Skip to main content

Validation of Alternative In Vitro Methods to Animal Testing: Concepts, Challenges, Processes and Tools

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology ((AEMB,volume 856))

Abstract

This chapter explores the concepts, processes, tools and challenges relating to the validation of alternative methods for toxicity and safety testing. In general terms, validation is the process of assessing the appropriateness and usefulness of a tool for its intended purpose. Validation is routinely used in various contexts in science, technology, the manufacturing and services sectors. It serves to assess the fitness-for-purpose of devices, systems, software up to entire methodologies. In the area of toxicity testing, validation plays an indispensable role: “alternative approaches” are increasingly replacing animal models as predictive tools and it needs to be demonstrated that these novel methods are fit for purpose. Alternative approaches include in vitro test methods, non-testing approaches such as predictive computer models up to entire testing and assessment strategies composed of method suites, data sources and decision-aiding tools. Data generated with alternative approaches are ultimately used for decision-making on public health and the protection of the environment. It is therefore essential that the underlying methods and methodologies are thoroughly characterised, assessed and transparently documented through validation studies involving impartial actors. Importantly, validation serves as a filter to ensure that only test methods able to produce data that help to address legislative requirements (e.g. EU’s REACH legislation) are accepted as official testing tools and, owing to the globalisation of markets, recognised on international level (e.g. through inclusion in OECD test guidelines). Since validation creates a credible and transparent evidence base on test methods, it provides a quality stamp, supporting companies developing and marketing alternative methods and creating considerable business opportunities. Validation of alternative methods is conducted through scientific studies assessing two key hypotheses, reliability and relevance of the test method for a given purpose. Relevance encapsulates the scientific basis of the test method, its capacity to predict adverse effects in the “target system” (i.e. human health or the environment) as well as its applicability for the intended purpose. In this chapter we focus on the validation of non-animal in vitro alternative testing methods and review the concepts, challenges, processes and tools fundamental to the validation of in vitro methods intended for hazard testing of chemicals. We explore major challenges and peculiarities of validation in this area. Based on the notion that validation per se is a scientific endeavour that needs to adhere to key scientific principles, namely objectivity and appropriate choice of methodology, we examine basic aspects of study design and management, and provide illustrations of statistical approaches to describe predictive performance of validated test methods as well as their reliability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Repeatability has been defined as “the agreement of test results obtained within a single laboratory when the procedure is performed on the same substance and under identical conditions” (OECD 2005) i.e. the same operator and equipment.

    Reproducibility has been defined as “the agreement of test results obtained from testing the same substance using the same protocol” (OECD 2005), but not necessarily under identical conditions (i.e. different operators and equipment).

  2. 2.

    Such strategic combinations have been proposed in the context of “Integrated Testing Strategies” that were proposed during the implementation of the REACH legislation in the EU (2006–2007) and consisted of steps of data gathering, evaluations and empirical (strategic) testing using several data sources. Later the concept of ITS has been further promoted under the term “Integrated Approaches to Assessment and Testing (IATA) by the OECD (OECD 2008).

References

  • Aggett P et al (2007) Variability and uncertainty in toxicology of chemicals in food, consumer products and the environment. Report by the Committee on toxicity of chemicals in food, consumer products and the environment. http://cot.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/cot/vutreportmarch2007.pdf

  • Archer G, Balls M, Bruner LH, Curren RD, Fentem JH, Holzhütter H-G, Liebsch M, Lovell DP, Southee JA (1997) ATLA 25:505–5016

    Google Scholar 

  • Attarwala H (2010) TGN1412: from discovery to disaster. J Young Pharm 2(3):332–336

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Balls M (1994) Replacement of animal procedures: alternatives in research, education and testing. Lab Anim 28:193–211

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Balls M (1997) Defined structural and performance criteria would facilitate the validation and acceptance of alternative test procedures. ATLA 25:483–484

    Google Scholar 

  • Balls M, Karcher W (1995) Comment: the validation of alternative test methods. ATLA 23:884–886

    Google Scholar 

  • Balls M, Blaauboer B, Brusick D, Frazier J, Lamb D, Pemberton M, Reinhardt C, Roberfroid M, Rosenkranz H, Schmid B, Spielmann H, Stammati AL, Walum E (1990a) Report and recommendations of the CAAT/ERGAAT workshop on the validation of toxicity test procedures. ATLA 18:313–337 (“Amden I report”)

