Advertisement

Validation of the Cytosensor™ Microphysiometer for In Vitro Cytotoxicity Testing

Chapter

Abstract

Regulatory agencies addressing human risk assessment of new pharmaceuticals, pesticides, food additives, cosmetics, and other chemicals currently require submission of a large battery of in vivo toxicity data derived from tests utilizing laboratory animals. Although fairly well proven for evaluating toxicity, the use of laboratory animals may have limited predictive values for human risk assessment because of differences in factors, such as bioavailability, pharmacokinetics, metabolism, receptor sensitivity, and repair mechanisms. The use of cell cultures for measuring drug toxicity is becoming increasingly acceptable. Accordingly, in vitro toxicity tests have been in demand and numerous organizations (e.g., Fund for Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments [FRAME], European Research Group for Alternate Testing [ERGAT], Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing [CAAT], and the International Multi-Center Evaluation of In Vitro Cytotoxicity [MEIC]) are encouraging the development of alternative testing protocols.

Keywords

Human Neuroblastoma Cell Human Liver Cell Acidification Rate Short Protocol Exposure Protocol 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Parce JW, Owicki JC, Kercso KM. Detection of cell affecting agents with a silicon biosensor. Science 1989; 246, 243–247.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Parce JW, Owicki JC, Wada HG, Kercso KM. Cells on silicon: the microphysiometer: In: Goldberg AM, ed. In Vitro Toxicology: Mechanisms and New Technology. Mary Ann Liebert, New York, 1991, pp. 97–106.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Owicki JC, Parce JW, Kersco KM, Sigal GB, Muir VC, Venter JC, et al. Continuous monitoring of receptor-mediated changes in the metabolic rates of living cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1990; 87: 4007–4011.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Owicki JC, Parce JW. Biosensors based on the energy metabolism of living cells: The physical chemistry and cell biology of extracellular acidification. Biosensors Bioelectronics 1992; 7: 255–272.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bruner LH, Miller KR, Owicki JC, Parce JW, Muir VC. Testing ocular irritancy in vitro with the silicon microphysiometer. Toxicol In Vitro 1991; 5: 277–284.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    McConnell HM, Owicki JC, Parce JW, Miller DL, Baxter GT, Wada HG, et al. The cytosensor microphysiometer: Biological applications of silicon technology. Science 1992; 257: 1906–1912.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eckwall B, Bondesson I, Castell JV, Gomez-Lechon MJ, Hellberg S, Hogberg J, et al. Cytotoxicity evaluation of the first ten MEIC chemicals: acute lethal toxicity in man predicted by cytotoxicity in five cellular assays and oral LD50 tests in rodents. ATLA 1989; 17: 83–100.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jover R, Ponsoda X, Castell JV, Gomez-Lechon MJ. Evaluation of cytotoxicity of ten chemicals on human cultured hepatocytes: predictability of human toxicity and comparison with rodent culture system. Toxicol In Vitro 1992; 6: 47–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Riddell RJ, Panacer DS, Wilde SM, Clothier RH, Ball, M. The importance of exposure period and cell type: in vitro cytotoxicity tests. ATLA 1986; 14: 86–92.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Balls M, Fenton JH. The use of basal cytotoxicity and target organ toxicity tests in hazard identification and risk assessment. ATLA 1992; 20: 368–388.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Clothier RH, Hulme LM, Smith M, Balls M. Comparison of the in vitro cytotoxicities and acute in vivo toxicities of 59 chemicals. Mol Toxicol 1987; 1: 571–577.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fry JR, Garle M.1, Hammond AH. Choice of acute toxicity measures for comparison of in vivo-in vitro toxicity. ATLA 1988; 16: 175–179.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations