The minipig in dermatotoxicology: Methods and challenges
Abstract
In view of more morphological and physiological similarities between human and porcine skin than for other laboratory animal species, the minipig is a preferred model to evaluate the safety profile of dermally applied xenobiotics. Different methods of dermal administration and examples of non-invasive and invasive investigations during the in-life phase of the studies are described. Routine and special post-mortem examinations in dermal studies are presented to assess responses to the topical treatment of minipig skin. Challenges in dermal minipig studies are discussed with respect to animal welfare and husbandry, test formulations, application methods and different types of investigations. One of the most significant issues for dermal minipig studies is the extensive measures required to prevent cross-contamination of blood and tissue samples taken to monitor local and systemic exposure to the test item.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Minipig skin most closely resembles human skin, with similar thicknesses of various layers and hair follicle density.
“In recent years, general toxicity studies and irritation evaluations have been conducted using minipigs, whose skin most closely resembles human skin, with similar thicknesses of various layers and hair follicle density6, 7, 8.”
From Morphological characteristics and notes of the skin in preclinical toxicity assessment (2023) · cites this paper as [6]
Cites
Skin absorption and human risk assessment
Poet, T. S., & McDougal, J. N. (2002) · Chemico-Biological Interactions · doi:10.1016/s0009-2797(02)00013-3 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Morphological characteristics and notes of the skin in preclinical toxicity assessment
Moroki, T. (2023) · Journal of Toxicologic Pathology · doi:10.1293/tox.2022-0103 · Cited by 26 · see citing works
- Authors
- Mahl, J. A., Vogel, B. E., Court, M., Kolopp, M., Roman, D., & Nogués, V.
- Affiliations
- Novartis (Switzerland) (CH)
- Venue
- Experimental and Toxicologic Pathology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2006-07
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 5-6
- Pages
- 341-345
- ISSN
- 0940-2993 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2087772905
- Cited by
- 77
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 2.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Experimental and Toxicologic Pathology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Contact Dermatitis and Allergies
- Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immunotoxicology and immune responses
- Keywords
- minipigs, dermatotoxicology, porcine skin, autopsy, animal welfare, cross-contamination prevention, xenobiotics, topical exposure
- MeSH terms
- Administration, Cutaneous, Animals, Animal Husbandry, Animal Welfare, Irritants, Skin, Swine, Swine, Miniature, Xenobiotics, Toxicity Tests, Models, Animal
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review