    Google Scholar 

  • Balls M, Botham P, Cordier A, Fumero S, Kayser D, Koeter H, Koundakjian P, Lindquist NG, Meyer O, Pioda L, Reinhardt C, Rozemond H, Smyrniotis T, Spielmann H, Van Looy H, van der Venne MT, Walum E (1990b) Report and recommendations of an international workshop on promotion of the regulatory acceptance of validated non-animal toxicity test procedures. ATLA 18:339–344 (“Vouliagmeni report”)

    Google Scholar 

  • Balls M, Bridges J, Southee J (1990c) Animals and alternatives in toxicology: present status and future prospects. VCH Publishers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Balls M, Blaauboer BJ, Fentem JH, Bruner L, Combes RD, Ekwall B, Fielder RJ, Guillouzo A, Lewis RW, Lovell DP, Reinhardt CA, Repetto G, Sladowski D, Spielmann H, Zucco F (1995a) Practical aspects of the validation of toxicity test procedures. ECVAM workshop report 5. ATLA 23:129-147 (“Amden II report”)

    Google Scholar 

  • Balls M, De Klerck W, Baker F, van Beek M, Bouillon C, Bruner L, Carstensen J, Chamberlain M, Cottin M, Curren R, Dupuis J, Fairweather F, Faure U, Fentem J, Fisher C, Calli C, Kemper F, Knaap A, Langley G, Loprieno G, Loprieno N, Pape W, Pechovitch G, Spielmann H., Ungar K, White I, Zuang V (1995b) Development and validation of non-animal tests and testing strategies: the identification of a coordinated response to the challenge and the opportunity presented by the sixth amendment to the Cosmetics Directive (76/768/EEC). ATLA 23:398–409

    Google Scholar 

  • Balls M, Amcoff P, Bremer S, Casati S, Coecke S, Clothier R, Combes R, Corvi R, Curren R, Eskes C, Fentem J, Gribaldo L, Halder M, Hartung T, Hoffmann S, Schechtman L, Laurie Scott L, Spielmann H, Stokes W, Tice R, Wagner D, Zuang V (2005) The principles of weight of evidence validation of test methods and testing strategies. the report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 58. ATLA 34:603–620

    Google Scholar 

  • Balls M, Combes RD, Bhogal N (2012) The use of integrated and intelligent testing strategies in the prediction of toxic hazard and in risk assessment. Adv Exp Med Biol 745:221–253

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Barratt MD, Brantom PG, Fentem JH, Gerner I, Walker AP, Worth AP (1998) The ECVAM international validation study for in vitro tests for skin corrosivity. 1. Selection and distribution of the test chemicals. Toxicol In Vitro 12:471–482

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Belanger SE, Rawlings JM, Carr GJ (2013) Use of fish embryo toxicity tests for the prediction of acute fish toxicity to chemicals. Environ Toxicol Chem 32(8):1768–1783

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Borlak J (2009) Trovafloxacin: a case study of idiosyncratic or iatrogenic liver toxicity—molecular mechanisms and lessons for pharmacotoxicity. In: Hayes W, Griesinger C, Guzelian (eds) Proceedings of the 1st international forum towards evidence-based toxicology. Hum Exp Toxicol 28:119–212

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouhifd M, Bories G, Casado J, Coecke S, Norlén H, Parissis N, Rodrigues RM, Whelan MP (2012) Automation of an in vitro cytotoxicity assay used to estimate starting doses in acute oral systemic toxicity tests. Food Chem Toxicol 50(6):2084–2096

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bouvier d’Yvoire M, Bremer S, Casati S, Ceridono M, Coecke S, Corvi R, Eskes, C, Gribaldo L, Griesinger C, Knaut H, Linge JP, Roi A, Zuang V (2012) ECVAM and new technologies for toxicity testing. In: Balls M, Combes RD, Bhogal N (eds) New technologies for toxicity testing. Springer series “Advances in experimental medicine and biology.” Springer/Landes Bioscience 745:154–180

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner LH, Carr GJ, Chamberlain M, Curren RD (1996) Validation of alternative methods for toxicity testing. Toxicol In Vitro 10:479–501

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coecke S, Bowe G, Millcamps A, Bernasconi C, Bostroen AC, Bories G, Fortaner S, Gineste Jm, Gouliarmou V, Langezaal I, Liska R, Mendoza E, Morath S, Reina V, Wilk-Zasadna I, Whelan M (2014) In: Jennings P, Price A (eds) Considerations in the development of in vitro toxicity testing methods intended for regulatory use, Coecke S. et al. 2014. In vitro Toxicology Systems series: methods in pharmacology and toxicology. Springer Science + Business Media, LLC, pp 551–569

