European Partnership For Alternative Approaches Research Articles

New supporting data to guide the use of evident toxicity in acute oral toxicity studies (OECD TG 420)

Currently there are three test guidelines (TG) for acute oral toxicity studies of substances or mixtures from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). TG 423 and TG 425 use lethality as an endpoint, while TG 420 replaces death with ‘evident toxicity’, defined as clear signs that exposure to a higher dose would result in death. However, the perceived subjectivity of ‘evident toxicity’ may be preventing wider use of TG 420. To address this, the UK National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs) and the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) collaborated to provide recommendations on the recognition of ‘evident toxicity’. Historical data from acute oral toxicity studies were analysed for clinical signs at the lower dose that could have predicted death at the higher dose. Several signs including ataxia, laboured respiration, and eyes partially closed, alone or in combination, are highly predictive. Others such as lethargy, decreased respiration, and loose faeces have lower but still appreciable positive predictive value (PPV). The data has been used to develop recommendations to promote use of TG 420 and thus reduce the suffering and numbers of animals used in acute oral toxicity studies.

The future of pyrogenicity testing: Phasing out the rabbit pyrogen test. A meeting report

The rabbit pyrogen test (RPT) was the benchmark for pyrogenicity testing, but scientific advancements have provided innovative and humane methods, such as the in vitro monocyte-activation test (MAT). However, transitioning from the RPT to the MAT has been challenging. The European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines & HealthCare, the Council of Europe, and the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing jointly hosted an international conference entitled "The future of pyrogenicity testing: phasing out the rabbit pyrogen test". The conference aimed to show how the European Pharmacopoeia intends to remove the RPT from its texts by 2026, facilitate the use of MAT, and identify gaps in the suppression of RPT. The events contributed to a better understanding of the barriers to RPT replacement and acceptance of in vitro alternatives. Participants comprised stakeholders from Asia, Europe, and North America, including vaccine developers, contract laboratories, and regulators. Participants shared their replacement strategies and experiences with MAT implementation. They emphasised the need for continued cooperation between stakeholders and stressed the importance of international harmonisation of regulatory requirements to help accelerate MAT acceptance outside Europe. Despite the challenges, the willingness to eliminate the unnecessary use of RPT was common across all participants.

Exposure considerations in human safety assessment: Report from an EPAA Partners’ Forum

Understanding and estimating the exposure to a substance is one of the fundamental requirements for safe manufacture and use. Many approaches are taken to determine exposure to substances, mainly driven by potential use and regulatory need. There are many opportunities to improve and optimise the use of exposure information for chemical safety. The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) therefore convened a Partners’ Forum (PF) to explore exposure considerations in human safety assessment of industrial products to agree key conclusions for the regulatory acceptance of exposure assessment approaches and priority areas for further research investment. The PF recognised the widescale use of exposure information across industrial sectors with the possibilities of creating synergies between different sectors. Further, the PF acknowledged that the EPAA could make a significant contribution to promote the use of exposure data in human safety assessment, with an aim to address specific regulatory needs. To achieve this, research needs, as well as synergies and areas for potential collaboration across sectors, were identified.

Use of New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) in regulatory decisions for chemical safety: Report from an EPAA Deep Dive Workshop

New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) are considered to include any in vitro, in silico or chemistry-based method, as well as the strategies to implement them, that may provide information that could inform chemical safety assessment. Current chemical legislation in the European Union is limited in its acceptance of the widespread use of NAMs. The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) therefore convened a ‘Deep Dive Workshop’ to explore the use of NAMs in chemical safety assessment, the aim of which was to support regulatory decisions, whilst intending to protect human health. The workshop recognised that NAMs are currently used in many industrial sectors, with some considered as fit for regulatory purpose. Moreover, the workshop identified key discussion points that can be addressed to increase the use and regulatory acceptance of NAMs. These are based on the changes needed in frameworks for regulatory requirements and the essential needs in education, training and greater stakeholder engagement as well the gaps in the scientific basis of NAMs.

