Benzene mono-C10-13-alkyl derivatives, distillation residues, sulfonated, sodium salts

Endpoint summary

Description of key information

Discussion

Classification and Labelling Proposal for Benzene mono-C10-13-alkyl derivatives, distillation residues, sulfonated, sodium salts (EC No. None; CAS No. None) Classification and Labeling is proposed and explained for Benzene mono-C10-13-alkyl derivatives, distillation residues, sulfonated, sodium salts using data from skin sensitisation studies with this substance and from skin sensitisation studies on natural and synthetic calcium sulfonates. For Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) classification and labeling, EU Classification, Labeling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP) Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008 applies. In the lubricant additive industry, a common name such as sodium and calcium sulfonate is used for natural and synthetic long-chain alkylbenzenesulfonic acids, sodium and calcium salts. Sodium and calcium sulfonates, which have surfactant properties, are used as detergents in a broad variety of lubricant applications. In some cases, excess sodium hydroxide or calcium carbonate is added to the calcium sulfonates to add acid buffering capacity (commonly known as “overbasing”). Sodium and calcium sulfonates with a large excess of sodium hydroxide or calcium carbonate are referred to as high overbased or high total base number (TBN) sodium and calcium sulfonates, whereas sodium or calcium sulfonates with small amounts of added sodium hydroxide or calcium carbonate are called low overbased or low TBN sodium and calcium sulfonates. Animal studies show that sodium and calcium sulfonates with a TBN greater than 300 are not skin sensitizers while the results in animals at a TBN of 300 exhibit a mixed response. Human repeat insult patch tests confirmed that the high TBN overbased calcium sulfonates (TBN ≥ 300) are not sensitisers and that low TBN calcium sulfonates do not cause sensitization (within the definition of sensitisation under EU Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008) in a substantial number of persons at concentrations of 10% or lower. Based on this, a sensitisation specific concentration limit (SCL) of ≥ 10% for low TBN calcium sulfonates can be determined. Sodium and calcium Sulfonate Skin Sensitisation: Low TBN Sodium and Calcium Sulfonates In a key LLNA BrdU ELISA study (OECD 442B), benzene mono-C10-13-alkyl derivatives, distillation residues, sulfonated, sodium salt was tested on female CBA/J mice (five animals per group) were treated with test article concentrations of 0.5, 1 and 2.5% in acetone:olive oil (4:1, AOO). A vehicle control group was treated with AOO and another group was treated with positive control, 25% alpha-hexylcinnamaldehyde in AOO. Topical application of benzene, mono-C10-13-alkyl derivatives, distillation residues, sulfonated, sodium salts resulted in SI values greater than 1.6 (SI > 1.6). Therefore, it was concluded that benzene mono-C10-13-alkyl derivatives, distillation residues, sulfonated, sodium salt is a dermal sensitizer in the LLNA with a EC1.6 of 0.6 (v/v) (MB Research, 2016). In a dermal sensitisation of the low TBN substance (Benzenesulfonic acid, mono-C20-24 (even)-sec-alkyl derivs., para-, sodium salts; EC No. None; CAS No. None); TBN = 3) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Smedley, 2015a). The animals were treated topically with a 75% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil once per week during the three-week induction phase. Following a two-week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 35% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 15% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. At the respective 24 and 48-hours challenge and rechallenge readings, dermal scores of 2 were noted in 18/20 and 16/20 at the 35% challenge and 14/20 and 14/20 at the 15% rechallenge. The 24/48 hour Draize scores in the 35% challenge group were 1.9/1.8 compared to 0.6/0.6 in the challenge controls. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores in the 15% rechallenge group were 1.7/1.7 compared to 0.7/0.8 in the rechallenge controls. Based on these results the test substance was determined to be a sensitiser. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a low TBN substance (Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15-36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, calcium salts; EC 939-141-9; TBN = 13) was evaluated in the local lymph node assay (LLNA) (Lees, 1996). Groups of male mice (4/group) were dose with approximately 25 µL of 0.1, 1, 10 or 30% concentrations of the test material in DMF on the dorsal surface of each ear for three consecutive days. The animals were then injected with 3H-methylthymidine, and the auricular lymph nodes where then collected and prepared for scintillation counting. A three-fold or greater increase in isotope incorporation was observed at all test concentrations. Although investigators have reported that LLNA over predicts the sensitisation potential of surfactants (Basketer & Kimber, 2011; Ball et al., 2011), the positive response in this study is supportive of the sensitisation response for low TBN calcium sulfonates noted in other sensitisation studies. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a low TBN substance (Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15-36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, calcium salts; EC 939-141-9; TBN = 13) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Bonnette, 1993b; Table 5.9). The animals were treated topically with a 100% concentration of the test substance once per week during the three-week induction phase. Following a two-week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 50% concentration of the test substance. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. Following the first rechallenge, the animals then were rechallenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance. The number of animals exhibiting positive sensitisation responses for the test substance at 50%, 25%, and 10% were 9/10, 10/10, and 9/10, respectively, and the mean 24/48 hour Draize scores were 1.9/2.1, 1.6/2.0, and 1.5/1.5, respectively. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores for the naïve controls at 50%, 25%, and 10% were 0.2/0.2, 0.7/0.6, and 0.5/0.5, respectively. Based on these results the test substance was determined to be a sensitiser. Table 5.9. Dermal Sensitisation Study (Modified Buehler Design) in Guinea Pigs with a 100% Low TBN Calcium Sulfonate (Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15-36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, Calcium Salts; EC 939 -141 -6; TBN = 13) Induction: Challenge Results (Bonnette, 1993b)  Group  Concentration  Mean Draize Score     # Positive  Conclusion      24 hours   24 hours      Test  50% 1.9  2.1  9/10  Sensitizer   Control  50% 0.2  0.2                  Test  25% 1.6  2.0 10/10  Sensitizer   Control  25% 0.7  0.6                   Test  10%  1.5  1.5 9/10   Sensitizer  Control  10%  0.5  0.5     Control = Topical application of test article to naive animals to account for primary irritation reactions                   In another key study the dermal sensitisation of this low TBN substance (Benezenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15-36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, calcium salts; EC 939 -141 -6; TBN = 13) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Shults, 1993). The animals were treated topically with a 100% concentration of the test substance once per week during the three-week induction phase. Following a two-week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance. Following the first rechallenge, the animals then were rechallenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance. The number of animals exhibiting positive sensitisation responses for the test substance at 25%, 10% rechallenge, and 10% second rechallenge were 10/10, 9/10, and 7/10, respectively, and the mean 24/48 hour Draize scores were 1.4/1.15, 0.8/0.95, and 0.8/0.85, respectively. