Tiered application of the neutral red release and EpiOcular™ assays for evaluating the eye irritation potential of agrochemical formulations

•Two alternative in vitro assays were evaluated for predicting the eye irritation.•64 and 51 formulations (11 types) were tested in the NRR and EpiOcular™ assays.•The NRR assay demonstrated good performance to identify GHS Cat 1 formulations.•Tiered application of the assays provided improved performance.

Agrochemical formulations have been underrepresented in validation efforts for implementing alternative eye irritation approaches but represent a significant opportunity to reduce animal testing. This study assesses the utility of the neutral red release assay (NRR) and EpiOcular™ assay (EO) for predicting the eye irritation potential of 64 agrochemical formulations relative to Draize data. In the NRR, formulations with an NRR50 value ≤ 50 mg/mL were categorized as UN GHS Cat 1 and those >250 mg/mL were classified as UN GHS Non Classified (NC). The accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 78, 85 and 76% and 73, 85 and 61% for identifying UN GHS 1 and NC formulations, respectively. Specificity was poor for formulations with NRR50 > 50 to ≤250 mg/mL. The EO (ET-40 method) was explored to differentiate formulations that were UN GHS 1/2 and UN GHS NC. The EO resulted in accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 65%, 58% and 75% for identifying UN GHS NC formulations. To improve the overall performance, the assays were implemented using a tiered-approach where the NRR was run as a first-tier followed by the EO. The tiered-approach resulted in improved accuracy (75%) and balanced sensitivity (73%) and specificity (77%) for distinguishing between irritating and non-irritating agrochemical formulations.

Graphical abstractDownload full-size image