Registration Dossier

Data platform availability banner - registered substances factsheets

Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.

The new ECHA CHEM database has been released by ECHA, and it now contains all REACH registration data. There are more details on the transition of ECHA's published data to ECHA CHEM here.

Diss Factsheets

Toxicological information

Skin sensitisation

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: The study was conducted according to current OECD test guideline and in compliance with GLP.

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
1994
Report date:
1994

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
GLP compliance:
yes
Type of study:
Buehler test

Test material

Constituent 1
Reference substance name:
Not applicable-UVCB
EC Number:
619-079-3
Cas Number:
949109-75-5
Molecular formula:
UVCB- Mixture of many formulae.
IUPAC Name:
Not applicable-UVCB
Constituent 2
Reference substance name:
Steroids, hydroxy
EC Number:
271-413-3
EC Name:
Steroids, hydroxy
Cas Number:
68555-08-8
IUPAC Name:
68555-08-8
Test material form:
other: Solid
Details on test material:
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): Generol 122. This substance is known by CAS number 68555-08-8. It fits the substance identity of the registered substance
- Substance type: Phytosterol UVCB
- Typical composition: beta-sitosterol (EC 201-480-6) 30-80%; campesterol (EC 207-484-4) ≤ 45%; Stigmasterol (EC 201-482-7) ≤ 30%; brassicasterol (EC 207-486-5) ≤ 20%; sitostanol (EC 201-479-0) ≤ 15%; campestanol (CAS 474-60-2) ≤ 2%
- Physical state: solid (at room temperature)
- Analytical purity: 95-100% Plant sterols
- Purity test date: not given
- Lot/batch No.:1055

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
Pirbright-Hartley
Sex:
female

Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)

Inductionopen allclose all
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
peanut oil
Concentration / amount:
Application dose - 0.65 g/plaster
Challengeopen allclose all
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
peanut oil
Concentration / amount:
Application dose - 0.65 g/plaster
No. of animals per dose:
3 preliminary, 10 control; 5 dose finding;
20 treatment.group

Results and discussion

In vivo (non-LLNA)

Resultsopen allclose all
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
12% dilution
No. with + reactions:
9
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
First challenge - Slight/weak dermal effects on the flank 24 hours after challenge.
Remarks on result:
other: see Remark
Remarks:
Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 12% dilution. No with. + reactions: 9.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: First challenge - Slight/weak dermal effects on the flank 24 hours after challenge..
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
12% dilution
No. with + reactions:
3
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
First challenge - Slight dermal reaction
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 12% dilution. No with. + reactions: 3.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: First challenge - Slight dermal reaction.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
12% dilution
No. with + reactions:
17
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
First challenge - Slight to weak dermal reaction
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 12% dilution. No with. + reactions: 17.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: First challenge - Slight to weak dermal reaction.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
12% dilution
No. with + reactions:
7
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
First challenge - Slight to weak dermal effects
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 12% dilution. No with. + reactions: 7.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: First challenge - Slight to weak dermal effects.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
72
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
12% dilution
No. with + reactions:
4
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
First challenge - Slight dermal reaction
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 72.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 12% dilution. No with. + reactions: 4.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: First challenge - Slight dermal reaction.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
72
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
12% dilution
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
First challenge - no effects reported
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 72.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 12% dilution. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: First challenge - no effects reported.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
3% dilution
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
Second challenge - no effects reported
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 3% dilution. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: Second challenge - no effects reported.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
3% dilution
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
Second challenge - no dermal effects reported
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 3% dilution. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: Second challenge - no dermal effects reported.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
3%
No. with + reactions:
6
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
Second challenge - slight dermal reaction
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 3%. No with. + reactions: 6.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: Second challenge - slight dermal reaction.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
3% dilution
No. with + reactions:
1
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
Second challenge - slight dermal reaction
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 3% dilution. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: Second challenge - slight dermal reaction.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
72
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
3% dilution
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
Second challenge - no dermal effects reported
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 72.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 3% dilution. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: Second challenge - no dermal effects reported.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
72
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
3% dilution
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
Second challenge - no dermal effects reported
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 72.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 3% dilution. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: Second challenge - no dermal effects reported.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Remarks:
Migrated information
Conclusions:
In a well conducted skin sensitisation study using non adjuvant method (Buehler,OECD 406, Rel 1, GLP) Plant sterols did not show any responses in guinea pigs following induction and challenge (epicutaneous, occlusive method). Plant sterols therefore do not fall under the criteria of classification as per EU Regulation CLP. (1272/2008)