P21-11 Re-evaluating the need for chronic toxicity studies with therapeutic monoclonal antibodies, using a weight of evidence approach

Different government agencies operating in the European Union regulate different types of chemical products but all require testing for carcinogenicity to support applications for product marketing and commercialisation. A conference was held in Brussels in 2013 where representatives of the pharmaceutical, animal health, chemical and plant protection industries, together with representatives of regulatory agencies, universities and other stakeholders, met under the auspices of The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) to discuss the varying requirements for carcinogenicity testing, and how these studies might be refined to improve hazard evaluation and risk assessment while implementing principles of the 3Rs (replacement, refinement and reduction in animal studies). While there are some similarities, the regulatory approaches in pharmaceutical, animal health, chemical and plant protection sectors have varying degrees of flexibility in requirements for carcinogenicity testing, to an extent reflecting concerns over the magnitude and duration of human exposure, either directly as in therapeutic exposure to pharmaceuticals, or indirectly through the ingestion of residues of veterinary drugs or plant protection chemicals. The article discusses these differences and other considerations for modified carcinogenicity testing paradigms on the basis of scientific and 3Rs approaches.

New ideas for non-animal approaches to predict repeated-dose systemic toxicity: Report from an EPAA Blue Sky Workshop

The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) convened a ‘Blue Sky Workshop’ on new ideas for non-animal approaches to predict repeated-dose systemic toxicity. The aim of the Workshop was to formulate strategic ideas to improve and increase the applicability, implementation and acceptance of modern non-animal methods to determine systemic toxicity. The Workshop concluded that good progress is being made to assess repeated dose toxicity without animals taking advantage of existing knowledge in toxicology, thresholds of toxicological concern, adverse outcome pathways and read-across workflows. These approaches can be supported by New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) utilising modern molecular technologies and computational methods. Recommendations from the Workshop were based around the needs for better chemical safety assessment: how to strengthen the evidence base for decision making; to develop, standardise and harmonise NAMs for human toxicity; and the improvement in the applicability and acceptance of novel techniques. “Disruptive thinking” is required to reconsider chemical legislation, validation of NAMs and the opportunities to move away from reliance on animal tests. Case study practices and data sharing, ensuring reproducibility of NAMs, were viewed as crucial to the improvement of non-animal test approaches for systemic toxicity.

Finding synergies for the 3Rs – Repeated Dose Toxicity testing: Report from an EPAA Partners' Forum

The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) convened a Partners' Forum on repeated dose toxicity (RDT) testing to identify synergies between industrial sectors and stakeholders along with opportunities to progress these in existing research frameworks. Although RTD testing is not performed across all industrial sectors, the OECD accepted tests can provide a rich source of information and play a pivotal role for safety decisions relating to the use of chemicals. Currently there are no validated alternatives to repeated dose testing and a direct one-to-one replacement is not appropriate. However, there are many projects and initiatives at the international level which aim to implement various aspects of replacement, reduction and refinement (the 3Rs) in RDT testing. Improved definition of use, through better problem formulation, aligned to harmonisation of regulations is a key area, as is the more rapid implementation of alternatives into the legislative framework. Existing test designs can be optimised to reduce animal use and increase information content. Greater use of exposure-led decisions and improvements in dose selection will be beneficial. In addition, EPAA facilitates sharing of case studies demonstrating the use of Next Generation Risk Assessment applying various New Approach Methodologies to assess RDT.

