Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40710990›Full record

ArticleToxics2025

PhotoChem Reference Chemical Database for the Development of New Alternative Photosafety Test Methods.

Ga-Young Lee, Jee-Hyun Hwang, Jeong-Hyun Hong, Seungjin Bae, Kyung-Min Lim

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Toxics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Ga-Young LeeCollege of Pharmacy, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ewha Womans University, Seoul 03760, Republic of Korea.
Jee-Hyun HwangCollege of Pharmacy, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ewha Womans University, Seoul 03760, Republic of Korea.
Jeong-Hyun HongCollege of Pharmacy, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ewha Womans University, Seoul 03760, Republic of Korea.
Seungjin BaeCollege of Pharmacy, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ewha Womans University, Seoul 03760, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-8993-8884
Kyung-Min LimCollege of Pharmacy, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ewha Womans University, Seoul 03760, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1517-7680

Funding

Ministry of Food and Drug Safety RS-2024-00396737Ministry of Food and Drug Safety Korea 24212MFDS250
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Photosafety assessments are a key requirement for the safe development of pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and agrochemicals. Although in vitro methods are widely used for phototoxicity and photoallergy testing, their limited applicability and predictive power often necessitate supplemental in vivo studies. To address this, we developed the PhotoChem Reference Chemical Database, comprising 251 reference compounds with curated data from in vitro, in vivo, and human studies. Using this database, we evaluated the predictive capacity of three OECD in vitro test guidelines-TG 432 (3T3 NRU), TG 495 (ROS assay), and TG 498 (reconstructed human epidermis)-by comparing the results against human and animal data. Against human reference data, all three test methods showed high sensitivity (≥82.6%) and strong overall accuracy: TG 432 (accuracy: 94.2% (49/52)), TG 495 (100% (27/27)), and TG 498 (86.7% (26/30)). In comparison with animal data, sensitivity remained high for all tests (≥92.0%), while specificity varied: TG 432 (54.3% (19/35)), TG 495 (63.6% (7/11)), and TG 498 (90.5% (19/21)). TG 498 demonstrated the most balanced performance in both sensitivity and specificity across datasets. We also analyzed 106 drug approvals from major regulatory agencies to assess real-world application of photosafety testing. Since the mid-2000s, the use of in vitro phototoxicity assays has steadily increased in Korea, particularly following the 2021 revision of the MFDS regulations. Test method preferences varied by region, with 3T3 NRU and ROS assays most widely used to evaluate phototoxicity, while photo-LLNA and guinea pig tests were frequently employed for photoallergy assay. Collectively, this study provides a valuable reference for optimizing test method selection and supports the broader adoption of validated, human-relevant non-animal photosafety assessment strategies.

Indexed as

alternative test methodchemical databasephotosensitization testphototoxic testreference chemical

Identifiers

PMID40710990
PMCPMC12298655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.