As is said the principle in REACH of the sharing and joint submission of data on intrinsic properties of a substance continues to work well. The registrants used it to fullfil the information requirements and to avoid unnecessary animal testing.

Registrants are making full use of the adaptations outlined in REACH Annexes VII to XI to avoid unnecessary animal testing. The building of categories and predicting substance properties by ‘read-across’ were commonly used for fulfilling the information requirements, consistent with the findings of the 2011 report. A ‘read-across’ or category approach was used in up to 75% of analysed dossiers for at least one endpoint.

Registrants started to take up new or revised in vitro methods for skin and eye irritation endpoints. The total number of in vitro studies submitted for skin and eye irritation has tripled. Almost 20% of analysed dossiers contained in vitro studies for these endpoints. Registrants have already made use of alternative test methods for the skin sensitisation endpoint, even though this approach is still in its early stage of development.

Third parties frequently send comments of a scientific nature on testing proposals published on ECHA’s website. In a number of cases, registrants appeared to have used the information provided to remove the testing proposals by either submitting an adaptation to cover the information gap or by including experimental data on the substance itself.

This report is provided to the Commission to fullfil ECHA’s obligation under Article 117(3) of the REACH Regulation.

Source and more information: http://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13639/alternatives_test_animals_2014_en.pdf