Cited by 16Animal testing and alternatives3D Printing in Biomedical ResearchContact Dermatitis and Allergies

In vitro 3D skin culture and its sustainability in toxicology: a narrative review

Open access
Masri, Syafira, Fauzi, Mh Busra, Rajab, Nor Fadilah, Lee, Wing-Hin, Zainal Abidin, Diana Atiqah, Siew, Ee Ling·2024·Artificial Cells, Nanomedicine, and Biotechnology

Abstract

In current toxicological research, 2D cell cultures and animal models are well- accepted and commonly employed methods. However, these approaches have many drawbacks and are distant from the actual environment in human. To embrace this, great efforts have been made to provide alternative methods for non-animal skin models in toxicology studies with the need for more mechanistically informative methods. This review focuses on the current state of knowledge regarding the in vitro 3D skin model methods, with different functional states that correspond to the sustainability in the field of toxicology testing. We discuss existing toxicology testing methods using in vitro 3D skin models which provide a better understanding of the testing requirements that are needed. The challenges and future landscape in using the in vitro 3D skin models in toxicology testing are also discussed. We are confident that the in vitro 3D skin models application may become an important tool in toxicology in the context of risk assessment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/21691401.2024.2407617

Cites

150 of 150 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Similar anti-melanogenic effects were consistently observed in both ULA-derived 3D spheroid cultures and a 3D human skin-equivalent model.

    “Similar anti-melanogenic effects were consistently observed in both ULA-derived 3D spheroid cultures and a 3D human skin-equivalent model [24].”

    From Anti-Photoaging and Anti-Melanogenic Effects of a Novel <i>Lactiplantibacillus plantarum</i> RKBP Isolated from Giant <i>Centella asiatica</i> (2026) · cites this paper as [24]

    The Structural similarity of human skin equivalent with native human skin section (page unavailable) discusses skin equivalents and spheroids as a way to construct dermal tissue, not anti-melanogenic effects. Searches for anti-melanogenic effects, melanin, and ULA-derived spheroids found no passage reporting the claimed comparison between the two models. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Sheikholeslam M, Wright MEE, Jeschke MG, et al. Biomaterials for skin substitutes. Adv Healthc Mater. 2019;176(5):139-148. doi: 10.1002/adhm.201700897.Biomaterials. · DOI
  2. Long W, Min J, Wen y, et al. Vat polymerization-based bioprinting -process, materials, applications and regulatory challenges. Biofabrication. 2020;12:022001. doi: 10.1088/1758. · DOI
  3. Neves cR, Gibbs S. Progress on reconstructed human skin models for allergy research and identifying contact sensitizers, vol. 37, no. october. Springer International Publishing; 2012. doi: 10.1007/82. · DOI
  4. Zareba G, cernichiari E, Hojo R, et al. Thimerosal distribution and metabolism in neonatal mice. J Appl Toxicol. 2007;27(5):511-518. doi: 10.1002/jat. · DOI
  5. UE. commission regulation (EU) 2016/1688 of 20 September 2016 amending Annex VII to Regulation (Ec) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the council on the Registration. off J Eur Union. 2016;1688(440):30-32.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Masri, S., Fauzi, M. B., Rajab, N. F., Lee, W.-H., Zainal Abidin, D. A., & Siew, E. L.
Affiliations
  • National University of Malaysia (MY)
  • University of Kuala Lumpur (MY)
  • ASASIpintar Unit, Pusat PERMATA@Pintar Negara, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia
Corresponding author
Siew, Ee Ling
Venue
Artificial Cells, Nanomedicine, and Biotechnology
Published
2024-10-03
Volume
52
Issue
1
Pages
476-499
ISSN
  • 2169-1401 (ISSN-L)
  • 2169-141X
OpenAlex
W4403107011
Cited by
15
References
150
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 7
FWCI
1.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Artificial Cells Nanomedicine and Biotechnology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Fundamental Research Grant Scheme
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Animal testing and alternatives
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › 3D Printing in Biomedical Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Contact Dermatitis and Allergies
Keywords
3D skin model, in vitro skin model, alternatives to animal testing, skin toxicity testing, skin toxicity, risk assessment, 2D cell culture limitations
MeSH terms
Cell Culture Techniques, Three Dimensional, Animals, Humans, Models, Biological, Skin, Toxicity Tests, Tissue Culture Techniques

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