of an integrated approach to investigate the malignant cell transformation in vitro , 2018, Carcinogenesis.

[39]  D. Weary,et al.  Institutional transparency improves public perception of lab animal technicians and support for animal research , 2018, PloS one.

[40]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  Animal testing and its alternatives - the most important omics is economics. , 2018, ALTEX.

[41]  Anton Simeonov,et al.  The US Federal Tox21 Program: A strategic and operational plan for continued leadership. , 2018, ALTEX.

[42]  Raffaella Corvi,et al.  Moving forward in carcinogenicity assessment: Report of an EURL ECVAM/ESTIV workshop , 2017, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[43]  Andrew Worth,et al.  Ab initio chemical safety assessment: A workflow based on exposure considerations and non-animal methods , 2017, Computational toxicology.

[44]  Christoph Studer,et al.  Green Toxicology: a strategy for sustainable chemical and material development , 2017, Environmental Sciences Europe.

[45]  A. M. Api,et al.  Chemical photoallergy: photobiochemical mechanisms, classification, and risk assessments. , 2017, Journal of dermatological science.

[46]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  From in vivo to in vitro: The medical device testing paradigm shift. , 2017, ALTEX.

[47]  Uwe Marx,et al.  Biology-inspired microphysiological system approaches to solve the prediction dilemma of substance testing. , 2016, ALTEX.

[48]  Martin Paparella,et al.  International regulatory needs for development of an IATA for non-genotoxic carcinogenic chemical substances. , 2016, ALTEX.

[49]  Maarten Nauta,et al.  The role of hazard- and risk-based approaches in ensuring food safety , 2015 .

[50]  P. Chugan,et al.  The Influence of Consumer Perception Towards Green Advertising on Green Purchase Intention , 2015 .

[51]  Sonali K Doke,et al.  Alternatives to animal testing: A review , 2013, Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society.

[52]  E. Ormandy,et al.  Public Attitudes toward Animal Research: A Review , 2014, Animals : an open access journal from MDPI.

[53]  Claes Wohlin,et al.  Guidelines for snowballing in systematic literature studies and a replication in software engineering , 2014, EASE '14.

[54]  Silke Gabbert,et al.  A Tutorial for Analysing the Cost-effectiveness of Alternative Methods for Assessing Chemical Toxicity: The Case of Acute Oral Toxicity Prediction , 2014, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[55]  Lee,et al.  What's Cruel About Cruelty Free: An Exploration of Consumers, Moral Heuristics, and Public Policy , 2014 .

[56]  D. Andrew CHAPTER 6:Acute Systemic Toxicity: Oral, Dermal and Inhalation Exposures , 2013 .

[57]  Martin L. Stephens,et al.  History of the 3Rs in Toxicity Testing: From Russell and Burch to 21st Century Toxicology , 2013 .

[58]  T. Matsushita,et al.  History and Social Duties in Future of the AATEX: Alternatives to Animal Testing and Experimentation , 2013 .

[59]  T. Evans Reproductive Toxicity and Endocrine Disruption , 2012 .

[60]  Whelan Maurice,et al.  Hepatotoxicity Screening Taking a Mode-Of-Action Approach Using HepaRG Cells and HCA , 2012 .

[61]  Hannu Raunio,et al.  In Silico Toxicology – Non-Testing Methods , 2011, Front. Pharmacol..

[62]  Valérie Zuang,et al.  Alternative (non-animal) methods for cosmetics testing: current status and future prospects—2010 , 2011, Archives of Toxicology.

[63]  Silke Gabbert,et al.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Chemical Testing for Decision-Support: How to Include Animal Welfare? , 2010 .

[64]  D. Weary,et al.  Attitudes towards the use of genetically modified animals in research , 2010, Public understanding of science.

[65]  Valérie Zuang,et al.  A proposed eye irritation testing strategy to reduce and replace in vivo studies using Bottom-Up and Top-Down approaches. , 2010, Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA.

[66]  David H Phillips,et al.  Mutagenicity testing for chemical risk assessment: update of the WHO/IPCS Harmonized Scheme. , 2009, Mutagenesis.

[67]  A. Jones,et al.  Foreword , 1967, British Journal of Cancer.

[68]  Thomas Hartung,et al.  Food for thought... on the economics of animal testing. , 2009, ALTEX.

[69]  D. Basketter,et al.  Skin Irritation and Sensitization: Mechanisms and New Approaches for Risk Assessment , 2008, Skin Pharmacology and Physiology.

[70]  Peter-Jürgen Kramer,et al.  Replacement of in vivo acute oral toxicity studies by in vitro cytotoxicity methods: opportunities, limits and regulatory status. , 2008, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[71]  D. Basketter,et al.  Skin Irritation and Sensitization: Mechanisms and New Approaches for Risk Assessment , 2008, Skin Pharmacology and Physiology.

[72]  Albrecht Poth,et al.  Genetic toxicity assessment: employing the best science for human safety evaluation part IV: Recommendation of a working group of the Gesellschaft fuer Umwelt-Mutationsforschung (GUM) for a simple and straightforward approach to genotoxicity testing. , 2007, Toxicological sciences : an official journal of the Society of Toxicology.

[73]  Raffaella Corvi,et al.  The Assessment of Repeated Dose Toxicity In Vitro: A Proposed Approach , 2006, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[74]  M. McKinney Let the People Speak , 2005 .

[75]  Michael Schwarz,et al.  The integrated project ReProTect: a novel approach in reproductive toxicity hazard assessment. , 2005, Reproductive toxicology.

[76]  George Daston,et al.  The Effects of Chemicals on Mammalian Fertility , 2005, Alternatives to laboratory animals : ATLA.

[77]  Mark J. Reasor,et al.  Principles of Toxicology , 2003 .

[78]  J. Durant,et al.  The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain , 1995 .

[79]  R. Isseroff,et al.  Quantitative in vitro assessment of phototoxicity by a fibroblast-neutral red assay. , 1992, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[80]  W. Freudenburg Perceived risk, real risk: social science and the art of probabilistic risk assessment. , 1988, Science.

[81]  R. Sharpe The Draize test--motivations for change. , 1985, Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association.

[82]  John H. Draize,et al.  METHODS FOR THE STUDY OF IRRITATION AND TOXICITY OF SUBSTANCES APPLIED TOPICALLY TO THE SKIN AND MUCOUS MEMBRANES , 1944 .