COLIPA (the European Federation of the Cosmetics Industry) represents 24 international companies and 2000 small and medium-sized enterprises. Together with ECVAM, COLIPA has been involved in the development and validation of alternative methods since the beginning of the validation efforts. The work of the Steering Committee on Alternatives to Animal Testing (SCAAT) is based on collaboration between companies, but also with academia, trade associations, the Scientific Committee on Cosmetics and Non-Food Products (SCCNFP), European Commission Directorates General, and ECVAM. Some success has been achieved, but some validation efforts have failed. One lesson is that the search for alternatives requires a lot of humility.
LisanskyS., MacmillanR., & DupuisJ. eds (1996). Alternatives to Animal Testing. Proceedings of an International Scientific Conference Organised by the European Cosmetics Industry, Brussels, Belgium 1995, 377 pp. Newbury, UK: CPL Press.
2.
COLIPA (1997). Guidelines for the Safety Assessment of Cosmetic Products.Brussels, Belgium: COLIPA.
3.
ClarkD., LisanskyS., & MacmillanR. eds (1999). Alternatives to Animal Testing II. Proceedings of the Second International Scientific Conference Organised by the European Cosmetics Industry, Brussels, Belgium, 294 pp. Newbury, UK: CPL Press.
4.
BagleyD.M., BrunerL.H., de SilvaO., CottinM., O'BrienK.A.F., UttleyM., & WalkerA.P. (1992). An evaluation of five potential alternatives in vitro to the rabbit eye irritation test in vivo.Toxicology in Vitro6, 275–284.
5.
CurrenR.D., SoutheeJ.A., SpielmannH., LiebschM., FentemJ.H., & BallsM. (1995). The role of prevalidation in the development, validation and acceptance of alternatives methods. ATLA23, 211–217.
6.
BrantomP.G., BrunerL.H., ChamberlainM., de SilvaO., DupuisJ., EarlL.K., LovellD.P., PapeW.J.W., UttleyM., BagleyD.M., BakerF.W., BracherM., CourtellemontP., DeclercqL., FreemanS., SteilingW., WalkerA.P., CarrG.J., DamiM., ThomasG., HarbellJ., JonesP.A., PfannenbeckerU., SoutheeJ.A., TchengM., ArgembeauxH., CasteliD., ClothierR., EsdaileD.J., ItagakiH., JunkK., KasaiY., KojimaH., KristenU., LarnicolM., LewisR.W., MarenusK., MorenoO., PetersonA., RasmussenE.S., RoblesC., & SternM. (1997). A summary report of the COLIPA international validation study on alternatives to the Draize rabbit eye irritation test. Toxicology in Vitro11, 141–179.
7.
BrunerL.H., de SilvaO., EarlL.K., PapeW., & SpielmannH. (1998). Report on the COLIPA workshop on mechanisms of eye irritation. ATLA26, 811–820.
8.
BallsM., BergN., BrunerL.H., CurrenR.D., de SilvaO., EarlL.K., EsdaileD.J., FentemJ.H., LiebschM., OhnoY., PrinsenM.K., SpielmannH., & WorthA.P. (1999). The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 34. ATLA27, 53–77.
9.
SpielmannH., BallsM., BrandM., DöringB., HolzhütterH-G., KalweitS., KlecakG., LépannetierH., LiebschM., LovellW.W., MaurerT., MoldenhauerF., MooreL., PapeW.J.W., PfannenbeckerU., PotthastJ., de SilvaO., SteilingW., & WillshawA. (1994). EC/COLIPA project on in vitro phototoxicity testing: first results obtained with the Balb/c 3T3 cell phototoxicity assay. Toxicology in Vitro8, 793–796.
10.
SpielmannH., LovellW.W., HölzleE., JohnsonB. E., MaurerJ., MirandaM., PapeW.J.W., SaporaO., & SladowskiD. (1994). In vitro phototoxicity testing. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 2. ATLA22, 314–348.
11.
SpielmannH., BallsM., DupuisJ., PapeW.J.W., PechovitchG., de SilvaO., HolzhütterH.G., ClothierR., DesolleP., GerberickG.F., LiebschM., LovellW.W., MaurerT., PfannenbeckerU., PotthastJ.M., CsatoM., SladowskiD., SteilingW., & BrantomP. (1998). The international EU/COLIPA in vitro phototoxicity validation study: results of Phase II (blind trial); part I: the 3T3 NRU phototoxicity test. Toxicology in Vitro12, 305–327.
12.
SCCNFP (1998). Opinion on In Vitro Methods to Assess Phototoxicity in the Safety Evaluation of Cosmetic Ingredients or Mixtures of Ingredients. SCCNFP/0069/98. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission, Health & Consumer Protection Directorate General.
13.
de SilvaO., & LoprienoN. (2000). Collaboration as the way to the acceptance of alternative methods. In Progress in the Reduction, Refinement and Replacement of Animal Experimentation (ed BallsM., van ZellerA-M., & HalderM.E.), pp. 1665–1672. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
14.