    Google Scholar 

  • Colton T (1974) Statistics in medicine. Little, Brown and Company, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Curren RD, Southee JA, Spielmann H, Liebsch M, Fentem JH, Balls M (1995) The role of prevalidation in the development, validation and acceptance of alternative methods. ATLA 23:211–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Desprez B, Barroso J, Griesinger C, Kandárová H, Alépée N, Fuchs H (2015) Two novel prediction models improve predictions of skin corrosive sub-categories by test methods of OECD Test Guideline No. 431. Toxicol In Vitro 29(2015):2055–2080

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Draize JH, Woodard G, Calvery HO (1944) Methods for the study of irritation and toxicity of substances applied topically to the skin and mucous membranes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 82:377–390

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • EURL ECVAM (2014) The EURL ECVAM—Cosmetics Europe prospective validation study of reconstructed human tissue-based test methods for identifying chemicals not requiring classification for serious eye damage/eye irritation testing

    Google Scholar 

  • EURL ECVAM, European Commission, Joint Research Centre (2012 onwards) Website on EURL ECVAM Recommendations on validated test methods; the site is continuously updated. https://eurl-ecvam.jrc.ec.europa.eu/eurl-ecvam-recommendations

  • Fentem JH, Prinsen MK, Spielmann H, Walum E, Botham PA (1995) Validation—lessons learned from practical experience. Toxicol In Vitro 9:857–862

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fentem JH, Archer GE, Balls M, Botham PA, Curren RD, Earl LK, Esdaile DJ, Holzhütter HG, Liebsch M (1998) The ECVAM International validation study on in vitro tests for skin corrosivity. 2. Results and evaluation by the management team. Toxicol In Vitro 12(4):483–524

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira E, Rocha M, Mequelino D (2012) Sigmae Alfenas 1(1):126–139. http://www.google.it/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCUQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fpublicacoes.unifal-mg.edu.br%2Frevistas%2Findex.php%2Fsigmae%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F99%2Fpdf&ei=4hK5VJS3H8i7ygPf0wI&usg=AFQjCNHE4phiKyiXay4fNnpctO489uddBQ&sig2=tNR25ijrcheBiS87zWLcrA&bvm=bv.83829542,d.bGQ

  • Flahault A, Cadilhac M, Thomas G (2005) Sample size calculation should be performed for design accuracy in diagnostic studies. J Clin Epidemiol 58:859–862

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frazier JM (1990a) Scientific criteria for validation of in vitro toxicity tests. Environment Monographs no. 36. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development; 62 pp. Not available any longer. The document gave rise to the OECD Solna report (OECD, 1996)

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier JM (1990b) Validation of in vitro models. J Am Coll Toxicol 9:355–359

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier JM (1992) Validation of in vitro toxicity tests. In: Frazier JM (ed) In vitro toxicity testing: applications to safety evaluations. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 245–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier JF (1994) The role of mechanistic toxicology in test method validation. Toxicology In Vitro 8:787–791

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, AM, Epstein, LD, Zurlo J (1995) A modular approach to validation—a work in progress. In: Salem H, Katz SA (eds) Advances in animal alternatives for safety and efficacy testing. Taylor & Francis, WA, pp 303–308. Expanded edition of: Animal test alternatives. Marcel Dekker, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Green S (1993) Regulatory agency considerations and requirements for validation of toxicity test alternatives. Toxicol Lett 68:119–123

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory CD (2014) Cell biology: the disassembly of death. Nature 507:312–313

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griesinger C (2009) Comparing medicine with toxicology— a mapping of knowledge creation, concepts and basic epistemology. In: Hayes W, Griesinger C, Guzelian P (eds) Proceedings of the 1st international forum towards evidence-based toxicology. Hum Exp Toxicol 28(2–3):101–104

    Google Scholar 

  • Griesinger C, Hoffmann S, Kinsner A, Coecke S, Hartung T (2009) Special issue: evidence-based toxicology (EBT). Preface. Hum Exp Toxicol. In: Hayes W, Griesinger C, Guzelian P (eds) Proceedings of the 1st international forum towards evidence-based toxicology. Hum Exp Toxicol 28(2–3):83–86

