ICCVAM panel
This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet
Executive Summary
There is insufficient data to validate the EpiOcular, Cytosensor Microphysiometer and bovine corneal opacity and permeability assays for gauging the eye irritation potential of antimicrobial cleaning products without animal involvement, concludes a scientific peer review panel convened by ICCVAM at its May 19-21 meeting in Bethesda, Md. Panel recommends further studies to characterize the three in vitro methods, invites stakeholders to submit validation and testing data to NICEATM. Panel additionally greenlights bovine corneal opacity and permeability assay and Cytosensor Microphysiometer test as screening methods to identify some products that would not require hazard labeling for eye irritation. Experts recommend using topical anesthetics and systemic analgesics prior to any in vivo ocular irritancy testing to minimize discomfort for the animal. Scientists from U.S., Japan, Canada, the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain participated in the review, in keeping with recently signed memorandum of cooperation promising greater international harmonization (1"The Rose Sheet" May 4, 2009, p. 6). Full report will be made available on the NICEATM/ICCVAM Web site later this year, and a summary of the panel's conclusions will be presented at the Scientific Advisory Committee on Alternative Toxicological Methods' public meeting June 25-29
You may also be interested in...
Adoption Of Alt Testing Methods Should Pick Up Under Cooperation Memo
Agencies from the U.S., EU, Canada and Japan have signed a memorandum of cooperation to accelerate the process by which non-animal testing methods are validated and implemented across the globe
New EU Approvals
The Pink Sheet's list of EU centralized approvals of new active substances has been updated to add two new products, including Ryzneuta, Evive Biotechnology's treatment for chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.
England’s NICE Says No To Santhera’s DMD Drug Agamree Due To ‘Unreliable Modeling’
Santhera Pharmaceuticals did not provide enough evidence to demonstrate that its Duchenne muscular dystrophy drug Agamree was a cost-effective use of resources, according to draft guidance from England’s health technology assessment body, NICE.