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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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:
weight of evidence
Study period:
from 6th of June to 1st of July fo 1983
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
guideline study with acceptable restrictions

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
1983
Report date:
1983

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
equivalent or similar to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
Deviations:
yes
Remarks:
no data if induction produced irritation reaction + no pretreatment
GLP compliance:
no
Remarks:
study performed before implementation of GLP at OECD level
Type of study:
guinea pig maximisation test
Justification for non-LLNA method:
test conducted before first publication of OECD 429 (LLNA test)

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
Ethyl 3,5,5-trimethylhexanoate
EC Number:
266-959-4
EC Name:
Ethyl 3,5,5-trimethylhexanoate
Cas Number:
67707-75-9
Molecular formula:
C11H22O2
IUPAC Name:
ethyl 3,5,5-trimethylhexanoate
Details on test material:
- Name of test material: 3,5,5-Trimethyl-ethyl capronate
- Analytical purity: no data

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
other: Pirbright white
Sex:
female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Winkelmann, Borchen
- Weight at study initiation: 396 g (mean, test group), 400 g (mean, control group)
- Housing: in groups of 5 in Makrolon cages, type 4
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): guinea pig diet Altromin 3022, ad libitum
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): tap water, ad libitum
- Acclimation period: no data

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): approx. 21
- Humidity (%): approx. 50
- Air changes (per hr): 11
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12

Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)

Induction
Route:
intradermal and epicutaneous
Vehicle:
other: propylen glycol (intradermal / challenge), vaseline (epicutaneous)
Concentration / amount:
intradermal induction: 5% in propylene glycol,
epicutaneous induction: 5% in vaseline,
challenge: 1% in propylen glycol
Challenge
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
other: propylen glycol (intradermal / challenge), vaseline (epicutaneous)
Concentration / amount:
intradermal induction: 5% in propylene glycol,
epicutaneous induction: 5% in vaseline,
challenge: 1% in propylen glycol
No. of animals per dose:
20 (test group), 20 (control)
Details on study design:
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1 intradermal, 1 dermal
- Exposure period: 48 h (dermal)
- Test groups: 5% test substance
- Control group: propylene glycol (intradermal) / vaseline (epicutaneous)
- Site: above the shoulder blades
- Concentrations:
Intradermal:
0.1 mL FCA (mixed at a ratio of 1+1 in vehicle)
0.1 mL 5% test substance in propylene glycol
0.1 mL 5% test substance + FCA (mixed at a ratio of 1+1 in propylene glycol)
Epicutaneous:
5% in vaseline

B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures:
- Day(s) of challenge: day 22 (14 d after epicutaneous induction)
- Exposure period: 24 h
- Test groups: right flank: propylene glycol, left flank: test substance 1% in propylene glycol
- Control group: right flank: propylene glycol, left flank: test substance 1% in propylene glycol
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24, 48

OTHER: no pretreatment with irritating substance / no information whether substance at applied concentration was minimally irritating as stipulated in the guideline
Positive control substance(s):
no

Results and discussion

In vivo (non-LLNA)

Resultsopen allclose all
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
1%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
19
Clinical observations:
one animal found dead 24 h after challenge
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 1%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 19.0. Clinical observations: one animal found dead 24 h after challenge.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
1%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
19
Clinical observations:
one animal found dead 24 h after challenge
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 1%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 19.0. Clinical observations: one animal found dead 24 h after challenge.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
1%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 1%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
1%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 1%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Conclusions:
3,5,5-Trimethyl-ethyl capronate was not sensitising in this study.
Executive summary:

In a dermal sensitisation study similar to OECD guideline 406 with 3,5,5-Trimethyl-ethyl capronate, 20 female Pirbright white guinea pigswere tested using the method of method of Magnusson & Kligman (Guinea Pig Maximisation Test).

Intradermal induction was performed with 5% in propylene glycol, epicutaneous induction with 5% in vaseline, challenge with 1% in propylen glycol. The animals were not pretreated to generate local irritation before epicutaneous induction.

After challenge no visible changes of the treated skin sites were observed in the test and control group animals 24 and 48 h after patch removal (= grade 0).

The test material produced a response in 0% of animals. According to CLP, EU GHS (Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008), a response of at least 30% of the test animals of an adjuvant type guinea pig test method for skin sensitisation is considered as positive.

Therefore 3,5,5-Trimethyl-ethyl capronate is not a dermal sensitiser in this study.