Biomedical subjects

O de Silva

Publications and source records attributed to O de Silva.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed1998

Industry experience with alternative methods.

L'OREAL has been using alternative methods for almost 30 years and this has led to their current widespread in-house use for evaluation of local effects in safety and efficacy. Alternative methods are used daily to assess eye and skin tolerance, phototoxicity, photoprotection, skin sensitization, percutaneous absorption and skin and hair care. For eye irritation, many years of in-house studies have enabled us to develop and to select the most reliable tests. New in vitro methods have also been developed to help to understand the ocular irritation mechanisms which underlie the irritative properties of new chemicals. In the field of skin irritation, L'OREAL's work has focused mainly on the wide possibilities offered by reconstructed human skins to evaluate the skin tolerance of cosmetics. Today we have managed to introduce Langerhans cells in reconstructed epidermis to develop an alternative to skin sensitization. Besides these in-house investigations either in research or in evaluation, our laboratories have contributed actively to multicentric studies to help the prevalidation/validation process in various fields. The alternative approach is now totally integrated into the safety evaluation strategy, and this allowed L'OREAL to totally ban animal testing on cosmetic products several years ago. In vitro alternatives are very powerful tools: they allow the study of fine mechanisms and the use of human cells. This overall 'in vitro' approach is a scientific, ethical and industrial breakthrough.

Animal Testing Alternatives↗

PubMed1997

IRAG working group 2. CAM-based assays. Interagency Regulatory Alternatives Group.

CAM-based assays, in which test material is applied to the chorion allantoic membrane (CAM) of embryonated chicken eggs, were assessed as alternatives to the Draize eye irritation test. Two general types of CAM-based assays are currently in use, the HET-CAM test and the CAMVA assay. Evaluations were made of five data sets produced with three different modifications of the HET-CAM test and two data sets obtained with the same CAMVA protocol. Data sets consisted of 9-133 test chemicals, usually from the sponsor's product line, and also from a validation trial. Each data set and assay protocol were analysed for quality of data, purpose and proposed use of the assay, range of responses covered, range of test materials amenable, current use in safety and risk assessment both in-house and for regulatory purposes. Since the MMAS Draize score was not available for all in vivo data sets, the sigma MMMIS, which correlates well with the MMAS, was used instead. In vitro/in vivo correlations calculated with Pearson's linear coefficient ranged from r = 0.6 to r = 0.9 for six of seven data sets. Corneal opacity and inflammation of the iris showed the best correlation to in vitro data. Prediction rates were significantly improved when partial linear regression was used, and the predictivity of three different HET-CAM protocols was almost the same. HET-CAM assays showed the best prediction with surfactants and surfactant-based formulations, whereas the CAMVA assay provided the best performance with alcohols.

Allantois↗

PubMed1997

Evaluation of eye irritation potential: statistical analysis and tier testing strategies.

Eye irritation testing, specifically the Draize test, has been the centre of controversy for many reasons. Several alternatives, based on the principles of reduction, refinement and replacement, have been proposed and are being used by the industry and government authorities. However, no universally applicable, validated non-animal alternative(s) is currently available. This report presents a statistical analysis and two testing approaches: the partial least squares multivariate statistical analysis of de Silva and colleagues from France, the tier-testing approach for regulatory purposes described by Gerner and colleagues from Germany, and the three-step tier-testing approach of the US Interagency Regulatory Alternatives Group described by Gupta and Hill. These approaches were presented as three separate papers at the November 1993 Interagency Regulatory Alternatives Group (IRAG) Workshop on Eye Irritation Testing; they have been summarized and combined into the following three-part report. The first part (de Silva et al.) presents statistical techniques for establishing test batteries of in vitro alternatives to the eye irritation test. The second (Gerner et al.) and third (Gupta and Hill) parts are similar in that they stage assessment of information by using a combination of screening information and animal testing to effect reductions in animal use and distress.

Animal Testing Alternatives↗

PubMed1992

In vitro methods: their relevance and complementarity in ocular safety assessment.

Ocular irritation includes a wide variety of mechanisms some of which can be explored by in vitro methods. For example, the effects on epithelial cells that constitute the outer layers of both the conjunctiva and the cornea may result in direct cytotoxicity or impairment of cellular functions -such as impermeability-, phenomena that can be explored in vitro. Irritancy may also involve inflammation of the conjunctival connective tissue and of the corneal stroma with its vascular and cellular features; effects on the stroma can lead to the opacification of the cornea; this last phenomenon may be the consequence of mechanisms such as modification of the structure of proteins or changes in stroma hydration which in particular is closely related to corneal endothelium metabolic activity. Recovery after eye injury depends partly on the extent of ocular damage and on the residual mitotic activity of the remaining cells. We have studied 41 surfactants, lotions and shampoos in 6 to 8 in vitro methods each one exploring one or two endpoints that could be linked to the ocular irritancy phenomena described above. In vivo ocular irritancy data for these materials from previous studies were compared to in vitro results. The results obtained show that -among the techniques that were investigated and for the categories of substances that were studied- the Het-CAM test and more particularly the endpoint that is related to vascular effects gives the best assessment of acute ocular irritancy (Spearman's rho coefficients between in vivo and in vitro data greater than 0.90); however, cell culture methods, especially one based on short contact time between cells and products and on evaluation of early toxic effects, also proved interesting (Spearman's rho coefficients between in vivo and in vitro data greater than 0.85). Moreover, the isolated cornea opacity and permeability test gave complementary information more related to recovery from surfactant-induced damage. These encouraging results lead us to consider in vitro ocular safety assessment with optimism for the categories of products investigated.

Allantois↗