Cited by 64Animal testing and alternativesContact Dermatitis and AllergiesImmunotoxicology and immune responses

A state-of-the-art review on the alternatives to animal testing for the safety assessment of cosmetics

Open access
Silva, Rita José, Tamburic, Slobodanka·2022·Cosmetics

Abstract

Almost a decade after the stipulated deadline in the 7th amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive, which bans the marketing of animal-tested cosmetics in the EU from 2013, animal experimentation for cosmetic-related purposes remains a topic of animated debate. Cosmetic industry continues to be scrutinised for the practice, despite its leading role in funding and adopting innovation in this field. This paper aims to provide a state-of-the-art review of the field on alternative testing methods, also known as New Approach Methodologies (NAMs), with the focus on assessing the safety of cosmetic ingredients and products. It starts with innovation drivers and global regulatory responses, followed by an extensive, endpoint-specific overview of accepted/prospective NAMs. The overview covers main developments in acute toxicity, skin corrosion/irritation, serious eye damage/irritation, skin sensitisation, repeated dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity/endocrine disruption, mutagenicity/genotoxicity, carcinogenicity, photo-induced toxicity, and toxicokinetics. Specific attention was paid to the emerging in silico methodology. This paper also provides a brief overview of the studies on public perception of animal testing in cosmetics. It concludes with a view that educating consumers and inviting them to take part in advocacy could be an effective tool to achieve policy changes, regulatory acceptance, and investment in innovation.

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 · 10.3390/cosmetics9050090

Cites

72 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 18 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?

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: 19

  1. Singer, P. Animal Liberation; New York Review: New York, NY, USA, 1975.
  2. OECD Test No. 425: Acute Oral Toxicity: Up-and-Down Procedure. In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2008. Available online: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/environment/test-no-425-acute-oral-toxicity- up-and-down-procedure_9789264071049-en (accessed on 19 April 2022). [CrossRef] · DOI
  3. Allen, D.G., Waters, M.D., Eds.; The Royal Society of Chemistry: London, UK, 2014; pp. 1-43.
  4. EC Council Directive 86/609/EEC of 24 November 1986 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States regarding the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes. Off. J. Eur. Union L 1986, 358, 1-28.
  5. EC Directive 2003/15/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 February 2003 amending Council Directive 76/768/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products (Text with EEA relevance). Off. J. Eur. Union L 2003, 66, 26-35.
  6. EC Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on cosmetic products (Text with EEA relevance). Off. J. Eur. Union L 2009, 342, 59.
  7. OECD Test No. 430: In Vitro Skin Corrosion: Transcutaneous Electrical Resistance Test Method (TER). In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2015. [CrossRef] · DOI
  8. OECD Test No. 435: In Vitro Membrane Barrier Test Method for Skin Corrosion. In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2015. [CrossRef] · DOI
  9. OECD Test No. 498: In vitro Phototoxicity-Reconstructed Human Epidermis Phototoxicity test method. In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2021. [CrossRef] · DOI
  10. OECD Test No. 495: Ros (Reactive Oxygen Species) Assay for Photoreactivity. In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2019. [CrossRef] · DOI
  11. OECD Test No. 455: Performance-Based Test Guideline for Stably Transfected Transactivation In Vitro Assays to Detect Estrogen Receptor Agonists and Antagonists. In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2021. [CrossRef] · DOI
  12. OECD Test No. 458: Stably Transfected Human Androgen Receptor Transcriptional Activation Assay for Detection of Androgenic Agonist and Antagonist Activity of Chemicals. In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2020. [CrossRef] · DOI
  13. OECD Test No. 457: BG1Luc Estrogen Receptor Transactivation Test Method for Identifying Estrogen Receptor Agonists and Antagonists. In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2012. [CrossRef] · DOI
  14. OECD Test No. 460: Fluorescein Leakage Test Method for Identifying Ocular Corrosives and Severe Irritants. In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2017. [CrossRef] · DOI
  15. OECD Test No. 496: In vitro Macromolecular Test Method for Identifying Chemicals Inducing Serious Eye Damage and Chemicals Not Requiring Classification for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage. In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2019. [CrossRef] · DOI
  16. OECD Guideline No. 497: Defined Approaches on Skin Sensitisation. In OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2021. [CrossRef] · DOI
  17. Klaassen, C.D., Ed.; McGraw-Hill Education: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 25-64.
  18. OECD Guidance Document on Considerations for Waiving or Bridging of Mammalian Acute Toxicity Tests; OECD Series on Testing and Assessment, No. 237; OECD Publishing: Paris, France, 2017. [CrossRef] · DOI
  19. Gocht, T.; Schwarz, M. Foreword. In SEURAT-1 Report: Towards the Replacement of In Vivo Repeated Dose Systemic Toxicity Testing; Gocht, T., Schwarz, M., Eds.; Coach Consortium: Evry, France, 2016; Volume 6, p. 3. 108.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Silva, R. J., & Tamburic, S.
Affiliations
  • University of the Arts London (GB)
  • Cosmetic Science Research Group, London College of Fashion, University of the Arts London, London W1G 0BJ, UK
Venue
Cosmetics
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-08-29
Volume
9
Issue
5
Pages
90
ISSN
2079-9284 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4293526622
Cited by
63
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 12
FWCI
14.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cosmetics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • University of the Arts London Research Online (University of the Arts London) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
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
alternatives to animal testing, new approach methodologies, cosmetic ingredients, acute toxicity, skin sensitization, repeated-dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity, endocrine disruption, genotoxicity, mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, toxicokinetics, in silico analysis, consumer education, cosmetic regulation

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