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores for the naïve controls at 25%, 10% rechallenge, and 10% second rechallenge were 0.8/0.06, 0.55/0.6, and 0.3/0.65, respectively. Based on these results the test substance was determined to be a sensitiser. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of this low TBN substance (Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15-36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, calcium salts; EC 939-141-6; TBN =13) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Shanahan & Erianne, 1993a; Table 5.10). A panel of 53 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase the undiluted (100% concentration) test substance was administered directly to the skin and covered with a semi-occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 44 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with the undiluted (100% concentration) test substance. Positive responses (scores ≥ 1) were observed in 9/44 and 6/44 at the 24 and 72 hour readings, respectively. Rechallenge of the six subjects suspected of exhibiting allergic reactions confirmed allergic contact dermatitis in four (4/44 or 9%). Based on these results the test substance was determined to be a sensitiser. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of this low TBN substance (Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15-36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, calcium salts; EC 939-141-6; TBN =13) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Shanahan & Erianne, 1994c Table 5.10). A panel of 55 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 20% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with a semi-occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 45 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 20% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. Positive responses (scores ≥ 1) were observed in 16/45 and 16/45 at the 24 and 72 hour readings (or 48 or 96 hour make up readings), respectively. Approximately 31 % (14/45) of the test population exhibited skin reactivity patterns that were suggestive or indicative of low to moderate grade, induced allergic contact dermatitis. Based on these results the test substance was determined to be a sensitiser. Table 5.10. Human Repeat Insult Patch Tests (HRIPT) with a Low TBN Calcium Sulfonate (Benzenesulfonic Acid, 4-(Mono-C15-36 Branched Alkyl Derivs., C24 Rich) and Benzenesulfonic Acid, 4-Octadecyl, Calcium Salts; EC 939 -141 -6; TBN = 13): Challenge Results  Test Phase Concentration  # Positive Responses     Conclusion  Study      24 hours  72 hours      Induction  100%      Sensitizer  Shanahan & Erianne, 1993a  Challenge  100%  9/44  6/44                  Induction  20%      Sensitizer  Shanahan & Erianne, 1994c  Challenge  20%  16/45*  16/45*     * 48 or 96 hr. make-up readings were required for some subjects Low TBN Specific Concentration Limit (SCL) The weight-of-evidence of all the animal and human studies demonstrates that low TBN calcium sulfonates are skin sensitisers. However, well-conducted, reliable, controlled HRIPT studies show that these substances do not cause sensitisation in a substantial number of subjects at 10% and lower. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a low TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 30) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Alworth, Schwartz & Erianne, 1995c; Table 5.11). Five panels consisting of a total of 166 subjects were identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 142 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 8/142 (5.6%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses. Based on these results the test substance was determined to cause a low incidence of sensitisation characterized by mild to moderate reactions in all but one subject. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a low TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 30) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Eisenberg,1994c; Table 5.11). A panel of 220 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of ten applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 205 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 12/205 (5.8%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses following the 10% challenge. Based on these results the test substance was determined to cause a low incidence of sensitisation characterized by mild to moderate reactions at 10%. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a low TBN analogue of this substance (Benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts; EC 616-278-7; TBN = 13) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Alworth, Schwartz & Erianne, 1995a; Table 5.11). Five panels consisting of a total of 159 subjects were identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 154 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 4/154 (2.6%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses. Based on these results the test substance was determined to cause a low incidence of sensitisation characterized by mild to moderate reactions. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a low TBN analogue of this substance (Benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts; EC 616-278-7; TBN = 13) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Eisenberg,1994a; Table 5.11). A panel of 223 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of ten applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 199 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 12/199 (6.0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses following the 10% challenge. Based on these results the test substance was determined to cause a low incidence of sensitisation characterized by mild to moderate reactions at 10%. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of this substance (Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15-36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, calcium salts; EC 939-141-6; TBN =13) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Alworth, Schwartz & Erianne, 1995b; Table 5.11). Four panels consisting of a total of 157 subjects were identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 140 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 4/140 (2.9%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses. Based on these results the test substance was determined to cause a low incidence of sensitisation characterized by mild to moderate reactions in all but one subject. In another key study, the dermal sensitisation of this substance (Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15-36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, calcium salts; EC 939-141-6; TBN =13) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Eisenberg,1994b; Table 5.11). A panel of 227 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of ten applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 199 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 12/199 (6.0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses following the 10% challenge. Based on these results the test substance was determined to cause a low incidence of sensitisation characterized by mild to moderate reactions at 10%. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a low TBN analogue of this substance (Benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts; EC 616-278-7; TBN = 85), was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Shanahan & Erianne, 1994a; Table 5.11). A panel of 53 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with a semi-occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 48 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 3/48 (6.3%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses. Based on these results the test substance was determined to cause a low incidence of sensitisation characterized by mild to moderate reactions in all but one subject. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a low TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 13, was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Shanahan & Erianne, 1994e; Table 5.11). A panel of 60 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with a semi-occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 56 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 0/56 (0.0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses. Based on these results the test substance was determined to not cause a sensitisation response. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a low TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 100) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Shanahan & Erianne, 1994f; Table 5.11). A panel of 52 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with a semi-occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 51 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 0/51 (0.0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses. Based on these results the test substance was determined to not cause a sensitisation response. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of an analogue of this substance (Benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts; EC 616-278-7; TBN = 13) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (DiFiglia, Shanahan & Erianne, 1993d). A panel of 53 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 1% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 48 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 1% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 0/48 (0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses following the 1% challenge. Based on these results the test substance was determined not to induce irritation or sensitisation at 1%. Table 5.11. Calcium Sulfonate Human Repeat Insult Patch Tests (HRIPT) with a 10% Induction Phase Concentration  Substance Challenge %   Challenge Response  Sensitization Response (%)  Conclusion  Study EC 263-093-9 (TBN = 30)  10%  7/142 with mild to moderate erythema/oedema including mild to moderate papular reactions; 1/142 with moderate erythema @ 24 hours and severe erythema @ 72 hours  8/142 (5.6)  Sensitiser: low incidence with mild to moderate reactions in all but one of 8 subjects  Alworth, Schwartz & Erianne, 1995c EC 263-093-9 (TBN = 30)  10%  3/205 with mild erythema @ original & virgin sites; 1/205 with moderate erythema @ both areas; 7/205 with mild erythema original site; 1/205 with mild erythema virgin site  12/205 (5.8)  Sensitiser: low incidence with mild to moderate reactions Eisenberg, 1994c  EC 616-278-7 (TBN = 13)  10%  2/154 with mild to moderate erythema with moderate papular reactions; 2/154 with mild to marked erythema and with moderate oedema and moderate papular reactions in the induction phase that were considered sensitised and, therefore were not challenged  4/154 (2.6)  Sensitiser: low incidence with mild to moderate reactions  Alworth, Schwartz & Erianne, 1995a EC 616-278-7 (TBN = 13)  10%  6/199 with mild erythema @ original sites; 5/199 with moderate erythema original site; 1/199 with moderate erythema virgin site  12/199 (6.0)  Sensitiser: low incidence with mild to moderate reactions  Eisenberg, 1994a EC 939-141-6 (TBN = 13)  10%   3/140 with mild to moderate erythema with mild to moderate oedema and/or mild to severe papular reactions in some; 1/140 with moderate erythema with mild to severe papular reaction including an adverse reaction report of reaction spreading to back/neck @ 96 hrs. with erythema diminishing @ 192 hours but papular reaction spreading to the eyes  4/140 (2.9)  Sensitiser: low incidence with mild to moderate reactions in all but one of 4 subjects  Alworth, Schwartz & Erianne, 1995b EC 939-141-6 (TBN = 13)  10%  1/210 with mild erythema original and virgin site; 6/210 with BP to mild erythema original site; 5/210 moderate erythema original site; 1/210 with marked erythema original site; 1/210 with mild erythema virgin site; 1/210 with marked erythema original site  15/210(7.1)  Sensitiser: low incidence with mild to moderate reactions  Eisenberg, 1994b EC 616-278-7 (TBN = 85)  10%  2/48 with mild to moderate erythema and 1/48 with moderate oedema and papular that spread beyond contact site during induction were not challenged  3/48(6.3)   Sensitiser: low incidence with mild to moderate reactions  Shanahan & Erianne, 1994a EC 263-093-9 (TBN = 82)  10%  56/56 no reaction  0/56(0)  Not a sensitiser  Shanahan & Erianne, 1994e EC 263-093-9 (TBN = 100)  10%  51/51 no reaction  0/51(0)  Not a sensitiser  Shanahan & Erianne, 1994f EC 263-093-9 = Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts EC 616-278-7 = Benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts EC 939-141-6 =Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15-36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, calcium salts              In accordance with EU CLP Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008, classification of low TBN calcium sulfonates is required for sensitisation with a specific concentration limit of 10%. High TBN Calcium Sulfonates In another key study the dermal sensitisation of the high TBN substance benzenesulfonic acid, mono-C20-24 (even)-sec-alkyl derivs., para-, sodium salts (EC No. None; CAS No. None; TBN = 448) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Smedley, 2015b). The animals were treated topically with a 100% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil once per week during the three-week induction phase. Following a two-week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 75% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 50% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. Following a one-week rest period the animal received a second rechallenge at 25% of the substance in mineral oil. At the respective 24 and 48-hours challenge, rechallenge, and second rechallenge readings, dermal scores of 1 were noted in 3/20 and 6/20 at the 75% challenge; dermal scores of 1 or 2 were noted in 13/20 and 13/20 at the 50% rechallenge; and dermal scores of 1 were noted in 10/20 and 12/20 at the 25% second rechallenge. The 24/48 hour Draize scores in the 75% challenge group were 0.2/0.3 compared to 0.3/0.5 in the challenge controls. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores in the 50% rechallenge group were 1.2/1.2 compared to 0.9/0.3 in the rechallenge controls. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores in the 25% second rechallenge group were 0.6/0.7 compared to 0.5/0.7 in the rechallenge controls. Based on the weight-of-evidence of these results the test substance was determined not to be a sensitiser. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 375) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Kiplinger, 1992a; Table 5.12). The animals were treated topically with a 100% concentration of the test substance once per week during the three-week induction phase. Following a two-week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. The number of animals exhibiting positive sensitisation responses for the test substance at 25% challenge and 25% rechallenge were 0/12 and 0/12, respectively, and the mean 24/48 hour Draize scores were 0.4/0.4 and 0.4/0.4, respectively. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores for the naïve controls at 25% challenge and 25% rechallenge were 0.1/0.1 and 0.4/0.3, respectively. Based on these results the test substance was determined not to be a sensitiser. Table 5.12. Dermal Sensitisation Study (Modified Buehler Design) in Guinea Pigs with a 100% High TBN Calcium Sulfonate (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 375) Induction: Challenge Results (Kiplinger, 1992a)  Group  Concentration  Mean Draize Score     # Positive  Conclusion       24hours  48 hours      Test  25%  0.4  0.4  0/12  Not a sensitiser  Control  25%  0.1   0.1                   Test  25%  0.4  0.4  0/12    Not a sensitiser  Control  25%  0.4  0.3       In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 400) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Reagan, 1988). The animals were treated topically with a 100% concentration of the test substance once per week during the three-week induction phase. Following a two-week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 60% concentration of the test substance. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 60% concentration of the test substance. The number of animals exhibiting positive sensitisation responses for the test substance at 60% challenge and 60% rechallenge were 4/10 and 0/10, respectively, and the mean 26/48 hour Draize score severity indices were 0.7/0.5 and 0.0/0.2, respectively. The mean 26/48 hour Draize score severity indices for the naïve controls at 60% challenge and 60% rechallenge were 0.5/0.3 and 0.0/0.0, respectively. Based on these results the test substance was determined not to be a sensitiser. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 375) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Kiplinger, 1992b). The animals were treated topically with a 30% concentration of the test substance once per week during the three-week induction phase. Following a two-week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. The number of animals exhibiting positive sensitisation responses for the test substance at 25% challenge and 25% rechallenge was 0/12 and 0/11, respectively, and the mean 24/48 hour Draize scores were 0.4/0.3 and 0.4/0.3, respectively. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores for the naïve controls at 25% challenge and 25% rechallenge were 0.5/0.4 and 0.2/0.2, respectively. Based on these results the test substance was determined not to be a sensitiser. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 300) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Blaszcak, 1992). The animals were treated topically with a 100% concentration of the test substance once per week during the three-week induction phase. Following a two-week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. The number of animals exhibiting positive sensitisation responses for the test substance at 25% challenge and 25% rechallenge were 1/20 and 7/20, respectively, and the mean 24/48 hour Draize scores were 0.0/0.2 and 0.4/0.4, respectively. In the naïve controls 0/10 and 4/10 animals, respectively, exhibited positive irritation responses; the mean 24/48 hour Draize scores for the naïve controls at 25% challenge and 25% rechallenge were 0.0/0.0 and 0.5/0.4, respectively. Dermal responses to the corn oil vehicle alone were similar to the treated animals and naïve control. Based on these results the test substance was determined not to be a sensitiser. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 300) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Kiplinger, 1992c). The animals were treated topically with a 100% concentration of the test substance once per week during the three-week induction phase. Following a two-week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. The number of animals exhibiting positive sensitisation responses for the test substance at 25% challenge and 25% rechallenge were 4/12 and 5/12, respectively, and the mean 24/48 hour Draize scores were 0.7/0.6 and 0.6/0.5, respectively. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores for the naïve controls at 25% challenge and 25% rechallenge were 0.3/0.4 and 0.3/0.5, respectively. Based on these results the test substance was determined to be a sensitiser. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts; EC 616-278-7; TBN = 300) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Bonnette, 1993a). The animals were treated topically with a 100% concentration of the test substance once per week during the three-week induction phase. Following a two-week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 50% concentration of the test substance. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 25% concentration of the test substance. Following the first rechallenge, the animals then were rechallenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance. The number of animals exhibiting positive sensitisation responses for the test substance at 50%, 25%, and 10% were 8/10, 10/10, and 7/10, respectively, and the mean 24/48 hour Draize scores were 1.1/2.1, 1.6/1.7, and 1.2/1.2, respectively. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores for the naïve controls at 50%, 25%, and 10% were 0.5/0.5, 0.7/0.8, and 0.3/0.5, respectively. Based on these results the test substance was determined to be a sensitiser. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 300) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Shanahan & Erianne, 1994d; Table 5.13). A panel of 213 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 100% concentration of the test substance was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 200 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 100% concentration of the test substance. A total of 0/200 (0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses following the 100% challenge. Based on these results the test substance was determined not to induce irritation or sensitisation at 100%. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 300) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (DiFiglia, Shanahan & Erianne, 1993c; Table 5.13). A panel of 53 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 51 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 0/51 (0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses following the 10% challenge. Based on these results the test substance was determined not to induce irritation or sensitisation at 10%. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 300) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (DiFiglia, Shanahan & Erianne, 1993d; Table 5.13). A panel of 53 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 1% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 50 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 1% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 0/50 (0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses following the 1% challenge. Based on these results the test substance was determined not to induce irritation or sensitisation at 1%. Table 5.13. Human Repeat Insult Patch Tests (HRIPT) with a High TBN Sulfonic acid, petroleum, calcium salt; EC 263-093-9; TBN = 300): Challenge Results  Test Phase  Concentration  #Positive Responses     Conclusion  Study      24 hours  72 hours      Induction  100%    Not a sensitiser  Shanahan & Erianne, 1994d  Challenge  100%  1/200   1/200                  Induction  10%      Not a sensitiser  DiFiglia, Shanahan & Erianne, 1993c  Challenge  10%  0/51  0/51                  Induction  1%      Not a sensitiser  DiFiglia, Shanahan & Erianne, 1993d  Challenge  1%  0/50  0/50       In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts; EC 616-278-7; TBN = 300) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Shanahan & Erianne, 1993b; Table 5.14). Five panels consisting of a total of 241 subjects were identified for this test. In the induction phase a 100% concentration of the test substance was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 222 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 100% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. The test substance did not induce any clinically significant irritation contact dermatitis. Only 1/222 (0.0%) of the subjects exhibited a reaction which was of questionable substance-related clinical significance. Based on these results the test substance was determined to not cause sensitisation. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts; EC 616-278-7; TBN = 300) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Wachs, 1993; Table 5.14). A panel of 57 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of ten applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 51 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 10% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 0/51 (0.0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses. Based on these results the test substance was determined to not cause a sensitisation response. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts; EC 616-278-7; TBN = 300) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (DiFiglia, Shanahan & Erianne, 1993a; Table 5.14). A panel of 53 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 1% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 49 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 1% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 0/49 (0.0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses. Based on these results the test substance was determined to not cause a sensitisation response. In another key study the dermal sensitisation of a high TBN analogue of this substance (Benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts; EC 616-278-7; TBN = 300) was evaluated in a human repeat insult patch test (Shanahan & Erianne, 1994e; Table 5.14). A panel of 53 subjects was identified for this test. In the induction phase a 1% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil was administered directly to the skin and covered with an occlusive patch three times per week for a total of nine applications. Following a two-week rest period, each of the 49 subjects that completed the induction phase was topically challenged with a 1% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. A total of 0/49 (0.0%) of the subjects exhibited sensitisation responses. Based on these results the test substance was determined to not cause a sensitisation response. Table 5.14. Human Repeat Insult Patch Tests (HRIPT) with a High TBN Calcium Sulfonate (Benzene, Polypropene Derivs., Sulfonated, Calcium Salts; EC 616-278-7; TBN = 300): Challenge Results   Test Phase   Concentration  #Positive Responses       Conclusion   Study       24 hours  72 hours       Induction  100%      Not a sensitiser  Shanahan & Erianne, 1993b   Challenge 100%    100%   1/222  1/222                    Induction  10%      Not a sensitiser  Wachs, 1993   Challenge  10%   0/51  0/51                  Induction  1%      Not a sensitiser  DiFiglia, Shanahan & Erianne, 1993a   Challenge  1%   0/49  0/49                    Induction  1%      Not a sensitiser  Shanahan & Erianne, 1994e   Challenge  1%   0/49  0/49         In accordance with EU CLP Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008, classification is not required for high TBN calcium and sodium sulfonates (TBN ≥ 300). Conclusion The weight-of-evidence indicates that low TBN sodium and calcium sulfonates (TBN < 300) are skin sensitisers with a specific concentration limit (SCL) of 10% and that high TBN sodium and calcium sulfonates (TBN ≥ 300) are not skin sensitisers. Studies in guinea pigs show that low TBN benzenesulfonic acid, mono-C20-24 (even)-sec-alkyl derivs., para-, sodium salts (EC No. None; CAS No. None; TBN = 3) is a skin sensitizer while benzenesulfonic acid, mono-C20-24 (even)-sec-alkyl derivs., para-, sodium salts (EC No. None; CAS No. None; TBN = 448) is not a skin sensitiser. Studies in guinea pigs and human volunteers show that low TBN benzenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15 -36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, calcium salts (EC 939-141-9; TBN = 13) are skin sensitisers. Numerous well-conducted, reliable, controlled human (HRIPT) studies with benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts (EC 616-278-7; TBN values ranging from 13 to 85), sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts (EC 263-093-9; TBN = 30 to 100), and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-(mono-C15-36 branched alkyl derivs., C24 rich) and benzenesulfonic acid, 4-octadecyl, calcium salts (EC 939-141-6; TBN = 13) show that low TBN calcium sulfonates do not cause sensitisation in a substantial number of subjects at 10% and lower. High TBN calcium sulfonates, sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts (EC 263-093-9; TBN = 375 and 400) do not cause skin sensitisation in guinea pigs. Results of guinea pigs studies at TBN = 300 are mixed; two studies of sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts, (EC 263-093-9) report no skin sensitisation while one study of sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts (EC 263-093-9) and one study of benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts (EC 616-278-7) report skin sensitisation, However, numerous well-conducted, reliable, controlled human (HRIPT) studies with benzene, polypropene derivs., sulfonated, calcium salts (EC 616-278-7; TBN = 300) and sulfonic acids, petroleum, calcium salts (EC 263-093-9; TBN = 300) also show that high TBN (TBN ≥ 300) do not cause skin sensitisation. In accordance with EU CLP Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008, classification is required for low TBN sodium and calcium sulfonates (TBN < 300) with a specific concentration limit of 10% and classification is not required for high TBN calcium sulfonates (TBN ≥ 300).

