Suppr超能文献

在六种情况中尚未排除兔眼试验结果:TTT无法预测农用化学品制剂在体内的全部眼刺激分类情况。

Not yet nixing rabbit eyes from the six: the TTT is not predicting the full range of in vivo eye irritation classifications for agrochemical formulations.

作者信息

Kolle Susanne N, Haase Peggy, Wareing Britta, Kemeny Monika, Stinchcombe Stefan, Funk-Weyer Dorothee, Landsiedel Robert

机构信息

BASF SE Experimental Toxicology and Ecology, Ludwigshafen, Germany.

BASF SE Experimental Toxicology and Ecology, Ludwigshafen, Germany.

出版信息

Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2025 Sep;161:105841. doi: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2025.105841. Epub 2025 May 3.

Abstract

Since its adoption as a test guideline (EIT, OECD test guideline (TG) 492) in 2015, the EpiOcular™ eye irritation test has been the in vitro method of choice to identify agrochemical formulations non-irritant to the eye (neither category 1 nor 2, according to the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals, GHS). For serious eye damage (GHS category 1), however, none of the in vitro test methods including the bovine cornea opacity and permeability test (BCOP, OECD TG 437, and protocol modifications), the isolated chicken eye test (ICE, OECD TG 438), the ocular irritation assay (OECD TG 496) or the hen's egg test on the chorioallantoic membrane (HET-CAM) assay proved sufficiently sensitive to correctly identify agrochemical formulations classified as seriously eye damaging in vivo. In 2022, the OECD adopted a new in vitro test guideline for identifying chemicals inducing serious eye damage, eye irritation, and chemicals not requiring classification for eye irritation (OECD TG 492B). However, within the formal validation study of this time-to-toxicity (TTT) test method, agrochemical formulations were not included. To assess the applicability of this test to agrochemical formulations 25 formulations with historical in vivo data were assessed in the TTT. The TTT correctly predicted 0 %, 90 % and 50 % of the agrochemical formulations which were classified by the in vivo data into the three categories 1, 2 and "not classified", respectively. The overall accuracy of the TTT to predict agrochemical formulations of the three categories was 52 %. Therefore, to facilitate non-animal-based identification of the full range of ocular irritation of agrochemical formulations, testing protocols and/or prediction models must be revised or classification guidelines should be adjusted to align with human relevant in vitro testing rather than relying on in vivo Draize data as a reference point.

摘要

自2015年被采纳为一项测试指南(EIT,经合组织测试指南(TG)492)以来,EpiOcular™眼刺激试验一直是用于识别对眼睛无刺激性的农用化学品制剂的首选体外方法(根据全球化学品统一分类和标签制度(GHS),既不属于1类也不属于2类)。然而,对于严重眼损伤(GHS 1类),包括牛角膜混浊和通透性试验(BCOP,经合组织TG 437及方案修改)、离体鸡眼试验(ICE,经合组织TG 438)、眼刺激试验(经合组织TG 496)或鸡胚绒毛尿囊膜试验(HET-CAM)在内的任何体外试验方法,都没有被证明足够灵敏,能够正确识别在体内被归类为严重眼损伤的农用化学品制剂。2022年,经合组织通过了一项新的体外测试指南,用于识别引起严重眼损伤、眼刺激的化学品以及无需进行眼刺激分类的化学品(经合组织TG 492B)。然而,在这次毒性时间(TTT)测试方法的正式验证研究中,没有纳入农用化学品制剂。为了评估该测试对农用化学品制剂的适用性,在TTT中对25种有历史体内数据的制剂进行了评估。TTT分别正确预测了根据体内数据被归类为1类、2类和“未分类”这三个类别的农用化学品制剂的0%、90%和50%。TTT预测这三个类别的农用化学品制剂的总体准确率为52%。因此,为了便于基于非动物试验识别农用化学品制剂的全范围眼刺激,必须修订测试方案和/或预测模型,或者调整分类指南,使其与人类相关的体外测试保持一致,而不是依赖体内Draize数据作为参考点。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验