Registration Dossier

Diss Factsheets

Toxicological information

Eye irritation

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
eye irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
From April 20th, 2016 to June 2nd, 2016
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
guideline study

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
2016
Report date:
2016

Materials and methods

Test guidelineopen allclose all
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 438 (Isolated Chicken Eye Test Method for Identifying i) Chemicals Inducing Serious Eye Damage and ii) Chemicals Not Requiring Classification for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage)
Deviations:
no
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
EU method B.48 (Isolated chicken eye test method for identifying occular corrosives and severe irritants)
Deviations:
no
GLP compliance:
yes (incl. QA statement)
Remarks:
September 22nd, 2015

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
Isopropyl trifluoroacetate
EC Number:
206-922-1
EC Name:
Isopropyl trifluoroacetate
Cas Number:
400-38-4
Molecular formula:
C5H7F3O2
IUPAC Name:
isopropyl trifluoroacetate
Test material form:
liquid
Details on test material:
Name: Isopropyl trifluoroacetate

Test animals / tissue source

Species:
chicken
Strain:
other: ROSS 308
Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
Source: TARAVIS KFT. (Address: 9600 Sárvár, Rábasömjéni út. 129., Hungary)

Chicken heads were collected after slaughter in a commercial abattoir from chickens (approximately 7 weeks old) which are used for human consumption. Heads were collected by a slaughter house technician and heads transported to CiToxLAB Hungary Ltd. at ambient temperature at the earliest convenience.
After collection, the heads were inspected for appropriate quality and wrapped with tissue paper moistened with physiological saline, then placed in a plastic box which was closed (4-5 heads per box). The heads were received at CiToxLAB Hungary Ltd. and processed within approximately 2 hours of collection.

SELECTION AND PREPARATION OF EYES FOR THE TEST
* Eyes selection
After removing the head from the plastic box, it was put on soft paper. The eyelids were carefully cut away with scissors, avoiding damaging the cornea. One small drop of 2% (w/v) fluorescein solution was applied onto the cornea surface for a few seconds and subsequently rinsed off with 20 mL physiological saline. Then the fluorescein-treated cornea was examined with a hand-held slit lamp or slit lamp microscope, with the eye in the head, to ensure that the cornea was not damaged. If the cornea was in good condition, the eyeball was carefully removed from the orbit.

* Preparation of eyes
The eye ball was carefully removed from the orbit by holding the nictitating membrane with a surgical forceps, while cutting the eye muscles with bent scissors. Care was taken to remove the eyeball from the orbit without cutting off the optical nerve too short. The procedure avoided pressure on the eye while removing the eyeball from the orbit, in order to prevent distortion of the cornea and subsequent corneal opacity. Once removed from the orbit, the eye was placed onto damp paper and the nictitating membrane was cut away with other connective tissue. The prepared eyes were kept on the wet papers in a closed box so that the appropriate humidity was maintained.

* Eyes examination and acclimatization time
The prepared eye was placed in a steel clamp with the cornea positioned vertically with the eye in the correct relative position (same position as in the chicken head). Again avoid too much pressure on the eye by the clamp. Because of the relatively firm sclera of the chicken eyeball, only slight pressure was needed to fix the eye properly. The clamp with the eyeball was transferred to a chamber of the superfusion apparatus. The clamp holding the eye was positioned in such a way that the entire cornea was supplied with physiological saline solution dripping from a stainless steel tube, at a rate of approximately 3-4 drops/minute or 0.1 to 0.15 mL/minutes. The door of the chamber was closed except for manipulations and examinations, to maintain temperature and humidity.

The appropriate number of eyes was selected and after being placed in the superfusion apparatus. There they were examined again with the slit lamp microscope to ensure that they were in good condition. The focus was adjusted to see clearly the physiological saline which was flowing on the cornea surface. Eyes with a high baseline fluorescein staining (i.e., > 0.5) or corneal opacity score (i.e., > 0.5) were rejected. The cornea thickness was measured, any eye with cornea thickness deviating more than 10 % from the mean value for all eyes, or eyes that showed any other signs of damage, were rejected and replaced. If the selected eyes were appropriate for the test, acclimatization started and it was conducted for approximately 45 to 60 minutes. The chambers of the superfusion apparatus were at controlled temperature (32±1.5°C) during the acclimatization and treatment periods.

