The Short Time Exposure (STE) test is a simple and easy-to-perform in vitro eye irritation test, that uses the viability of SIRC cells (a rabbit corneal cell line) treated for five minutes as the endpoint. In this study, our goal was to define the applicability domain of the STE test, based on the results obtained with a set of 113 substances. To achieve this goal, chemicals were selected to represent both different chemical classes and different chemical properties, as well as to cover, in a balanced manner, the categories of eye irritation potential according to the Globally Harmonised System (GHS). Accuracy analysis indicated that the rates of false negatives for organic/inorganic salts (75.0%), hydrocarbons (33.3%) and alcohols (23.5%) were high. Many of the false negative results were for solid substances. It is noteworthy that no surfactant resulted in a false negative result in the STE test. Further examination of the physical property data and performance showed a significant improvement in the predictive accuracy, when substances with vapour pressures over 6kPa were excluded from the analyses. Our results indicate that several substances — i.e. certain solids such as salts, alcohols, hydrocarbons, and volatile substances with a vapour pressure over 6kPa — do not fall within the applicability domain of the STE test. Overall, we are encouraged by the performance and improved accuracy of the STE test.
DraizeJ.H., WoodardG., & CalveryH.O. (1944). Methods for the study of irritation and toxicity of substances applied topically to the skin and mucous membranes. Journal of Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics82, 377–390.
2.
BallsM., BothamP.A., BrunersL.H., & SpielmannH. (1995). The EC/HO international validation study on alternatives to the Draize eye irritation test. Toxicology in Vitro9, 871–929.
3.
EskesC., BessouS., BrunerL., CurrenR., HarbellJ., JonesP., KreilingR., LiebschM., McNameeP., PapeW., PrinsenM.K., SeidleT., VanparysP., WorthA., & ZuangV. (2005). 3.3. Eye Irritation. In Alternative Non-animal Methods for Cosmetics Testing: Current Status and Future Prospects (ed. C. Eskes & V. Zuang). ATLA33, Suppl. 1, 47–81.
4.
European Commission (2003). 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. Official Journal of the European UnionL66, 11.03. 2003, 26–35.
5.
OECD (2009). OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals. No. 437. Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability Test Method for Identifying Ocular Corrosives and Severe Irritants, 18 pp. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Available at: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/book/9789264076303-en (Accessed 09. 05.13).
6.
OECD (2009). OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals. No. 438. Isolated Chicken Eye Test Method for Identifying Ocular Corrosives and Severe Irritants, 18 pp. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Available at: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/book/9789264076310-en (Accessed 09.05.13).
7.
OECD (2012). OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals. No. 460. Fluorescein Leakage Test Method for Identifying Ocular Corrosives and Severe Irritants, 16 pp. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Available at: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/book/9789264185401-en (Accessed 09.05.13).
8.
TakahashiY., KoikeM., HondaH., ItoY., SakaguchiH., SuzukiH., & NishiyamaN. (2008). Development of the short time exposure (STE) test: An in vitro eye irritation test using SIRC cells. Toxicology in Vitro22, 760–770.
9.
TakahashiY., HayashiT., WatanabeS., HayashiK., KoikeM., AisawaN., EbataS., SakaguchiH., NakamuraT., KuwaharaH., & NishiyamaN. (2009). Inter-laboratory study of short time exposure (STE) test for predicting eye irritation potential of substances and correspondence to globally harmonized system (GHS) classification. Journal of Toxicological Sciences34, 611–626.
10.
SakaguchiH., OtaN., OmoriT., KuwaharaH., SozuT., TakagiY., TakahashiY., TanigawaK., NakanishiM., NakamuraT., MorimotoT., WakuriS., OkamotoY., SakaguchiM., HayashiT., HanjiT., & WatanabeS. (2011). Validation study of the Short Time Exposure (STE) test to assess the eye irritation potential of substances. Toxicology in Vitro25, 796–809.
11.
TakahashiY., HayashiK., AboT., KoikeM., SakaguchiH., & NishiyamaN. (2011). The Short Time Exposure (STE) test for predicting eye irritation potential: Intra-laboratory reproducibility and correspondence to globally harmonized system (GHS) and EU eye irritation classification for 109 substances. Toxicology in Vitro25, 1425–1434.
12.
TakahashiY., HayashiT., KoikeM., SakaguchiH., KuwaharaH., & NishiyamaN. (2010). An interlaboratory study of the Short Time Exposure (STE) test using SIRC cells for predicting eye irritation potential. Cutaneous & Ocular Toxicology29, 77–90.
