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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Administrative data

Endpoint:
skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
01 Feb - 03 Apr 1995
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: Guideline study with acceptable restrictions. The results of the reliability check were inconclusive.

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
1995
Report date:
1995

Materials and methods

Test guidelineopen allclose all
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
Deviations:
yes
Remarks:
results of reliability check were inconclusive
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
EU Method B.6 (Skin Sensitisation)
Deviations:
yes
Remarks:
results of reliability check were inconclusive
GLP compliance:
yes
Type of study:
Buehler test

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
(Z)-octadec-9-enyl (Z)-docos-13-enoate
EC Number:
241-654-9
EC Name:
(Z)-octadec-9-enyl (Z)-docos-13-enoate
Cas Number:
17673-56-2
Molecular formula:
C40H76O2
IUPAC Name:
(Z)-octadec-9-enyl (Z)-docos-13-enoate
Details on test material:
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): eruca acid oleyl ester
- Physical state: yellowish liquid
- Analytical purity: 100%
- Lot/batch No.: 24344206
- Expiration date: Jul 1995
- Stability: stable at room temperature

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
other: Dunkin Hartley Crl:(HA)BR
Sex:
female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Charles River, Kisslegg, Germany
- Age at study initiation: approximately 5 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: approximately 380 g
- Housing: in groups of 2-3 animals in Makrolon Type IV cages (EBECO) with standard softwood bedding (ARWI-Center, Essen, Germany); bedding chaged twice weekly
- Diet: pelleted Altromin Maintenance Diet 3022 (Fa. Altromin, Lage, Germany), ad libitum. Carrots optionally added.
- Water: tap water, ad libitum
- Acclimation period: 7 days

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 22 ± 3
- Humidity (%): 45-70
- Air changes (per hr): 100 m³
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12

IN-LIFE DATES: 7 Feb - 3 Apr 1995

Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)

Inductionopen allclose all
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
peanut oil
Concentration / amount:
Induction: 70 %
Challenge: 60 %
Challengeopen allclose all
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
peanut oil
Concentration / amount:
Induction: 70 %
Challenge: 60 %
No. of animals per dose:
10 (control group), 20 (treatment group)
Details on study design:
RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Irritation test: 0.5 mL of the test substance was applied topically to the shaved skin of 3 guinea pigs, successively. A concentration of 12.5, 25, 50 and 100 % was applied to the left flank and 30, 50 and 70% concentration to the right flank. The exposure was terminated after 6 hours by removing the plaster and cleaning the skin with 20% propylene glycol. The severity of erythema and oedema was assessed 24 and 48 h after exposure. The undiluted substance caused weak, confluent erythema in 1/3 animals at the 24 and 48 hour reading time point. The 70% solution was the lowest concentration to induce minimal irritation; causing weak, confluent erythema in 1/3 animals 24 hours after exposure. This effect had cleared within 48 hours.
Challenge test: the maximum non-irritating concentration was tested one week before the challenge in the main study by applying 0.5 mL of 30, 50 and 70% solution to the right flank of 5 animals in the control group under occlusive conditions. After 6 hours, the plaster was removed and the site cleaned with 20% propylene glycol. 24 and 48 hours after the exposure ended, the skin irritating effects were assessed. None of the concentrations caused skin irritation. 60% was selected to be the challenge dose.

MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 3
- Exposure period: 6 h
- Test groups: test substance in peanut oil
- Control group: peanut oil
- Site: left cranial shaved flanks
- Frequency of applications: once weekly
- Duration: Day 1-14
- Concentrations: 70%

B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1
- Day(s) of challenge: 28
- Exposure period: 6 h
- Test groups: test substance in peanut oil
- Control group: test substance in peanut oil
- Site: left and right caudal flanks
- Concentrations: 60%
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24, 48 and 72 h
Positive control substance(s):
yes
Remarks:
alpha-hexyl cinnamic aldehyde

Results and discussion

Positive control results:
A reliability check is carried out at regular intervals with alpha-hexyl cinnamic aldehyde to check the sensitivity of the test system and the reliability of the experimental methods used by the test laboratory. An independent study was performed in October-December 1994 (report No. R 9400844), according to the Buehler method. During the first challenge with 25% alpha-hexyl cinnamic aldehyde, a sensitisation reaction was induced in 25% (5/20) of the Dunkin Hartley guinea pigs, while the second challenge did not lead to conclusive sensitisation reactions. In the negative control group, the first challenge induced sensitisation in 20% (2/10) of the animals, and the second challenge did not caused any sensitisation reactions. The 50% solution in peanut oil that was used for the topical inductions, caused weak to moderate skin irritation. A 25% solution was applied in the first challenge, while a 25% solution was applied to the left flank and 15, 20 and 25% solutions were applied to the right flank during the second challenge. As 20% of the animals in the negative control group reacted, the results of the reliability check are inconclusive.

In vivo (non-LLNA)

Resultsopen allclose all
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
60 %
No. with + reactions:
1
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
1/10 animals showed slight, patchy erythema on the right flank only
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 60 %. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: 1/10 animals showed slight, patchy erythema on the right flank only.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
60 %
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 60 %. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
60 %
No. with + reactions:
1
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
1/10 animals showed slight, patchy erythema on the left flank only
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 60 %. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: 1/10 animals showed slight, patchy erythema on the left flank only.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
60 %
No. with + reactions:
2
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
2/20 animals showed slight, patchy erythema on the left flank only
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 60 %. No with. + reactions: 2.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: 2/20 animals showed slight, patchy erythema on the left flank only.
Reading:
other: 3rd reading
Hours after challenge:
72
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
60%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: other: 3rd reading. . Hours after challenge: 72.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 60%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
other: 3rd reading
Hours after challenge:
72
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
60%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: other: 3rd reading. . Hours after challenge: 72.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 60%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.

Any other information on results incl. tables

Skin rections, induction phases

The 3rd induction with a 70% solution caused slight skin irritation in 2/20 treatment animals.

Skin reactions, challenge phase

At the first reading, 1/10 control animals had slight, patchy erythema on the challenge site on the left flank. 1/10 in the control group had slight, patchy erythema on the right flank at the second reading, while 2/20 treatment animals had slight, patchy erythema on the left flank at the second reading. All skin irritation effects had cleared within 72 hours after exposure ended.

Table 1: Skin reactions 24, 48 and 72 hours after challenge

 

24 hours

48 hours

72 hours

group

(# of animals)

flank

control

(10)

l/r

treatment

(20)

l/r

control

(10)

l/r

treatment

(20)

l/r

control

(10)

l/r

treatment

(20)

l/r

none

10/9

20/20

9/10

18/20

10/10

20/20

slight

0/1

0/0

1/0

2/0

0/0

0/0

weak

0/0

0/0

0/0

0/0

0/0

0/0

moderate

0/0

0/0

0/0

0/0

0/0

0/0

strong

0/0

0/0

0/0

0/0

0/0

0/0

l: left flank, induction site and challenge site

r: right flank, challenge site

Mortality and body weight

There was no mortality during the study period and the animals in the treatment group showed a similar gain in body weight compared with the control group.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
not sensitising
Remarks:
Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
Conclusions:
CLP: not classified
DSD: not classified