Test system

Vehicle:
unchanged (no vehicle)
Controls:
yes, concurrent positive control
yes, concurrent negative control
Amount / concentration applied:
30 µL
Duration of treatment / exposure:
10 seconds
Duration of post- treatment incubation (in vitro):
The control eyes and test eyes were evaluated pre-treatment and at approximately 30, 75, 120, 180 and 240 minutes after the post-treatment rinse.
Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
Three replicates for the test item and the positive control
One replicate for the negative control
Details on study design:
TREATMENT
After the zero reference measurements, the eye (in its retainer) was removed from the chamber, held in a horizontal position and the test item was applied onto the centre of the cornea, taking care not to damage or touch the cornea.
30 μL of test item was applied to the entire surface of the cornea attempting to cover the cornea surface uniformly with the test substance.
Negative control eye was treated with 30 μL of physiological saline; positive control eyes were treated with 30 μL 5% (w/v) Benzalkonium chloride solution.
Three test item treated eyes, three positive control treated eyes and one negative control eye were examined during the study.

TEST ITEM REMOVAL
The time of application was observed, then after an exposure period of 10 seconds from the end of the application the cornea surface was rinsed thoroughly with 20 mL physiological saline at ambient temperature, taking care not to damage the cornea but attempting to remove all residual the test item if possible.

OBSERVATION AND ASSESSMENT OF CORNEAL EFFECTS
The control eyes and test eyes were evaluated pre-treatment and at approximately 30, 75, 120, 180 and 240 minutes after the post-treatment rinse. Minor variations within approximately ±5 minutes were considered acceptable.
Corneal thickness and corneal opacity were measured at all time points. Fluorescein retention was measured on two occasions, at baseline (t=0) and approximately 30 minutes after the post-treatment rinse. Haag-Streit BP 900® slit-lamp microscope was used for the measurements.

Results and discussion

In vitro

Resultsopen allclose all
Irritation parameter:
percent corneal swelling
Remarks:
at up to 75 min
Value:
0.5
Remarks on result:
other: ICE Class I
Irritation parameter:
percent corneal swelling
Remarks:
at up to 240 min
Value:
0.5
Remarks on result:
other: ICE Class I
Irritation parameter:
cornea opacity score
Value:
0.83
Remarks on result:
other: ICE Class II
Irritation parameter:
fluorescein retention score
Value:
0.83
Remarks on result:
other: ICE Class II
Irritation parameter:
other: Other Observations
Remarks on result:
other: None
Irritation parameter:
other: Overall ICE Class
Remarks on result:
other: 1xI 2xII
Other effects / acceptance of results:
TEST ITEM
Based on this in vitro eye irritation in the isolated chicken eyes test with Isopropyl trifluoroacetate, the test item is not classified as a severe irritant and just above the threshold for being classified as non-irritant. It is concluded that further information is required for classification.

POSITIVE CONTROL
The positive control (Benzalkonium chloride solution 5 % (w/v)) was classified as severely irritating, UN GHS Classification: Category 1.

NEGATIVE CONTROL
The negative control (Physiological saline) was classified as non-irritating, UN GHS Classification: Non-classified.

VALIDITY OF THE TEST
The results from all eyes used met the quality control standards. The negative control and positive control results were in line with historic data. This experiment was considered to be valid.

MORPHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
In case of positive control loosening of epithelium was observed on two eyes (2/3) at 75 minutes after the post-treatment rinse.
No other morphological effect was observed.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
other: Not a severe irritant and not classified as non-irritant
Conclusions:
Based on these in vitro eye irritation assays in isolated chicken eyes with Isopropyl trifluoroacetate (Batch number: BWF151211), the test item is not classified as a severe irritant and not classified as non-irritant.
Executive summary:

An in vitro eye irritation study of the test item was performed in isolated chicken’s eyes. The irritation effects of the test item were evaluated according to the OECD No. 438 (26 July 2013) and GLP.

After the zero reference measurements, the eye was held in horizontal position and 30 μL of test item was applied onto the centre of the cornea such that the entire surface of the cornea was covered. After 10 seconds, the surface was rinsed with physiological saline. The positive control eyes were treated with 30 μL 5% (w/v) Benzalkonium chloride solution. The negative control eye was treated with 30 μL of physiological saline (9% (w/v) NaCl solution). In the study, three test item treated eyes, three positive control treated eyes and one negative control treated eye were examined.

The results from all eyes used in the study met the quality control standards. The negative control and positive control results were in good correlation with the historical control data. Thus, the experiment was considered to be valid.

No significant corneal swelling was observed during the four-hour observation period on test item treated eyes. Slight corneal opacity change (severity 0.5 or 1) was noted on three eyes. Slight fluorescein retention change (severity 0.5 or 1) was noted on three eyes. No other corneal effect was observed.

Based on these in vitro eye irritation assays in isolated chicken eyes with Isopropyl trifluoroacetate (Batch number: BWF151211), the test item is not classified as a severe irritant and not classified as non-irritant.

Categories Display