References

Alworth, K., Schwartz, H. & Erianne, J. A. (1995a). Clinical Safety Evaluations OS# 87926C (same as OS# 87926A) at 10% in Mineral Oil Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 3848.01, 4357.03, 4403.03. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1995-10-03.

Alworth, K., Schwartz, H. & Erianne, J. A. (1995b). Clinical Safety Evaluation OS# 65271E at 10% in Mineral Oil Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 3838.01, 4357.02, 4403.02. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298. Report date: 1995-10-04.

Alworth, K., Schwartz, H. & Erianne, J. A. (1995c). Clinical Safety Evaluation OS# 18504G at 10% in Mineral Oil Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 3849.01, 4357.01, 4403.01. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298. Report date: 1995-07-21.

Blaszcak, D. L. (1992). Closed Patch Repeated Insult Dermal Sensitization Study Of OS#18163Q In Guinea Pigs (Buehler Method). Testing laboratory: Bio/dynamics, Inc., P. O. Box 2360, Mettlers Road, East Millstone, New Jersey 08875-2360. Report no.: 6153-91. Owner company: Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Blvd, Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1992-03-26.

 

Bonnette, K. L. (1993a). Dermal Sensitization Study In Guinea Pigs With OS# 67708C - Modified Buehler Design (EPA-TSCA, EPA-FIFRA, OECD). Testing laboratory: Springborn Laboratories, Inc. (SLS) Life Sciences Division 553 North Broadway Spencerville, Ohio 45887. Report no.: 3263.10. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation 29400 Lakeland Boulevard Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298. Report date: 1993-04-13.

Bonnette, K. L. (1993b). Dermal Sensitization Study In Guinea Pigs With OS#65271E - Modified Buehler Design - (EPA-TSCA, EPA-FIFRA, OECD). Testing laboratory: Springborn Laboratories, Inc. (SLS) Life Sciences Division 553 North Broadway Spencerville, Ohio 45887. Report no.: 3263.9. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation 29400 Lakeland Boulevard Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298. Report date: 1993-04-13.

DiFiglia, C. J. & Shanahan, R. W. (1993). Comparative Dermal Irritation (48-Hour Patch Test) OS16928AJ. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic Incorporated, 799 Bloomfield Avenue Suite 212 Verona, N. J. 07044. Report no.: 3768.01-.08. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation 29400 Lakeland Boulevard Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298. Report date: 1993-04-30.

DiFiglia, C. J., Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1993a). Clinical Safety Evaluation OS# 67708E Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: ETC Entry No: 3775.01. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092, USA. Report date: 1993-05-07.

DiFiglia, C. J., Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1993b). Clinical Safety Evaluation OS #65271E (1% in Mineral Oil) Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., Verona, NJ. Report no.: 3811.01. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092, USA. Report date: 1993-06-11.

DiFiglia, C. J., Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1993c). Clinical Safety Evaluation OS# 16928AJ (at 10% in Mineral Oil) Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 3864.01. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092, USA. Report date: 1993-08-06.

DiFiglia, C. J., Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1993d). Clinical Safety Evaluation OS #16928A (1 % in Mineral Oil) Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 3825.02. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092, USA. Report date: 1993-06-25.

Eisenberg, R. R. (1994a). Repeated Insult Patch Test 10% w/OS# 87926A in Squibb White Mineral Oil. Testing laboratory: Consumer Product Testing, 12 Spielman Road, Fairfield, New Jersey 07004-3404. Report no.: C94-0116. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1994-06-23.

Eisenberg, R. R. (1994b). Repeated Insult Patch Test 10% w/OS#65271E in Squibb White Mineral Oil. Testing laboratory: Consumer Product Testing, 12 Spielman Road, Fairfield, New Jersey 07004-3404. Report no.: C94-0117. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1994-07-06.

Eisenberg, R. R. (1994c). Repeated Insult Patch Test 10% w/OS# 18504G in Squibb White Mineral Oil. Testing laboratory: Consumer Product Testing Co., 12 Spielman Road, Fairfield New Jersey 07004-3404. Report no.: C94-0115. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298. Report date: 1994-06-17.

Kiplinger, G. R. (1992a). Skin Sensitization Study in Albino Guinea Pigs with OS 47860E. Testing laboratory: WIL Research Laboratories, Inc, Ashland, Ohio 44805-9281. Report no.: WIL-168017. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickcliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1992-03-31.

Kiplinger, G. R. (1992b). Skin Sensitization Study in Albino Guinea Pigs with OS47860E. Testing laboratory: WIL RESEARCH LABORATORIES INC, A Subsidiary of Great Lakes Chemical Corporation, Ashland, OH 44805-9281. Report no.: WIL-168018. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1992-02-14.

Kiplinger, G. R. (1992c). Skin Sensitization Study in Albino Guinea Pigs with OS 22969Q. Testing laboratory: WIL RESEARCH LABORATORIES, INC. A Subsidiary of Great Lakes Chemical Corporation, Ashland, OH 44805-9281. Report no.: WIL-168019. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard. Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1992-02-14.

Lees, D. (1996). OS65271G: Local Lymph Node Assay. Testing laboratory: Central Toxicology Laboratory, Cheshire, UK. Report no.: CTL/E/132. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation. Report date: 1996-01-17.

Reagan, E. L. (1988). Dermal Sensitization Study Of OS 68022 In Guinea Pigs. Testing laboratory: Food and Drug Research Laboratories, Inc. P. O. Box 107, Rt. l7C Waverly, New York 14892. Report no.: 9592C. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation Wickliffe, Ohio 44092. Report date: 1988-01-28.

Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1993a). Clinical Evaluation OS# 65271E (100%) Repeated Insult (Semi-Occlusive) Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 3900.02. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298, USA. Report date: 1993-09-24.

Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1993b). Clinical Safety Evaluation OS# 67708E (at 100%) Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: ETC Entry No: 3870.01. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298. Report date: 1993-12-17.

Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1994a). OS13463M (at 10% in White Mineral Oil) Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 4044.01. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1994-03-28.

Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1994b). Clinical Safety Evaluation OS# 67708E (at 1% in Mineral Oil) Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: ETC Entry No: 3834.01. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298. Report date: 1994-01-28.

Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1994c). Clinical Safety Evaluation OS# 65271E at 20% in Mineral Oil Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 3999.01. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation 29400 Lakeland Boulevard Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298. Report date: 1994-02-04.

Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1994d). Clinical Safety Evaluation OS#16928AJ Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 3911.01. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, OH 44092-2298. Report date: 1994-01-03.

Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1994e). OS17759W Repeated Insult Patch Tests of Various Sulfonates and Gear Oil Additive Test Articles. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 4103.02. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1994-08-16.

