Here - Stiftung Forschung 3R

and expertise collected and acquired by
the project persists after March 2010.
Project Management
Project management was taken care of
by the Co-ordinator, assisted by the Vice
Co-ordinator, the Management Team (WP
leaders), the Steering Committee, and
the Scientific Advisory Board. While these
bodies have assured proper and timely
exhibition of the implementation plans,
or advised on how to proceed (decision
making) and to improve, the General
Assembly has been the body actually
taking the decisions.
An important management task has
been to stimulate communication and
dissemination among the partners, and to
adjust the meeting format to the changing
Sens-it-iv landscape. The Science Module
was characterised by quarterly progress
reports, which were evaluated and
discussed by the Management Team. In
addition, regular intra-WP meetings were
organised (either physical or by telephone)
during the first 1.5 years to assure optimal
use of resources and to stimulate the
exchange of information. As the different
WPs started to collect data, integration
was stimulated by organising selected
inter-WP meetings (e.g., WP2 - WP3 on
dendritic cells; WP2 - WP4-6 on –omics
analysis of keratinocytes and DC; WP5-6
on haptenisation and bio-activation; WP1-
7 on data collection). With the transition
from basic research (Science Module) to
applied research (Technology Module) the
quarterly reports were abandoned. The
frequency of GA meetings was increased
from annual to 2 per year since the focus
on test development and refinement
required an integrated approach and thus
the presence of all available expertise.
Furthermore, decisions had to be made
about (i) tests to be pursued or abandoned,
(ii) prioritisation, and (iii) modifications of
the implementation plan. Such decisions
can only be made by the GA.
Results
Final Compound List
1. Chemicals
The selection of the chemicals to be
used for the development of the tests
was performed according to predefined
criteria.
Inclusion criteria included the following:
• Chemicals should be backed by the
availability of high quality in vivo data
• Chemicals should be purchasable
from commercial sources
• Chemicals should cover as much as
possible the dynamic range of effects
observed in the in vivo tests (e.g., the
Local Lymph Node Assay, LLNA)
• Chemicals should cover a relevant
range of chemical classes
• Chemicals should cover different
chemical reaction mechanisms by
which they react with proteins
• Chemicals should cover as much as
possible a wide range of physicalchemical
properties
• Chemicals that must be activated
to react with proteins should be
PROGRESS REPORTS FROM EU-FUNDED PROJECTS
Progress Report 2011 & AXLR8-2 Workshop Report
163