Prediction of eye irritation potential of liquid and granular laundry detergent formulas using the bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) assay
Henkel Consumer Goods Inc. , Scottsdale, AZ , USA and.Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology (Impact Factor: 1.12). 01/2013; 32(3). DOI: 10.3109/15569527.2012.754459
Abstract Evaluation of eye irritation potential is a routine part of consumer product testing. Increasingly, companies are using in vitro methods to perform these assessments. We have used the bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) assay for the prediction of eye irritation of liquid and granular laundry detergent formulas. The BCOP assay was selected because it can distinguish between moderate and severe irritants as required to evaluate these classes of formulations. Corneas were maintained in short-term culture and the exposure conditions were optimized using marketed product upper-end benchmark formulas for each product class. The primary endpoint was the loss of epithelium as measured by the change in permeability of the cornea to fluorescein and was complemented by histological evaluation of depth of injury. The opacity endpoint was not used, as the surfactants in these products do not induce opacity in proportion to the depth of injury induced. Liquid laundry detergents were diluted to 25% and exposed to the corneas for 20 min while the granular detergents were diluted to 10% and exposed for 30 min. These conditions were selected for each product type to induce OD(490) values in the midrange (between 0.5 and 0.6 absorbance units) and so increased or decreased irritation potential in the test formulas could readily be observed. Seventeen liquid and eleven granular laundry detergents were tested and the OD(490) values ranged from 0.278 to 2.193 for the liquid detergents and 0.267 to 0.856 for the granular detergents. Histological changes in the epithelium and stroma were consistent with the OD(490) values. These data suggest that the OD(490) provides an effective measure of epithelial cell loss (degree of cell lysis) and thus irritation potential for these surfactant-based formulas. The upper-end benchmark set a known upper range for acceptable irritation for the product class. Those formulas inducing lower OD(490) values may be considered to fall within the acceptable range while those inducing greater OD(490) values should receive further evaluation and perhaps reformulation.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The potential hazard of a carbonate-based, phosphate-free detergent was compared with that of a variety of granular and liquid phosphate detergents. Evaluations were made using methods prescribed by the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA) and others designed to more closely approximate exposure in actual use. Some phosphate products produced esophageal and gastric mucosal irritation similar to that produced by the nonphosphate detergent, while others caused varying, lesser degrees of injury. The nonphosphate detergent, as well as several phosphate products, was seriously irritating to the unwashed eye at required FHSA test levels. Under more realistic conditions, eye irritation was reduced significantly. Skin irritation by the nonphosphate product was comparable to that by phosphate detergents, and in some cases was lower. In skin irritation tests with human subjects, results with the carbonate detergent were equal to or lower than those obtained with phosphate detergents. The carbonate detergent was found not to be phototoxic, nor a contact- nor photo-sensitizer. Total alkalinity was shown not to correlate with the severity of tissue injury in either test animals or in man.Journal of Oil & Fat Industries 11/1972; 49(10):539-51. DOI:10.1007/BF02609223 · 1.54 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Much of the data which have been generated on in vitro alternatives to the Draize eye irritation test have dealt with compounds within a specific chemical class or product category. However, in the pharmaceutical industry, it is often necessary to evaluate materials which are not related in structure or properties. It was thus decided to evaluate a diverse series of chemicals in seven in vitro methods for estimating ocular irritation. Thirty-seven test materials were chosen to represent a broad range of pH, solubility, and in vivo irritation potential. Assays were chosen to include as many different types of end points as practical. The group of assays was composed of TOPKAT (assessing structure-activity relationships), bovine corneal opacity-permeability (BCO-P; corneal opacity/toxicity), Eytex (protein coagulation), neutral red uptake (cytotoxicity), MTT in living dermal equivalent (cytotoxicity), Microtox (cytotoxicity in bacteria), and CAMVA (inflammation/toxicity). The results of the study indicated that, in general, the cytotoxicity end points did not correlate well with the in vivo data. The BCO-P, CAMVA, and Eytex assays had the best overall concordance (88.9, 75.8, and 75.0%, respectively) with this set of compounds. Estimation of irritation potential based on structure-activity (TOPKAT) was possible for only approximately 50% of the compounds; however, the assay showed 100% sensitivity (i.e., no false negatives), but low specificity (i.e., negatives correctly identified only 54.5% of the time). These data suggest that for screening of chemicals of diverse structure and properties, the more mechanism-based assays, as opposed to general cytotoxicity assays, hold more promise and should be further evaluated.Fundamental and Applied Toxicology 07/1995; 26(1):20-31. DOI:10.1093/toxsci/26.1.20
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The CTFA Evaluation of Alternatives Program is an evaluation of the relationship between data from the Draize primary eye irritation test and comparable data from a selection of promising in vitro eye irritation tests. In Phase III, data from the Draize test and 41 in vitro endpoints on 25 representative surfactant-based personal care formulations were compared. As in Phase I and Phase II, regression modelling of the relationship between maximum average Draize score (MAS) and in vitro endpoint was the primary approach adopted for evaluating in vitro assay performance. The degree of confidence in prediction of MAS for a given in vitro endpoint is quantified in terms of the relative widths of prediction intervals constructed about the fitted regression curve. Prediction intervals reflect not only the error attributed to the model but also the material-specific components of variation in both the Draize and the in vitro assays. Among the in vitro assays selected for regression modeling in Phase III, the relationship between MAS and in vitro score was relatively well defined. The prediction bounds on MAS were most narrow for materials at the lower or upper end of the effective irritation range (MAS = 0-45), where variability in MAS was smallest. This, the confidence with which the MAS of surfactant-based formulations is predicted is greatest when MAS approaches zero or when MAS approaches 45 (no comment is made on prediction of MAS > 45 since extrapolation beyond the range of observed data is not possible). No single in vitro endpoint was found to exhibit relative superiority with regard to prediction of MAS. Variability associated with Draize test outcome (e.g. in MAS values) must be considered in any future comparisons of in vivo and in vitro test results if the purpose is to predict in vivo response using in vitro data.Food and Chemical Toxicology 02/1996; 34(1):79-117. DOI:10.1016/0278-6915(96)89525-1 · 2.90 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.