Shanahan, R. W. & Erianne, J. A. (1994f). Clinical Safety Evaluations OS# 65841A Repeated Insult Patch Test. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 4103.01. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1994-07-08.

Shanahan, R. W. (1994). Comparative Dermal Evaluation (48-Hour Patch Test) OS65841A and OS17759W. Testing laboratory: Essex Testing Clinic, Inc., 799 Bloomfield Avenue, Verona, NJ 07044. Report no.: 4102.01 & 4102.02. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, 29400 Lakeland Boulevard, Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1994-05-12.

Shults, S. K. (1993). Dermal Sensitization Study (Closed-Patch Repeated Insult) In Guinea Pigs with OS# 65271E. Testing laboratory: Ricerca, Inc. Report no.: 92-0514. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation. Report date: 1993-08-03.

Smedley, J. W. (2015a). A Sensitization Study of OS329036A by Dermal Administration in Guinea Pigs-Modified Buehler Design. Testing laboratory: Charles River Laboratories, Preclinical Services, Ohio, Spencerville, United States. Report no.: 20061359. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, Wickliffe, Ohio, United States. Report date: 2015-02-19.

Smedley, J. W. (2015b). A Sensitization Study of OS102880AM by Dermal Administration in Guinea Pigs-Modified Buehler Design. Testing laboratory: Charles River Laboratories, Preclinical Services, Ohio, Spencerville, United States. Report no.: 20072111. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation, Wickliffe, Ohio, United States. Report date: 2015-06-26.

Wachs, G. N. (1993). Repeated Insult Patch Test OS# 67708E. Testing laboratory: Consumer Product Testing Corporation Incorporated, 12 Spielman Road, Fairfield, New Jersey 07004. Report no.: C-227-93. Owner company: The Lubrizol Corporation 29400 Lakeland Boulevard Wickliffe, Ohio 44092-2298. Report date: 1993-06-29.

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin sensitisation

Link to relevant study records

Reference

Endpoint:

skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

key study

Study period:

21 Jan 2016 to 10 May 2016

Reliability:

1 (reliable without restriction)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

guideline study

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

OECD Guideline 442B (Skin Sensitization: Local Lymph Node Assay: BrdU-ELISA)

Deviations:

no

GLP compliance:

yes (incl. QA statement)

Type of study:

mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA): BrdU-ELISA

Species:

mouse

Strain:

CBA

Remarks:

J strain

Sex:

male/female

Details on test animals and environmental conditions:

Female CBA/J mice were received and following an acclimation period of at least five days, thirty-seven nulliparous, non-pregnant female mice were assigned to the test groups without conscious bias. The Day 1 body weight range for the QIT animals was 17.7 - 24.0 grams. The Day 1 body weight range for the main test animals was 19.3 - 23.0 grams. The weight variation of the animals at study start did not exceed ± 20% of the mean body weight. The animals were observed prior to the study start to ensure that no skin lesions were present on the ears.

The animals were identified by cage notation and indelible tail marks, and housed one per cage in suspended wire-bottom cages. Bedding was placed beneath the cages and changed at least three times per week. Fresh Rodent Chow and water were available ad libitum. The animal room, reserved exclusively for mice on acute tests, was temperature-controlled, had a 12-hour light/dark cycle, and was kept clean and vermin free. Temperature and humidity were continuously monitored using automatic recording devices.

Route:

epicutaneous, open

Vehicle:

acetone/olive oil (4:l v/v)

Concentration / amount:

Concentrations of 0.5%, 1% and 2.5% (v/v) were chosen [v/v]

Day(s)/duration:

Treatment was made by topical application of the test article concentrations to the dorsum of each ear once daily for three consecutive days.

Adequacy of induction:

highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically

No. of animals per dose:

Five groups of CBA/J mice (five animals per group) were treated by topical application of the test article concentrations, vehicle control or positive control in the same manner as in the screen. AOO was chosen as the vehicle, based on solubility.

Details on study design:

Body weights were recorded on Day 1, immediately prior to dosing, and on Day 6 (prior to euthanasia). Ear thickness measurements were performed on Day 1 prior to dosing, on Day 3 before the third test article application (approximately 48 hours after the first test article application), and on Day 6 before euthanasia (approximately 120 hours after the first dose and 72 hours after the third dose). Changes in ear thickness on Day 3 and Day 6 relative to Day 1 were expressed as a percent of the Day 1 pre-dose values. Ear thickness increases of 25% or more were considered biologically significant (based on the scientific literature and historical laboratory data) and deemed indicative of a greater than moderate local dermal irritation response.

Positive control substance(s):

yes

Vehicle:

acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v)

Concentration:

Positive Control: 25% alpha-Hexylcinnamaldehyde in acetone:olive oil (4:1)

No. of animals per dose:

Vive animals per group

Details on study design:

The mice in the main test were given an intraperitoneal injection of the thymidine analog 5-bromo-2’- deoxy-uridine (BrdU) four days following the initial dose, and approximately 24 hours prior to euthanasia. At euthanasia, the auricular lymph nodes were isolated; single-cell suspensions of lymph node cells (LNC) were generated, then permeabilized and denatured in triplicate in a 96-well microplate for analysis by ELISA for BrdU incorporation. The Stimulation Index (SI) was calculated by dividing the mean optical density of each animal by the mean optical density of the vehicle control group. The mean SI ± standard deviation (S.D.) was calculated for each group from the individual animal data. Test article groups that yielded an SI ≥ 1.6 were characterized as sensitizing substances.

Positive control substance(s):

hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)

Statistics:

For each test group, the individual animal SI values along with the mean group SI and standard deviation were calculated, and ANOVA followed by the Students’ t-Test was run to statistically compare each test article dose group to the vehicle control group.