    Google Scholar 

  • Griesinger C, Schäffer M, Worth A, Zuang V (2014) Skin corrosion and irritation. In: Alternative methods for regulatory toxicology—a state-of-the-art review. JRC science & policy report. Publications Office of the European Union. http://bookshop.europa.eu/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/WFS/EU-Bookshop-Site/en_GB/-/EUR/ViewParametricSearch-Dispatch

  • Guzelian PS, Victoroff MS, Halmes NC, James RC, Guzelian CP (2005) Evidence-based toxicology: a comprehensive framework for causation. Hum Exp Toxicol 24(4):161–201

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guzelian PS, Victoroff MS, Halmes C, James RC (2009) Clear path: towards an evidence-based toxicology (EBT). In: Hayes W, Griesinger C, Guzelian P (eds) Proceedings of the 1st international forum towards evidence-based toxicology. Hum Exp Toxicol 28(2–3):71–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanley JA, Negassa A, Edwardes MD, Forrester JE (2003) Statistical analysis of correlated data using generalized estimating equations: an orientation. Am J Epidemiol 157(4):364–375

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hartung T (2010) Evidence-based toxicology—the toolbox of validation for the 21st century? ALTEX 27(4):253–263

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hartung T, Bremer S, Casati S, Coecke S, Corvi R, Fortaner S, Gribaldo L, Halder M, Hoffmann S, Roi AJ, Prieto P, Sabbioni E, Scott L, Worth A, Zuang V (2004) A modular approach to the ECVAM principles on test validity. Altern Lab Anim 32(5):467–472

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hendriksen C, Spieser J-M, Akkermans A, Balls M, Bruckner L, Cussler K, Daas A, Descamps J, Dobbelaer R, Fentem J, Halder M, van der Kamp M, Lucken R, Milstien J, Sesardic D, Straughan D, Valadares A (1998) Validation of alternative methods for the potency testing of vaccines. ATLA 26:747–761

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann S, Hartung T (2005) Diagnosis: toxic!—trying to apply approaches of clinical diagnostics and prevalence in toxicology considerations. Toxicol Sci 85(1):422–428

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann S, Hartung T (2006a) Designing validation studies more efficiently according to the modular approach: retrospective analysis of the EPISKIN test for skin corrosion. Altern Lab Anim 34(2):177–191

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann S, Hartung T (2006b) Toward an evidence-based toxicology. Hum Exp Toxicol 25(9):497–513

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann S, Edler L, Gardner I, Gribaldo L, Hartung T, Klein C, Liebsch M, Sauerland S, Schechtman L, Stammati A, Nikolaidis E (2008) Points of reference in the validation process: the report and recommendations of ECVAM Workshop 66. Altern Lab Anim 36(3):343–352

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holzhütter HG, Archer G, Dami N, Lovell DP, Saltelli A, Sjöström M (1996) Recommendation for the application of biostatistical methods during the development and validation of alternative methods. ATLA 24:511–530

    Google Scholar 

  • Horvath CJ, Milton MN (2009) The TeGenero incident and the Duff Report conclusions: a series of unfortunate events or an avoidable event? Toxicol Pathol 37(3):372–383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hothorn LA (2002) Selected biostatistical aspects of the validation of in vitro toxicological assays. ATLA 30(2):93–98

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • ICCVAM (1997) Validation and regulatory acceptance of toxicological test methods: a report of the ad hoc interagency coordinating committee on the validation of alternative methods. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), Research Triangle Park, NC, USA, p 105. NIH Publication No: 97-3981. http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/docs/guidelines/validate.pdf

  • Judson R, Kavlock R, Martin M, Reif D, Houck K, Knudsen T, Richard A, Tice RR, Whelan M, Xia M, Huang R, Austin C, Daston G, Hartung T, Fowle JR 3rd, Wooge W, Tong W, Dix D (2013) Perspectives on validation of high-throughput assays supporting 21st century toxicity testing. ALTEX 30(1):51–56

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kinsner-Ovaskainen A, Maxwell G, Kreysa J, Barroso J, Adriaens E, Alépée N, Berg N, Bremer S, Coecke S, Comenges JZ, Corvi R, Casati S, Dal Negro G, Marrec-Fairley M, Griesinger C, Halder M, Heisler E, Hirmann D, Kleensang A, Kopp-Schneider A, Lapenna S, Munn S, Prieto P, Schechtman L, Schultz T, Vidal JM, Worth A, Zuang V (2012) Report of the EPAA-ECVAM workshop on the validation of Integrated Testing Strategies (ITS). Altern Lab Anim 40(3):175–181

