Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20096797›Full record

ReviewJournal of pharmacological and toxicological methods

Validating and troubleshooting ocular in vitro toxicology tests.

Frank A Barile

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of pharmacological and toxicological methods. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Looking into the Eyes-In Vitro Models for Ocular Research.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Role of In Vitro Models for Development of Ophthalmic Delivery Systems.Critical reviews in therapeutic drug carrier systems · 2021
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Human corneal cell culture models for drug toxicity studies.Drug delivery and translational research · 2016
    Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Frank A BarileDepartment of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Toxicology Division, St. John's University, College of Pharmacy and Allied Health Professions, Queens, New York 11439, USA. barilef@stjohns.edu

Funding

In Vitro Method for Gut Absorption and CytotoxicityR15ES012170 · NIEHS · ST. JOHN'S UNIVERSITY · PI BARILE, FRANK A · 2003 to 2003
$162k
NIEHS NIH HHS R15 ES012170
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In vitro organotypic models for testing ocular irritants have warranted sufficient interest as methods to replace in vivo ocular testing. The in vitro organotypic models claim to maintain short-term normal physiological and biochemical functions of the mammalian cornea in an isolated system. In these test methods, damage by the test substance is assessed by quantitative measurements of changes in corneal opacity and permeability using opacitometry and spectrophotometry, respectively. Both measurements are used quantitatively for irritancy classification for prediction of the in vivo ocular irritation potential of a test substance. Examples of organotypic models that incorporate these criteria include: the bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) assay, the isolated chicken eye (ICE) test method and the isolated rabbit eye (IRE) assay. A fourth method, the hen's egg test-chorioallantoic membrane (HET-CAM) assay, differs in the evaluation criteria but is also normally included among this class of in vitro protocols. Each of these protocols is discussed in detail as representative candidate in vitro methods for assessing ocular irritation and corrosion. The methodologies, protocol details, applications, and their validation status are discussed. A brief historical perspective of the development of original in vitro ocular testing models is also mentioned. More importantly, improving and troubleshooting the current techniques, in order to present the models as stand-alone in vitro tools for ocular toxicity assessment, is emphasized.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimal Testing AlternativesCattleChickensChorioallantoic MembraneCorneal OpacityEpithelium, CornealEyeEye DiseasesHumansIrritantsRabbitsReproducibility of ResultsToxicity TestsIrritants

Identifiers

PMID20096797
PMCPMC2849866

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.