JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
A Web-based Alternative Non-animal Method Database for Safety Cosmetic Evaluations
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
  • Journal title : Toxicological Research
  • Volume 32, Issue 3,  2016, pp.259-267
  • Publisher : The Korean Society of Toxicology
  • DOI : 10.5487/TR.2016.32.3.259
 Title & Authors
A Web-based Alternative Non-animal Method Database for Safety Cosmetic Evaluations
Kim, Seung Won; Kim, Bae-Hwan;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
Animal testing was used traditionally in the cosmetics industry to confirm product safety, but has begun to be banned; alternative methods to replace animal experiments are either in development, or are being validated, worldwide. Research data related to test substances are critical for developing novel alternative tests. Moreover, safety information on cosmetic materials has neither been collected in a database nor shared among researchers. Therefore, it is imperative to build and share a database of safety information on toxicological mechanisms and pathways collected through in vivo, in vitro, and in silico methods. We developed the CAMSEC database (named after the research team; the Consortium of Alternative Methods for Safety Evaluation of Cosmetics) to fulfill this purpose. On the same website, our aim is to provide updates on current alternative research methods in Korea. The database will not be used directly to conduct safety evaluations, but researchers or regulatory individuals can use it to facilitate their work in formulating safety evaluations for cosmetic materials. We hope this database will help establish new alternative research methods to conduct efficient safety evaluations of cosmetic materials.
 Keywords
Database;Alternative method;Animal test;Cosmetic testing;
 Language
English
 Cited by
 References
1.
The Lancet (2004) Animal research is a source of human compassion, not shame. The Lancet, 364, 815-816. crossref(new window)

2.
Purchase, I.F. (1997) Prospects for reduction and replacement alternatives in regulatory toxicology. Toxicol. In Vitro, 11, 313-319. crossref(new window)

3.
Vinardell, M.P. and Mitjans, M. (2008) Alternative methods for eye and skin irritation tests: an overview. J. Pharm. Sci., 97, 46-59. crossref(new window)

4.
Barker, C. (2013) South Korea proposes to recognize animal testing alternatives [17-Dec-2013]. CosmeticsDesign-Asia.com. Available from: http://www.cosmeticsdesign-asia.com/Regulation-Safety/South-Korea-proposes-to-recognize-animal-testing-alternatives.

5.
Jung, K.M., Lee, S.H., Ryu, Y.H., Jang, W.H., Jung, H.S., Han, J.H., Seok, S.H., Park, J.H., Son, Y., Park, Y.H. and Lim, K.M. (2011) A new 3D reconstituted human corneal epithelium model as an alternative method for the eye irritation test. Toxicol. In Vitro, 25, 403-410. crossref(new window)

6.
Zeiger, E. (2003) Validation and acceptance of new and revised tests: a flexible but transparent process. Toxicol. Lett., 140-141, 31-35. crossref(new window)

7.
Meyer, O. (2003) Testing and assessment strategies, including alternative and new approaches. Toxicol. Lett., 140-141, 21-30. crossref(new window)

8.
ECVAM (2015) EURL ECVAM Database service on Alternative Methods to animal experiment (DB-ALM). Available from: http://ecvam-dbalm.jrc.ec.europa.eu/beta.

9.
McNamee, P., Hibatallah, J., Costabel-Farkas, M., Goebel, C., Araki, D., Dufour, E., Hewitt, N.J., Jones, P., Kirst, A., Le Varlet, B., Macfarlane, M., Marrec-Fairley, M., Rowland, J., Schellauf, F. and Scheel, J. (2009) A tiered approach to the use of alternatives to animal testing for the safety assessment of cosmetics: eye irritation. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 54, 197-209. crossref(new window)

10.
Whitehouse, L. (2014) More Korean cosmetics brands eyeing up China [26-Jun-2014]. CosmeticsDesign-Asia.com. Available from: http://www.cosmeticsdesign-asia.com/Business-Financial/More-Korean-cosmetics-brands-eyeing-up-China.

11.
Comiskey, D., Api, A.M., Barratt, C., Daly, E.J., Ellis, G., McNamara, C., O'Mahony, C., Robison, S.H., Safford, B., Smith, B. and Tozer, S. (2015) Novel database for exposure to fragrance ingredients in cosmetics and personal care products. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 72, 660-672. crossref(new window)

12.
Elena, L.P. and Andrew, W. (2010) Review of QSAR Models and Software Tools for predicting Developmental and Reproductive Toxicity (JRC59820). Publications Office of the European Union.

13.
Jung, K.M., Lee, S.H., Jang, W.H., Jung, H.S., Heo, Y., Park, Y.H., Bae, S., Lim, K.M. and Seok, S.H. (2014) KeraSkin$^{TM}$-VM: A novel reconstructed human epidermis model for skin irritation tests. Toxicol. In Vitro, 28, 742-750. crossref(new window)

14.
Yang, H., Na, J., Jang, W.H., Jung, M.S., Jeon, J.Y., Heo, Y., Yeo, K.W., Jo, J.H., Lim, K.M. and Bae, S. (2015) Appraisal of within-and between-laboratory reproducibility of nonradioisotopic local lymph node assay using flow cytometry, LLNA: BrdU-FCM: Comparison of OECD TG429 performance standard and statistical evaluation. Toxicol. Lett., 234, 172-179. crossref(new window)

15.
De Wolf, W., Comber, M., Douben, P., Gimeno, S., Holt, M., Leonard, M., Lillicrap, A., Sijm, D., van Egmond, R., Weisbrod, A. and Whale, G. (2007) Animal use replacement, reduction, and refinement: Development of an integrated testing strategy for bioconcentration of chemicals in fish. Integr. Environ. Assess. Manag., 3, 3-17. crossref(new window)

16.
Jaworska, J. and Hoffmann, S. (2010) Integrated testing Strategy (ItS)-Opportunities to better use existing data and guide future testing in toxicology. ALTEX, 27, 231-242.