Positive control results:

Positive control results within historical laboratory data

Other effects / acceptance of results:

The Stimulation Index (SI) was calculated by dividing the mean optical density of each animal by the mean optical density of the vehicle control group. The mean SI ± standard deviation (S.D.) was calculated for each group from the individual animal data. Test article groups that yielded an SI ≥ 1.6 were characterized as sensitizing substances.

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Remarks:

SI ≥ 1.6 indicates a sensitizing response

Value:

1

Variability:

S.D.= 0.7

Test group / Remarks:

Vehicle Control

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Remarks:

SI ≥ 1.6 indicates a sensitizing response

Value:

1.2

Variability:

S.D=0.9

Test group / Remarks:

0.5% (v/v) Benzene, mono-C10-13-alkyl derivatives

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Remarks:

SI ≥ 1.6 indicates a sensitizing response

Value:

2.8

Variability:

S.D.=0.3

Test group / Remarks:

1% (v/v) Benzene, mono-C10-13-alkyl derivatives

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Remarks:

SI ≥ 1.6 indicates a sensitizing response

Value:

3.5

Variability:

S.D= 2.2

Test group / Remarks:

2.5% (v/v) Benzene, mono-C10-13-alkyl derivatives

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Remarks:

SI ≥ 1.6 indicates a sensitizing response

Value:

2.5

Variability:

S.D.= 1.8

Test group / Remarks:

25% HCA (Positive Control)

Interpretation of results:

Category 1B (indication of skin sensitising potential) based on GHS criteria

Conclusions:

Topical application of test article Benzene, mono-C10-13-alkyl derivatives, distillation residues, sulfonated, sodium salts; Lot/Batch# RS-873-4-2, at 1% and 2.5% (v/v) in AOO resulted in SI values greater than 1.6 (SI > 1.6). Therefore, this test article is a dermal sensitizer in the Local Lymph Node Assay. The EC1.6 was calculated to be 0.6% (v/v).

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

adverse effect observed (sensitising)

Additional information:

A dermal sensitisation of the low TBN substance (Benzenesulfonic acid, mono-C20-24 (even)-sec-alkyl derivs., para-, sodium salts, TBN = 3) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Smedley, 2015a). The animals were treated topically with a 75% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil once per week during the three week induction phase. Following a two week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 35% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 15% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. At the respective 24 hour and 48 hour challenge and rechallenge readings, dermal scores of 2 were noted in 18/20 and 16/20 at the 35% challenge and 14/20 and 14/20 at the 15% rechallenge. The 24/48 hour Draize scores in the 35% challenge group were 1.9/1.8 compared to 0.6/0.6 in the challenge controls. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores in the 15% rechallenge group were 1.7/1.7 compared to 0.7/0.8 in the rechallenge controls. Based on these results the test substance was determined to be a sensitiser.

 

In another key study the dermal sensitisation of the high TBN substance (Benzenesulfonic acid, mono-C20-24 (even)-sec-alkyl derivs., para-, sodium salts; TBN = 448) was evaluated in guinea pigs (Smedley, 2015b). The animals were treated topically with a 100% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil once per week during the three week induction phase. Following a two week rest period, the animals were topically challenged with a 75% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. After approximately one week the animals were rechallenged with a 50% concentration of the test substance in mineral oil. Following a one week rest period the animal received a second rechallenge at 25% of the substance in mineral oil. At the respective 24 hour and 48 hour challenge, rechallenge, and second rechallenge readings, dermal scores of 1 were noted in 3/20 and 6/20 at the 75% challenge; dermal scores of 1 or 2 were noted in 13/20 and 13/20 at the 50% rechallenge; and dermal scores of 1 were noted in 10/20 and 12/20 at the 25% second rechallenge. The 24/48 hour Draize scores in the 75% challenge group were 0.2/0.3 compared to 0.3/0.5 in the challenge controls. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores in the 50% rechallenge group were 1.2/1.2 compared to 0.9/0.3 in the rechallenge controls. The mean 24/48 hour Draize scores in the 25% second rechallenge group were 0.6/0.7 compared to 0.5/0.7 in the rechallenge controls. Based on the weight-of-evidence of these results the test substance was determined not to be a sensitiser.

Migrated from Short description of key information:
Studies in guinea pigs show that low TBN Benzenesulfonic acid, mono-C20-24 (even)-sec-alkyl derivs., para-, sodium salts (TBN = 3) is a skin sensitiser (Smedley, 2015a) while Benzenesulfonic acid, mono-C20-24 (even)-sec-alkyl derivs., para-, sodium salts (TBN = 448) is not a skin sensitiser (Smedley, 2015b). The study results provide additional weight-of-evidence indicating that low TBN sodium and calcium sulfonates (TBN < 300) are skin sensitisers with a specific concentration limit (SCL) of 10% and that high TBN sodium and calcium sulfonates (TBN ≥ 300) are not skin sensitisers (for more details, please refer to the classification and labelling summary for skin sensitisation).

Justification for selection of skin sensitisation endpoint:
No study is selected since the test substance was tested in two forms (as TBN = 3 and as TBN = 448) resulting in two different skin sensitisation responses.

Respiratory sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

no study available

Justification for classification or non-classification

The classification and labelling for Benzene mono-C10 -13 -alkyl derivatives, distillation residues, sulfonated, sodium salts is based on the results of two recent skin sensitisation studies according to Modified Buehler design and on the results of numerous skin sensitisation animal studies with low and high TBN calcium sulfonates. Results of Human Repeat Insult Test (HRIPT) with low and high TBN calcium sulfonates have also been taken into account (please see attached file or refer to the respective section of the CSR). In accordance with EU CLP Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008, classification is required for low TBN sodium sulfonates (TBN < 300) with a specific concentration limit of 10% and classification is not required for high TBN sodium sulfonates (TBN ≥ 300).