FentemJ.H., ArcherG.F.B., BallsM., BothamP.A., CurrenR.D., EarlL.K., EsdaileD.J., HolzhütterH.G., & LiebschM. (1998). The ECVAM international validation study on in vitro tests for skin corrosivity. II. Results and evaluation by the Management Team. Toxicology in Vitro12, 483–524.
15.
SCCNFP (1998). Opinion on In Vitro Methods to Assess Skin Corrosivity in the Safety Evaluation of Cosmetic Ingredients or Mixtures of Ingredients. SCCNFP/0070/98. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission, Health & Consumer Protection Directorate General.
16.
HowesD., GuyR., HadgraftJ., HeylingsJ., HoeckU., KemperF., MaibachH., MartyJ-P., MerkH., ParraJ., RekkasD., RondelliI., SchaeferH., TäuberU., & VerbieseN. (1996). Methods for assessing percutaneous absorption. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 13. ATLA24, 81–106.
17.
COLIPA (1995). Cosmetic Ingredients: Guidelines for Percutaneous Absorption/Penetration.20 pp. Brussels, Belgium: COLIPA.
18.
DiembeckW., BeckH., Benech-FiefferF., CourtellemontP., DupuisJ., LovellW., PayeM., SpenglerJ., & SteilingW. (1999). Test Guidelines for in vitro assessment of cosmetic ingredients. Food and Chemical Toxicology37, 191–205.
19.
SCCNFP (1999). Opinion on In Vitro Methods to Assess Percutaneous Absorption of Cosmetic Ingredients. SCCNFP/0088/98. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission, Health & Consumer Protection Directorate General.
20.
RogiersV., BallsM., BasketterD.A., BerardescaE., EdwardsC., ElsnerP., EnnenJ., LévêqueJ.L., LodenM., MassonP., ParraP., PayeM., PierardG., RodriguesL., SchaeferH., SalterD., & ZuangV. (1999). The potential use of non-invasive methods in safety assessment of cosmetics. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 38. ATLA27, 515–537.
21.
Van de SandtH., RoguetR., CohenC., EsdaileD., PonecM., CorsiniE., BarkerC., FusenigN., LiebschM., BenfordD., de Brugerolle de FraissinettA., & FartaschM. (1999). The use of human keratinocytes and human skin models for predicting skin irritation. ATLA27, 723–743.
22.
FentemJ.H., BriggsD., ChesnéC., ElliottG.R., HarbellJ.W., KeylingJ.R., PortesP., RoguetR., Van de SandtH., & BothamP. (2001). A prevalidation study on in vitro tests for acute skin irritation: results and evaluation by the Management Team. Toxicology in Vitro15, 57–93.
23.
ZuangV., BallsM., BothamP., CoquetteA., CorsiniE., CurrenR.D., ElliottG.R., FentemJ.H., HeylingsJ.R., LiebschM., MedinaJ., RoguetR., Van de SandtH., WiemannC., & WorthA.P. (2002). Follow up to the ECVAM prevalidation study on in vitro tests for acute skin irritation. ECVAM Skin Irritation Task Force Report 2. ATLA30, 109–129.
24.
de SilvaO., BasketterD.A., BarrattM.D., CorsiniE., CroninM.T.D., DasP.K., DegwertJ., EnkA., GarrigueJ.L., HauserC., KimberI., LepoittevinJ.P., PeguetJ., & PonecM. (1996). Alternative methods for skin sensitisation testing. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 19. ATLA24, 683–705.
25.
PichowskiJ.S., CumberbatchM., DearmanR.J., BasketterD.A., & KimberI. (2000). Investigation of induced changes in Interleukin 1β mRNA expression by cultured human dentritic cells as an in vitro approach to skin sensitisation testing. Toxicology in Vitro14, 351–360.
26.
SmithC., & HotchkissS. (2001). Allergic Contact Dermatitis: Chemical and Metabolic Mechanisms, 344 pp. London, UK: Taylor and Francis.
27.
BasketterD., GerberickF., & KimberI. (2000). Validation in practice — the reality for skin sensitisation. In Progress in the Reduction, Refinement and Replacement of Animal Experimentation (ed. BallsM., van ZellerA-M., & HalderM.E.), pp. 395–399. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
28.
BallsM., De KlerckW., BakerF., Van BeckM., BouillonC., BrunerL., CarstensenJ., ChamberlainM., CottinM., DupuisJ., FaureU., FentemJ., FisherJ., GalliC., KemperF., KnaapA., LangleyG., LoprienoG., LoprienoN., PapeW., PechovitchG., SpielmannH., UngarK., WhiteI., & ZuangV. (1995). Development and validation of non-animal tests and testing strategies: the identification of a coordinated response to the challenge and the opportunity to the Cosmetics Directive (76/768/EEC). The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 7. ATLA23, 398–409.
29.
RoussetF., VerdaD., ArrighiJ.F., Péguet-NavarroJ., & CottinM. (2000). A strategy for the prediction of skin sensitisation: an alternative to animal testing. In Progress in the Reduction, Refinement and Replacement of Animal Experimentation (ed. BallsM., van ZellerA-M., & HalderM.E.), pp. 635–642. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
