Department of Research and Toxicology, Humane Society International (HSI), Washington, DC, USA.
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery and Periodontology, Ribeirão Preto Dental School, University of São Paulo (USP), Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, Brazil.
Altern Lab Anim. 2019 Nov-Dec;47(5-6):174-195. doi: 10.1177/0261192919896361. Epub 2020 Jan 4.
methods that can replace animal testing in the identification of skin sensitisers are now a reality. However, as cell culture and related techniques usually rely on animal-derived products, these methods may be failing to address the complete replacement of animals in safety assessment. The objective of this study was to identify the animal-derived products that are used as part of methods for skin sensitisation testing. Thus, a systematic review of 156 articles featuring 83 different methods was carried out and, from this review, the use of several animal-derived products from different species was identified, with the use of fetal bovine serum being cited in most of the methods (78%). The use of sera from other animals, monoclonal antibodies and animal proteins were also variously mentioned. While non-animal alternatives are available and methods free of animal-derived products are emerging, most of the current methods reported used at least one animal-derived product, which raises ethical and technical concerns. Therefore, to deliver technically and ethically better methods for the safety assessment of chemicals, more effort should be made to replace products of animal origin in existing methods and to avoid their use in the development of new method protocols.
替代动物试验以鉴定皮肤致敏物的方法现已成为现实。然而，由于细胞培养和相关技术通常依赖于动物源性产品，这些方法可能无法完全替代动物进行安全性评估。本研究的目的是确定作为皮肤致敏性测试方法的一部分所使用的动物源性产品。因此，对 156 篇文章进行了系统综述，其中涉及 83 种不同的方法，从该综述中确定了几种不同物种的动物源性产品的使用，其中大多数方法（78%）都使用了胎牛血清。还提到了来自其他动物的血清、单克隆抗体和动物蛋白的使用。虽然有非动物替代品，并且正在出现无动物源性产品的方法，但大多数目前报道的方法至少使用了一种动物源性产品，这引发了伦理和技术方面的关注。因此，为了提供技术和伦理上更优的化学品安全性评估方法，应更加努力地在现有方法中替代动物源性产品，并避免在新方法协议的开发中使用它们。
