The luminescent bacteria toxicity test: its potential as an in vitro alternative

• Published in: Journal of bioluminescence and chemiluminescence Vol. 5; no. 2; p. 71
• Main Authors: Bulich, A A, Tung, K K, Scheibner, G
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England 01.04.1990
• Subjects: Animal Testing Alternatives; Animals; Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Eye - drug effects; Eye - pathology; Luminescent Measurements; Photobacterium - drug effects; Rabbits
• ISSN: 0884-3996
• DOI: 10.1002/bio.1170050202

During the past several years, the use of animals for toxicity testing has come under critical surveillance. For ethical and economic reasons, various techniques have been developed and proposed as potential alternatives for some of the whole animal toxicity assays. One assay proposed as an alternative to animal testing is the luminescent bacteria toxicity test (LBT), provided under the trade name of Microtox. The sensitivity and specificity of the LBT was compared with two commonly used toxicity tests--the L-929 Minimal Eàgle's Medium (MEM) elution cytotoxicity test and the Draize test. Cytotoxicity and LBT test data from 709 medical device and biomaterial extracts were compared using a positive/negative ranking system which provided a measurement of false positive and false negative results. These data were compiled from nine separate laboratories producing or using a wide variety of biomaterials and medical device products. The LBT was more sensitive than the tissue culture assay and displayed few false negatives. LBT EC50 values were compared with eye irritancy categories for a group of 34 chemicals and 27 personal care products. As with tissue culture, the LBT was more sensitive and produced minimal false negatives. The data from this study indicate the LBT has potential as a rapid, simple method to screen biomaterials and personal care products for toxicity and irritancy.