Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 46 (2006) 18–22 www.elsevier.com/locate/yrtph 0273-2300/$ - see front matter Published by Elsevier Inc. doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2006.06.001 Report of an ISRTP Workshop: Progress and barriers to incorporating alternative toxicological methods in the U.S. Richard A. Becker a,¤ , Christopher J. Borgert b , Simon Webb c , Jay Ansell d , Sara Amundson e , Christopher J. Portier f , Alan Goldberg g , Leon H. Bruner h , Andrew Rowan i , Rodger D. Curren j , William T. Stott k a American Chemistry Council, Arlington, VA, USA b Applied Pharmacology and Toxicology, Inc., Gainesville, FL, USA c The Procter and Gamble Company, Strombeek-Bever, Belgium d Yves Rocher North America, Inc., Exton, PA, USA e Doris Day Animal League, Washington, DC, USA f National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA g Johns Hopkins University, Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing, Baltimore, MD, USA h The Gillette Company, Needham, MA, USA i The Humane Society of the United States, Washington, DC, USA j Institute for In Vitro Sciences, Inc., Gaithersburg, MD, USA k The Dow Chemical Company, Midland, MI, USA Received 6 June 2006 Available online 28 July 2006 Abstract The workshop objectives were to explore progress in implementing new, revised and alternative toxicological test methods across reg- ulatory evaluation frameworks and decision-making programs in the United States, to identify barriers and to develop recommendations to further promote adoption of approaches that reduce, reWne, or replace the use of animal methods. The workshop included sessions on: (1) current research, development, and validation of alternative methods within the U.S. federal government; (2) emerging alternative methodologies with potential applications to a broad spectrum of toxicity evaluation strategies; (3) tiered evaluation (“intelligent testing”) strategies; and (4) identiWcation of, and recommendations to address, critical barriers that aVect adoption and use of new, revised alternative toxicological test methods by U.S. regulatory agencies. Through facilitated discussion, a list of barriers and recommen- dations were developed and grouped into categories of economic/Wnancial, scientiWc/technical, and regulatory/policy. Overall, partici- pants from all sectors collectively supported catalyzing actions to promote more meaningful and rapid progress for research to develop alternative methods focused for use in regulatory programs, accelerated lab investigations to validate such alternative methods and adoption of regulatory frameworks which embrace and incorporate these validated alternatives. Published by Elsevier Inc. Keywords: Alternative testing methods; Animal testing; Regulatory toxicology The International Society of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology (ISRTP) hosted a workshop in November 2005 that explored progress to date in implementing new, revised and alternative toxicological test methods to reduce, reWne, or replace the use of animals across regulatory evalu- ation frameworks and decision-making programs in the U.S. (see http://www.isrtp.org for workshop program, speaker’s slides, and available workshop CDs). In addition to providing a better understanding of current alternatives research and validation eVorts, the workshop focused on * Corresponding author. Fax: +1 703 741 6056. E-mail address: Rick_Becker@americanchemistry.com (R.A. Becker).