A comparison of the in vitro permeation of 3‐O‐ethyl‐l‐ascorbic acid in human skin and in a living skin equivalent (LabSkinTM)

alkiviadis.1961 shared this article with you from Inoreader A comparison of the in vitro permeation of 3‐O‐ethyl‐l‐ascorbic acid in human skin and in a living skin equivalent (LabSkinTM) Via International Journal of Cosmetic Science Abstract The EU Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) and the Cosmetic Ingredient Review (CIR) Expert Panel have listed a number of requirements for safety evaluation of cosmetics (1‐3). These include data on the percutaneous absorption of selected cosmetic ingredients, such as actives, colouring agents, UV filters and preservatives. For such studies, the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ECVAM), the European Medicine Agency (EMA) and the UK National Centre for the 3Rs (NC3Rs) have encouraged the replacement of animal testing with alternative in vitro models (4‐6). In 2003, a ban on in vivo animal testing for cosmetic products was introduced by Directive 2003/15/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, and became law a few years later with the Cosmetics Regulation (EC) No. 1223/2009 (1). Currently, percutaneous absorption of cosmetic ingredients may be determined in human or porcine skin in vitro according to procedures de scribed by the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD), SCCS and COLIPA ‐ The European Cosmetic and Perfumery Association (1, 7‐9). The use of porcine tissue offers advantages for routine permeability testing given the financial and safety considerations associated with sourcing human tissue. However, this testing still requires consideration of ethical and animal welfare issues. Consequently, various human skin equivalents (HSEs) have been developed as alternative sources of tissue for skin permeation experiments (10). View on the web Inoreader. Take back control of your news feed. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.