, 2013, Jaworska et al., 2011, Bauch et al., 2012, Nukada et al., 2012 and Natsch et al., 2013). Whilst these approaches continue to show promise, the majority have focused upon integrating non-animal data to predict sensitiser potential. Consequently, one major objective of the Cosmetics Europe Skin Tolerance Task Force has been to identify and evaluate test methods that could allow sensitiser potency prediction without the need for new animal test data, which is of vital importance for the cosmetics industry

(Maxwell et al., 2011). This evaluation will inform the development of a non-animal testing strategy for skin sensitisation potency predictions. The resulting strategy will ultimately become an essential part – along with consideration of exposure and other

information such as bioavailability or metabolism – of a data integration Cetuximab approach for the skin sensitisation safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients. Here we document the first of three phases to develop such a non-animal testing strategy. Sixteen test methods were identified for systematic evaluation, following a review of the available scientific literature. The aim of this evaluation was to gain comparable detailed understanding of the test methods that would allow promising methods Trichostatin A chemical structure to be prioritised for further in-depth evaluation. Therefore, a common set of criteria was assessed involving test method characterisation and standardisation. Such criteria included AOP mapping, ease of transferability, availability and throughput, performance (in terms of reproducibility and predictivity) as well

as legal aspects and information. The information was assembled for each test method in collaboration with the developers. In addition, we have compiled data on a set of ten substances for each of the methods to verify publically available data in terms of both sensitiser potential and potency prediction. The resulting analysis forms a comprehensive review of the results obtained, which informed the selection of test methods for the next evaluation phases. Finally, we present our future framework set-up for the development of a non-animal testing strategy for skin sensitisation potency predictions – a data and knowledge gap identified selleck chemical by a previous review of non-animal risk assessment approaches for skin sensitisation (Goebel et al., 2012). The following section provides an overview of the 16 test methods, which were analysed during the first phase of the Cosmetics Europe method evaluation process. They are presented according to their alignment to the skin sensitisation AOP (Fig. 1). The description, which covers the status at the beginning of 2013, comprises the test system, read-out parameter, prediction model, and whether the method provides only hazard identification or also includes potency prediction.