The LAL test is a major source of animal product dependence in the biomedical industry, and a challenge to the Three Rs of science in relation to the use of animals in testing. With reports of higher-than anticipated mortality rates it has been considered more ethical to devise alternatives to the test. Since 2003, a recombinant protein substitute for use in the LAL test has been commercially available. Named the recombinant factor C (rFC) assay, it is based on the same Limulus clotting factor C protein, but produced by genetically modified insect cells (the specific factor C sequence used does not necessarily come from the Atlantic horseshoe crab).
Instead of emulating the whole clotting pathway, rFC tests let factor C cleave a synthetic fluorogenic substrate, so that the sample lights up when endotoxin activates the factor. Since it does not contain factor G, (1,3)-β-D-glucan will not cause false-positives. As of 2018, available evidence shows that the rFC test is no worse than the LAL test.
The adoption of the rFC test was slow, which began to change in 2012 when the US FDA and the European health ministry acknowledged it as an accepted alternative. Its lack of mention in Pharmacopeias remained an issue, as there was no good standard for running the test in production. In 2016, it was added to the European Pharmacopoeia. A patent on rFC also limited adoption until its expiration in 2018.
On 1 June 2020, the United States Pharmacopeia (USP) decided to cancel the proposal to include recombinant technology for endotoxin testing in chapter 85, Bacterial Endotoxins, and start the development of a separate chapter that expands on the use, validation, and comparability of endotoxin tests based on recombinantly derived reagents. A separate guidance-only chapter 1085.1 was proposed by the USP, though comments and feedback published on 11 December 2020 show that pharmaceutical companies and the FDA do not support this chapter, and request for compendial status.