Cited by 35Animal testing and alternativesContact Dermatitis and AllergiesImmunotoxicology and immune responses

Interlaboratory validation of the in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients. (8) Evaluation of cytotoxicity tests on SIRC cells

Tani, N, Kinoshita, S, Okamoto, Y, Kotani, M, Itagaki, H, Murakami, N, Sugiura, S, Usami, M +7 more·1999·Toxicology in Vitro

Abstract

Two common assays, the neutral red uptake assay (SIRC-NRU) and the crystal violet staining assay (SIRC-CVS), were evaluated as alternatives to the Draize eye irritation test (Draize test).The cytotoxicity of thirty-eight cosmetic ingredients as well as a physiological saline solution was determined on SIRC cells at five to seven laboratories. SIRC-NRU and SIRC-CVS were performed according to the common standard operating procedure (SOP). The 50% effective concentration (EC(50)) was determined for each ingredient. The EC(50) of SIRC-CVS was similar to that of SIRC-NRU, showing a strong correlation (r=0.995). The coefficient of variation (CV) of EC(50) which represents the interlaboratory reproducibility of SIRC-NRU was 32.1%, whereas that of SIRC-CVS was 32.8%. The logarithmically transformed EC(50) values showed a strong correlation with the maximal average Draize total score (MAS) (SIRC-NRU: r=-0.816 (n=30), SIRC-CVS: r=-0.805 (n=29)). Both methods could be applied to water-insoluble substances and dyes. However, strong acids, alkanolamines and alcohols had a tendency to deviate from the linear regression lines which were obtained from the in vivo and in vitro data for both methods in the present study. These results suggest that cytotoxicological testing on SIRC cells may provide an alternative method to the Draize test for cosmetic ingredients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0887-2333(98)00071-x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Interlaboratory studies show substantial variability in IC50 and related cytotoxicity metrics, frequently in the range of approximately 20% to >40%, depending on system and endpoint.

    “Interlaboratory studies further show substantial variability in IC50 and related cytotoxicity metrics, frequently in the range of approximately 20% to >40%, depending on system and endpoint (Tani et al., 1999; Gruber and Nickel, 2023).”
  • Comparative analyses show that MTT, neutral red uptake, resazurin and ATP assays have endpoint-dependent sensitivity and variability, with metabolic assays often detecting early functional stress and membrane-integrity assays reflecting later loss of cellular integrity.

    “Comparative analyses of MTT, neutral red uptake, resazurin and ATP assays show endpoint-dependent sensitivity and variability, with metabolic assays often detecting early functional stress and membrane-integrity assays reflecting later loss of cellular integrity (Riss et al., 2016; Tani et al., 1999).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tani, N., Kinoshita, S., Okamoto, Y., Kotani, M., Itagaki, H., Murakami, N., Sugiura, S., Usami, M., Kato, K., Kojima, H., Ohno, T., Saijo, K., Kato, M., Hayashi, M., & Ohno, Y.
Affiliations
  • KOSÉ (Japan) (JP)
  • Sunstar (Japan) (JP)
  • Shiseido Group (Japan) (JP)
  • Hoyu (Japan) (JP)
  • Nippon Menard Cosmetic (Japan) (JP)
  • RIKEN (JP)
  • National Institute of Health Sciences (JP)
Corresponding author
Tani, N
Venue
Toxicology in Vitro
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1999-02
Volume
13
Issue
1
Pages
175-187
ISSN
0887-2333 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2090955424
Cited by
35
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
2.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Toxicology in Vitro (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
eye irritation, Draize test, SIRC cells, cytotoxicity, neutral red uptake assay, cosmetic ingredients, interlaboratory reproducibility, EC50, alternative test methods, dyes

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