Finding synergies for 3Rs – Toxicokinetics and read-across: Report from an EPAA partners' Forum

The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) convened a Partners' Forum Toxicokinetics and Read-Across to provide an overview on research activities to develop in vitro toxicokinetics methods and physiologically-based kinetic (PBK) models and to find synergies to enhance use of toxicokinetic data to strengthen read-across. Currently, lacking toxicokinetic data often prevent the application of read-across. Preferably, toxicokinetic data should be generated using in vitro and in silico tools and anchored towards human relevance. In certain sectors, PBK modelling is being used for risk assessment, but less so in others. Specific activities were identified to facilitate the use of in vitro and in silico toxicokinetic data to support read-across: The collation of available tools indicating the parameters and applicability domains covered; endpoint-specific guidance on toxicokinetics parameters required for read-across; case studies exemplifying how toxicokinetic data help support read-across. Activities to enhance the scientific robustness of read-across include the further user-friendly combination of read-across tools and formal guidance by the authorities specifying the minimum information requirements to justify read-across for a given toxicity endpoint. The EPAA was invited to continue dissemination activities and to explore possibilities to collate a contemporaneous list of open toxicokinetics tools that assist risk assessment.

Modern science for better quality control of medicinal products “Towards global harmonization of 3Rs in biologicals”: The report of an EPAA workshop

This article summarizes the outcome of an international workshop organized by the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) on Modern science for better quality control of medicinal products: Towards global harmonization of 3Rs in biologicals. As regards the safety testing of biologicals, the workshop participants agreed to actively encourage the deletion of abnormal toxicity tests and target animal batch safety tests from all relevant legal requirements and guidance documents (country-specific guidelines, pharmacopoeia monographs, WHO recommendations). To facilitate the global regulatory acceptance of non-animal methods for the potency testing of, e.g., human diphtheria and tetanus vaccines and veterinary swine erysipelas vaccines, international convergence on the scientific principles of the use of appropriately validated in vitro assays for replacing in vivo methods was identified as an overarching goal. The establishment of scientific requirements for new assays was recognized as a further means to unify regulatory approaches in different jurisdictions. It was recommended to include key regulators and manufacturers early in the corresponding discussions. Manufacturers and responsible expert groups, e.g. at the European Directorate for the Quality of Medicines and Health Care of the Council of Europe or the European Medicines Agency, were invited to consider leadership for international collaboration.

Knowledge sharing to facilitate regulatory decision-making in regard to alternatives to animal testing: Report of an EPAA workshop

The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) convened a workshop Knowledge sharing to facilitate regulatory decision-making. Fifty invited participants from the European Commission, national and European agencies and bodies, different industry sectors (chemicals, cosmetics, fragrances, pharmaceuticals, vaccines), and animal protection organizations attended the workshop. Four case studies exemplarily revealed which procedures are in place to obtain regulatory acceptance of new test methods in different sectors. Breakout groups discussed the status quo identifying the following facilitators for regulatory acceptance of alternatives to animal testing: Networking and communication (including cross-sector collaboration, international cooperation and harmonization); involvement of regulatory agencies from the initial stages of test method development on; certainty on prerequisites for test method acceptance including the establishment of specific criteria for regulatory acceptance. Data sharing and intellectual property issues affect many aspects of test method development, validation and regulatory acceptance. In principle, all activities should address replacement, reduction and refinement methods (albeit animal testing is generally prohibited in the cosmetics sector). Provision of financial resources and education support all activities aiming at facilitating the acceptance and use of alternatives to animal testing. Overall, workshop participants recommended building confidence in new methodologies by applying and gaining experience with them.

Advancing the 3Rs in regulatory toxicology – Carcinogenicity testing: Scope for harmonisation and advancing the 3Rs in regulated sectors of the European Union

Different government agencies operating in the European Union regulate different types of chemical products but all require testing for carcinogenicity to support applications for product marketing and commercialisation. A conference was held in Brussels in 2013 where representatives of the pharmaceutical, animal health, chemical and plant protection industries, together with representatives of regulatory agencies, universities and other stakeholders, met under the auspices of The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) to discuss the varying requirements for carcinogenicity testing, and how these studies might be refined to improve hazard evaluation and risk assessment while implementing principles of the 3Rs (replacement, refinement and reduction in animal studies). While there are some similarities, the regulatory approaches in pharmaceutical, animal health, chemical and plant protection sectors have varying degrees of flexibility in requirements for carcinogenicity testing, to an extent reflecting concerns over the magnitude and duration of human exposure, either directly as in therapeutic exposure to pharmaceuticals, or indirectly through the ingestion of residues of veterinary drugs or plant protection chemicals. The article discusses these differences and other considerations for modified carcinogenicity testing paradigms on the basis of scientific and 3Rs approaches.