13.
HayashiK., MoriT., AboT., KoikeM., TakahashiY., SakaguchiH., & NishiyamaN. (2012). A tiered approach combining the Short Time Exposure (STE) test and the bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) assay for predicting eye irritation potential of substances. Journal of Toxicological Sciences37, 269–280.
14.
HayashiK., MoriT., AboT., OoshimaK., HayashiT., KomanoT., TakahashiY., SakaguchiH., TakatsuA., & NishiyamaN. (2012). Two-stage bottom-up tiered approach combining several alternatives for identification of eye irritation potential of chemicals including insoluble or volatile substances. Toxicology in Vitro26, 1199–1208.
15.
UN (2003). Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Substances (GHS), 443 pp. New York, NY, USA & Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations.
16.
ECETOC (1998). Technical Report No. 48 (Second Edition). Eye Irritation: Reference Substances Data Bank, 236 pp. Brussels, Belgium: European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Substances.
17.
GautheronP., DukicM., AlixD., & SinaJ.F. (1992). Bovine corneal opacity and permeability test: An in vitro assay of ocular irritancy. Fundamental & Applied Toxicology18, 442–449.
18.
ICCVAM–NICEATM (2006). Background Review Document. Current Status of In Vitro Test Methods for Identifying Ocular Corrosives and Severe Irritants: Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability Test Method. NIH Publication No. 06-4512, 206 pp. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Available at: http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/docs/ocutox_docs/ocubrd/bcop/bcopbrd.pdf (Accessed 10.05.13).
19.
ICCVAM–NICEATM (2006). Background Review Document. Current Status of In Vitro Test Methods for Identifying Ocular Corrosives and Severe Irritants: Hen's Egg Test–Chorioallantoic Membrane Test Method. NIH Publication No. 06-4515, 248 pp. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Available at: http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/docs/ocutox_docs/ocubrd/hetcam/hetcambrd.pdf (Accessed 10.05.13).
20.
ICCVAM–NICEATM (2006). ICCVAM Test Method Evaluation Report — In Vitro Ocular Toxicity Test Methods for Identifying Severe Irritants and Corrosives. NIH Publication No. 07-4517, 484 pp. Research Triangle Park, NC, USA: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. Available at: http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/docs/ocutox_docs/OTeval/OTevalrpt.pdf (Accessed 10.05.13).
21.
CooperK.R., BrownR.S., & ChangP.W. (1982). Accuracy of blood cytological screening techniques for the diagnosis of a possible hematopoietic neoplasm in the bivalve mollusc, Mya arenaria.Journal of Invertebrate Pathology39, 281–289.
22.
HaginoS., OkazakiY., & ItagakiH. (2008). An in vitro tier evaluation for the identification of cosmetic ingredients which are not ocular irritants. ATLA36, 641–652.
23.
McNameeP., HibatallahJ., Costabel-FarkasM., GoebelC., ArakiD., DufourE., HewittN.J., JonesP., KirstA., Le VarletB., MacfarlaneM., Marrec-FairleyM., RowlandJ., SchellaufF., & ScheelJ. (2009). A tired approach to the use of alternative to animal testing for the safety assessment of cosmetics: Eye irritation. Regulatory Toxicology & Pharmacology54, 197–209.
24.
ScottL., EskesC., HoffmannS., AdriaensE., AlepeeN., BufoM., ClothierR., FacchiniD., FallerC., GuestR., HarbellJ., HartungT., KampH., Le VarletB., MeloniM., McNameeP., OsborneR., PapeW., PfannenbeckerU., PrinsenM., SeamanC., SpielmanH., StokesW., TroubaK., Van den BergheC., Van GoethemF., VassalloM., VinardellP., & ZuangV. (2010). A proposed eye irritation testing strategy to reduce and replace in vivo studies using Bottom-Up and Top-Down approaches. Toxicology in Vitro24, 1–9.
25.
KolleS.N., KandárováH., WareingB., van RavenzwaayB., & LandsiedelR. (2011). In-house validation of the EpiOcular™ eye irritation test and its combination with the bovine corneal opacity and permeability test for the assessment of ocular irritation. ATLA39, 365–387.
26.
ECVAM (2008). Background Review Document of Existing Methods for Eye Irritation Testing: Silicon Microphysiometer and Cytosensor Microphysiometer, 212 pp. Ispra, Italy: Institute for Health and Consumer Protection. Available at: http://ecvam.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ft_doc/ECVAM-CMBRD-Aug08cleaned.pdf (Accessed 13.08.12).
