Joint publication with Corteva Agriscience: GARD™skin and GARD™potency: A proof-of-concept study investigating applicability domain for agrochemical formulations

New joint publication with Corteva Agriscience.

SenzaGen scientists, alongside the toxicology team at Corteva Agriscience, have recently published a joint study in Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, presenting new peer-reviewed evidence on the applicability of GARD® for agrochemical formulations.

The study demonstrates a satisfactory performance of GARD®skin and GARD®potency for skin sensitization hazard and GHS potency categorization of tested agrochemical formulations.

Marco Corvaro, Joseph Henriquez, Raja Settivari, Ulrika Mattson, Andy Forreryd, Robin Gradin, Henrik Johansson, Sean Gehen,
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, Volume 148, 2024, 105595, ISSN 0273-2300,


GARD™; In vitro; Skin sensitisation; NAMs; Agrochemical formulations


  • Tested 42 agrochemical formulations to expand applicability domain of GARD.

  • GARDskin showed good accuracy (76.2%), sensitivity (85.0%) and specificity (68.2%).
  • GARDpotency correctly subcategorized 14/17, correctly predicted sensitisers.
  • GARD satisfactory for Key Event 3 characterisation of agrochemical formulations.


Several New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) for hazard assessment of skin sensitisers have been formally validated. However, data regarding their applicability on certain product classes are limited. The purpose of this project was to provide initial evidence on the applicability domain of GARD™skin and GARD™potency for the product class of agrochemical formulations.

For this proof of concept, 30 liquid and 12 solid agrochemical formulations were tested in GARDskin for hazard predictions. Formulations predicted as sensitisers were further evaluated in the GARDpotency assay to determine GHS skin sensitisation category. The selected formulations were of product types, efficacy groups and sensitisation hazard classes representative of the industry’s products.

The performance of GARDskin was estimated by comparing results to existing in vivo animal data. The overall accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity were 76.2% (32/42), 85.0% (17/20), and 68.2% (15/22), respectively, with the predictivity for liquid formulations being slightly higher compared to the solid formulations. GARDpotency correctly subcategorized 14 out of the 17 correctly predicted sensitisers. Lack of concordance was justifiable by compositional or borderline response analysis. In conclusion, GARDskin and GARDpotency showed satisfactory performance in this initial proof-of-concept study, which supports consideration of agrochemical formulations being within the applicability domain of the test methods.