Skin sensitisation – Moving forward with non-animal testing strategies for regulatory purposes in the EU

In a previous EPAA-Cefic LRI workshop in 2011, issues surrounding the use and interpretation of results from the local lymph node assay were addressed. At the beginning of 2013 a second joint workshop focused greater attention on the opportunities to make use of non-animal test data, not least since a number of in vitro assays have progressed to an advanced position in terms of their formal validation. It is already recognised that information produced from non-animal assays can be used in regulatory decision-making, notably in terms of classifying a substance as a skin sensitiser. The evolution into a full replacement for hazard identification, where the decision is not to classify, requires the generation of confidence in the in vitro alternative, e.g. via formal validation, the existence of peer reviewed publications and the knowledge that the assay(s) are founded on key elements of the Adverse Outcome Pathway for skin sensitisation. It is foreseen that the validated in vitro assays and relevant QSAR models can be organised into formal testing strategies to be applied for regulatory purposes by the industry. To facilitate progress, the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to animal testing (EPAA) provided the platform for cross-industry and regulatory dialogue, enabling an essential and open debate on the acceptability of an in vitro based integrated strategy. Based on these considerations, a follow up activity was agreed upon to explore an example of an Integrated Testing Strategy for skin sensitisation hazard identification purposes in the context of REACH submissions.

Report of the EPAA–ECVAM Workshop on the Validation of Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS)

The use of Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS) permits the combination of diverse types of chemical and toxicological data for the purposes of hazard identification and characterisation. In November 2008, the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA), together with the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), held a workshop on Overcoming Barriers to Validation of Non-animal Partial Replacement Methods/Integrated Testing Strategies, in Ispra, Italy, to discuss the extent to which current ECVAM approaches to validation can be used to evaluate partial replacement in vitro test methods (i.e. as potential ITS components) and ITS themselves. The main conclusions of these discussions were that formal validation was only considered necessary for regulatory purposes (e.g. the replacement of a test guideline), and that current ECVAM approaches to validation should be adapted to accommodate such test methods. With these conclusions in mind, a follow-up EPAA-ECVAM workshop was held in October 2009, to discuss the extent to which existing validation principles are applicable to the validation of ITS test methods, and to develop a draft approach for the validation of such test methods and/or overall ITS for regulatory purposes. This report summarises the workshop discussions that started with a review of the current validation methodologies and the presentation of two case studies (skin sensitisation and acute toxicity), before covering the definition of ITS and their components, including their validation and regulatory acceptance. The following main conclusions/recommendations were made: that the validation of a partial replacement test method (for application as part of a testing strategy) should be differentiated from the validation of an in vitro test method for application as a stand-alone replacement, especially with regard to its predictive capacity; that, in the former case, the predictive capacity of the whole testing strategy (rather than of the individual test methods) would be more important, especially if the individual test methods had a high biological relevance; that ITS allowing for flexible and ad hoc approaches cannot be validated, whereas the validation of clearly defined ITS would be feasible, although practically quite difficult; and that test method developers should be encouraged to develop and submit to ECVAM not only full replacement test methods, but also partial replacement methods to be placed as parts of testing strategies. The added value from the formal validation of testing strategies, and the requirements needed in view of regulatory acceptance of the data, require further informed discussion within the EPAA forum on the basis of case studies provided by industry.