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lachin JM (1981) Introduction to sample size determination and power analysis for clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 2:93–113

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews BW (1975) Comparison of the predicted and observed secondary structure of T4 phage lysozyme. Biochim Biophys Acta 405(2):442–451

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer D (2004) Essential evidence-based medicine. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Neugebauer EA (2009) Evidence-based medicine—a possible model for evidence-based toxicology? In: Hayes W, Griesinger C, Guzelian P (eds) Proceedings of the 1st international forum towards evidence-based toxicology. Hum Exp Toxicol 28(2–3):105–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (1996, updated in 2009) Final report of the OECD workshop on the harmonisation of validation and acceptance criteria for alternative toxicological test methods. “Solna Report”. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=env/mc/chem/tg(96)9&doclanguage=en

  • OECD (2005) Guidance document on the validation and international acceptance of new or updated test methods for hazard assessment. OECD series on testing and assessment, document No. 34. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=env/jm/mono%282005%2914&doclanguage=en

  • OECD (2008) Workshop on integrated approaches to testing and assessment. Series on testing and assessment No. 88. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=env/jm/mono(2008)10&doclanguage=en

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2013 (rev.), adopted 2010) Test guideline No. 439. In vitro skin irritation: Reconstructed human Epidermis test methods. http://www.oecdilibrary.org/docserver/download/9713241e.pdf?expires=1417441398&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=DB5C47DAF73F635E918A565FCCABCA01

  • OECD (2013) Guidance document on developing and assessing adverse outcome pathways. Series on Testing and Assessment No. 184. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=env/jm/mono(2013)6&doclanguage=en

  • OECD (2014 (2nd rev.), adopted 2004) Test guideline No. 431. In vitro skin corrosion: Reconstructed human Epidermis test methods. http://www.oecdilibrary.org/docserver/download/9714521e.pdf?expires=1417442281&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=BA3044BD757F25BF4559D9D83E8E83A6

  • OECD (2014) New guidance on an integrated approach on testing and assessment (IATA) for skin corrosion and irritation. Series on testing and assessment No. 203. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/?cote=env/jm/mono(2014)19&doclanguage=en

  • Pepe M (2003) The statistical evaluation of medical tests for classification and prediction. Oxford statistical science series. Oxford University Press, Oxford

  • Russell WMS, Burch RL (1959) The principles of humane experimental technique. Methuen, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Scala RA (1987) Theoretical approaches to validation. In: Goldberg AM (ed) In Vitro toxicology: approaches to validation. vol 5, Alternative methods in toxicology. Mary Ann Liebert, New York, pp 1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Smythe DH (1978) Alternatives to animal experiments. Scolar Press for the Research Defence Society, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephens ML, Andersen M, Becker RA, Betts K, Boekelheide K, Carney E, Chapin R, Devlin D, Fitzpatrick S, Fowle JR 3rd, Harlow P, Hartung T, Hoffmann S, Holsapple M, Jacobs A, Judson R, Naidenko O, Pastoor T, Patlewicz G, Rowan A, Scherer R, Shaikh R, Simon T, Wolf D, Zurlo J (2013) Evidence-based toxicology for the 21st century: opportunities and challenges. ALTEX 30(1):74–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Hecke T (2012) J Stat Manage Syst 15(2–3). http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09720510.2012.10701623?journalCode=tsms20#.VH7SxRAhB8E

  • Walum E, Clemedson C, Ekwall B (1994) Principles for the validation of in vitro toxicology test methods. Toxicol In Vitro 8:807–812

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Waters CK (1990) Why the antireductionist consensus won’t survive the case of classical Mendelian genetics. In: Fine A, Forbes M, Wessels L (eds) Proceedings of the biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, vol 1. Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, pp 125–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Waters CK (2007) Causes that make a difference. J Philos 104:551–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber M (2005) Philosophy of experimental biology. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valérie Zuang .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Griesinger, C., Desprez, B., Coecke, S., Casey, W., Zuang, V. (2016). Validation of Alternative In Vitro Methods to Animal Testing: Concepts, Challenges, Processes and Tools. In: Eskes, C., Whelan, M. (eds) Validation of Alternative Methods for Toxicity Testing. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol 856. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33826-2_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics