期刊文献+

受精鸡卵尿囊绒膜试验作为眼刺激试验替代方法的研究 被引量:5

Study on using the hen's egg test-chorioallantoic membrane as an alternative method of draize eye irritation test
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的 探讨受精鸡卵尿囊绒膜试验 (HET CAM)是否可作为体内眼刺激试验 (Draizetest)的一种替代方法。方法 用HET CAM的两种方法 ,即显微镜观察 (HET CAMscore)和台盼蓝染色法 (CAM TB)对 14种化学物的眼刺激性进行检测 ,并与Draizetest两种评分标准 ,即最大平均值 (MAS)和 2 4h作用值 (S2 4 )结果进行相关性比较。结果 HET CAMscore与MAS和S2 4的相关系数分别是 0 84 7和 0 779,CAM TB与MAS和S2 4分别是 0 86 2和 0 831。结论 HET CAM可用于替代Draizetest。 Objective To establish and study the hen's egg test-chorioallantoic membrane (HET-CAM) as an alternative method of Draize eye irritation test (Draize test). Methods 14 cosmetic ingredients were tested by the Hen's egg test-chorioallantoic membrane score (HET-CAM score) and the chorioallantoic membrane-trypan blue staining (CAM-TB) methods. Results Showed that compared with two kinds of scores in Draize test, i.e. Maximum average Draize total score (MAS) and score of 24h after application (S24), the correlation coefficient between HET-CAM score and MAS or S24 was 0.847 or 0.779, while that between CAM-TB and MAS or S24 was 0.862 or 0.831 respectively. The results also showed that CAM-TB had a higher correlation with Draize test than HET-CAM score, partly because it is objective and quantitative. Also, the results showed that HET-CAM score had the greatest correlation with conjunctivae score of the three components, and so did the CAM-TB with corneal score. Conclusion It is suggested that the two types of HET-CAM can be used in a combined manner as an effective alternative method to Draize test.
出处 《卫生研究》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2004年第3期279-283,共5页 Journal of Hygiene Research
基金 科技部社会公益研究专项资金资助项目 (No .2 0 0 0 86)
关键词 眼刺激试验 替代方法 受精鸡卵尿囊绒膜试验 台盼蓝染色法 eye irritation, alternative assay, HET-CAM, trypan blue staining
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

  • 1Kasttner W. Irritancy potential of cosmetic ingredients. J Soc Cosmet Chem, 1977, 28(8): 741-754
  • 2Patrick E, Maibach HI. Comparison of the time course, dose response,and mediators of chemically induced skin irritation in three species. In:Frosch PJ, et al., eds. Current Topics in Contact Dermatitis. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1989: 399-403
  • 3Balls M, Riddell R J, Worden AN. Animal and alternatives in Toxicity Testing. London: Academic Press, 1983,84-93
  • 4Ohno Y, Kaneko T, Inoue T, et al. Interlaboratory validation of the in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients (1) Overview of the validation study and Draize scores for the evaluation of the tests. Toxicol In Vitro, 1999, 13 (1): 73-98
  • 5Lawrence RS, Ackroyd DM, Williams DL, et al. The chorioallantoic membrane in the prediction of eye irritation potential. Toxicol In Vitro,1990,4(2): 321-323
  • 6Hagino S, Itagaki H, Kato S. Further evaluation of the quantitative chorioallantoic membrane test using trypan blue stain to predict the eye irritancy of chemicals. Toxicol In Vitro, 1993,7(1): 35-39
  • 7Luepke NP. Hen' s egg chorioallantoic membrane test for irritation potential. Food Chem Toxicol, 1985, 23(2): 287-291
  • 8Hagino S, Itagaki H, Kato S, et al. Quantitative evaluation to predict the eye irritancy of chemicals: Modification of chorioallantoic membrane test by using trypan blue. Toxicol In Vitro, 1991,5(2): 301-304
  • 9Ohno Y, Kaneko T, Inoue T, et al. Interlaboratory validation of the in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients ( 1 ) Overview of the validation study and Draize scores for the evaluation of the tests. Toxicol In Vitro,1999, 13(1): 73-98
  • 10Hagino S, Kinoshita S, Tani N, et al. Interlaboratory validation of in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients. (2) Chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) test. Toxicol Vitro, 1999,13( 1), 99-113

二级参考文献8

  • 1[1]Kasttner W. Irritancy potentialof cosmetic ingredients [J]. J SocCosmet Chem, 1977, 28: 741-754.
  • 2[2]Patrick E, Maibach HI. Comparison of the time course, dose response, and mediators of chemically induced skin irritation in three species. In: Frosch PJ, et al. , eds. Current Topics in Contact Dermatitis. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1989: 399-403.
  • 3[3]Balls M, Riddell RJ, Worden AN. Animal and alternatives in Toxicity Testing. London: Academic Press, 1983. Balls M,Riddell R J, Worden A N, Animal and alternatives in Toxicity Testing. London: Academic Press, 1983.
  • 4[4]Hayashi T, Itagaki H, Fukuda T, et al. Multivariate factorialanalysis of data obtained in seven in vitro test systems for predicting eye irritancy. Toxicology in vitro. 1994 ; 8: 215-220.
  • 5[5]Balls M, et al. Report and recommendation of the CAAT/ERGATT workshop on the validation of toxicity test procedures.ATLA 1990; 18:318-338
  • 6[6]Okamoto Y, Ohkoshi K, Itagaki H, et al. Interlaboratory validation of the in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients.(3)Evaluation of the Haemolysis Test. Toxicology in vitro.1999; 13: 115-124.
  • 7[7]Ohno Y, Kaneko T, Inoue T, Morikawa Y, et al. Interlaboratory validation of the in vitro eye irritation tests for cosmetic ingredients (1) Overview of the validation study and Draize scores for the evaluation of the tests. Toxicology in vitro. 1999; 13:73-98.
  • 8[8]Bagley D, Booman KA, Bruner I, et al. The SDA alternatives program phase Ⅰ: comparison of in vitro data with animal eye irritation data on solvents, surfactants, oxidizing agents, and prototype cleaning products. Journal of Toxicology Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology, 1994, 13: 127-155.

共引文献24

同被引文献68

引证文献5

二级引证文献15

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部