Computational chemistry, systems biology and toxicology. Harnessing the chemistry of life: revolutionizing toxicology. A commentary

There is a continuing interest in, and increasing imperatives for, the development of alternative methods for toxicological evaluations that do not require the use of animals. Although a significant investment has resulted in some achievements, progress has been patchy and there remain many challenges. Among the most significant hurdles is developing non-animal methods that would permit assessment of the potential for a chemical or drug to cause adverse health effects following repeated systemic exposure. Developing approaches to address this challenge has been one of the objectives of the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA). The EPAA is a unique partnership between the European Commission and industry that has interests in all aspects of reducing, refining and replacing the use of animals (the '3Rs'). One possible strategy that emerged from a broad scientific debate sponsored by the EPAA was the opportunity for developing entirely new paradigms for toxicity testing based upon harnessing the increasing power of computational chemistry in combination with advanced systems biology. This brief commentary summarizes a workshop organized by the EPAA in 2010, that had the ambitious title of 'Harnessing the Chemistry of Life: Revolutionizing Toxicology'. At that workshop international experts in chemistry, systems biology and toxicology sought to map out how best developments in these sciences could be exploited to design new strategies for toxicity testing using adverse effects in the liver as an initial focus of attention. Here we describe the workshop design and outputs, the primary purpose being to stimulate debate about the need to align different areas of science with toxicology if new and truly innovative approaches to toxicity testing are to be developed.

Dissemination Strategies: How do they Influence the Uptake of New three Rs Methods across Laboratories and Other Boundaries?

The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA; 1) organised a workshop in October 2007, to review whether dissemination plays a role in the successful uptake of new Three Rs methods. The main conclusions from the workshop are summarised in this report.

The European partnership for alternative approaches to animal testing

In the light of an increasing tendency to introduce the 3Rs into European law – often in a very specific and prescriptive fashion European industry representing 7 large sectors and the European Commission, created in November 2005 the European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing. Its aim is to better promote the 3Rs in regulatory testing by adopting a holistic approach to acceptance of alternatives, from validation and regulatory acceptance, harmonization of global acceptance of new approaches to more effective dissemination of good practice in order to ensure widespread use and implementation. The initial premises on which this unprecedented cooperation between industry and authorities was based have been confirmed, i.e. that significant scope exists to promote the application of the 3Rs, through practical sharing of the experience, knowledge and technical know-how between the Partners, and across the industry sectors and Commission services, and through the application of new, research led, science and technology which offer scope for completely new approaches to deriving the required safety information. The article also shortly indicates the EPAA longer term ambitions.

Safety testing of cell-based medicinal products: Opportunities for the monocyte activation test for pyrogens

The European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to Animal Testing (EPAA) pointed out the need to involve authorities throughout the process of validation and legal acceptance of alternatives to animal experiments. The Paul-Ehrlich-Institute (PEI), Federal Agency for Sera and Vaccines, is the national competent authority in Germany which is responsible for the quality and safety of biologicals including blood and cell-based products. This paper is intended to contribute to the discussion concerning the use of alternative methods in safety testing of medicinal products and considers the scientific work of the PEI in this field. From a regulator's perspective, adequate demonstration of safety and quality of medicinal products are of major interest. Additionally, the availability of the products to the patient has to be taken into consideration. It has to be carefully explored whether the respective in vitro method for demonstration of non-clinical safety as part of the non-clinical development programme is able to guarantee safety level comparable to the corresponding experiment in animals. The topics cited above shall be discussed in this paper using the example of the Alternative Pyrogen Test or also called Monocyte Activation Test. The Alternative Pyrogen Test could serve as paradigm to exemplify how an alternative test can provide at least a comparable level of safety estimation in comparison with a conventional animal test. Furthermore, this alternative test creates additional information which cannot be obtained from the animal experiment, and might also open further scientific insight into the mechanisms of pyrogenicity and acute pro-inflammatory reactions in patients. This test method allows the definition of pyrogen limits for medicinal products. Due to its use of relevant cell systems this in vitro test might contribute significantly to safety assessments of advanced medicinal products during the pre-clinical phase.