1,2-Ethanediamine, N-(2-aminoethyl)-, reaction products with glycidyl tolyl ether

Endpoint summary

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin irritation / corrosion

Link to relevant study records

Reference

Endpoint:

skin corrosion: in vitro / ex vivo

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

supporting study

Reliability:

3 (not reliable)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

significant methodological deficiencies

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

other:

Version / remarks:

The Corrositex® - InVitro International, Placentia, CA

Principles of method if other than guideline:

The Corrositex® (InVitro International, Placentia, CA) test is a standardized and reproducible method that can be employed to determine the potential corrosivity and the Packing Group classification of specified
categories of chemical compounds under the hazardous materials transportation regulations administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and international dangerous goods codes. The
Corrositex® test predicts1,2 the in vivo corrosive potential of a chemical compound or mixture by using as an endpoint the amount of time it takes for a chemical to permeate or destroy a synthetic biobarrier.
A color change in a proprietary liquid Chemical Detection System (CDS) is used to indicate that the chemical has passed through the biobarrier. This assay system is depicted below.

The Corrositex® test is a three step procedure. First, each test article was qualified to ensure that it was compatible with the Corrositex® system, and then it was categorized according to pH to determine cut-off
times. Finally, they were classified based on the mean time each test article took to penetrate the biobarriers.
Qualification
For each test article, 150 μl or 100 mg of the test article were added to the CDS reagent in a Qualify vial, and the vial was observed for any notable color change. An observable color change indicates that the
test article is compatible with the Corrositex® system.
Categorization
Next, each test article was categorized, which determined cut-off times for the Packing Group designations. A 10% formulation of each test article was prepared and its pH was measured. If the pH of the 10%
formulation was  7.0, 150 μl or 100 mg of the neat test article were added to Tube A. The pH of Tube A was then measured, and if it was  5.0, the test article was assigned to Category 1, and if it was  5.0, the
test article was assigned to Category 2. If the pH of the 10% formulation was  7.0, 150 μl or 100 mg of the neat test article were added to Tube B. The pH of Tube B was measured, and if the final pH was  9.0, the
test article was Category 1, and if it was  9.0, the test article was Category 2.
Classification
Finally, each test article was classified by adding 500 μl or 500 mg of the test article to four test vials containing biobarriers to determine the Packing Group. If the test article mixture permeates or destroys
the biobarrier, it will come in contact with the CDS reagent in the vial and induce a color change similar to that observed in the Qualify tube. The amount of time required for the test article to permeate or destroy
each biobarrier was recorded and the mean time of the four replicates is used to designate the United Nations (U.N.) Packing Group classification. Classifications are as follows: Packing Group I (severe
corrosivity), Packing Group II (moderate corrosivity), Packing Group III (mild corrosivity), or Non-Corrosive. A positive control was performed using 1.0 N Sodium Hydroxide . The result for the Positive
Control is considered valid if it falls within the range of the MB Research historical mean ± 2 standard deviations. A negative control was performed using 1% citric acid; the result is considered valid if the
breakthrough time is greater than 60 minutes.

GLP compliance:

yes (incl. QA statement)

Specific details on test material used for the study:

Intermediate P273,
Batch# 8418406

Test system:

artificial membrane barrier model

Vehicle:

unchanged (no vehicle)

Control samples:

yes, concurrent negative control

yes, concurrent positive control

Amount/concentration applied:

The crushed test article was used neat.

Irritation / corrosion parameter:

penetration time (in minutes)

Run / experiment:

1

Value:

> 67

Vehicle controls validity:

not applicable

Negative controls validity:

valid

Positive controls validity:

valid

Irritation / corrosion parameter:

penetration time (in minutes)

Run / experiment:

2

Value:

> 67

Vehicle controls validity:

not applicable

Negative controls validity:

valid

Positive controls validity:

valid

Irritation / corrosion parameter:

penetration time (in minutes)

Run / experiment:

3

Value:

> 66.8

Vehicle controls validity:

not applicable

Negative controls validity:

valid

Positive controls validity:

valid

Irritation / corrosion parameter:

penetration time (in minutes)

Run / experiment:

4

Value:

66.7

Vehicle controls validity:

not applicable

Negative controls validity:

valid

Positive controls validity:

valid

Interpretation of results:

GHS criteria not met

Conclusions:

1,2-Ethanediamine, N-(2-aminoethyl)-, reaction products with glycidyl tolyl ether was found to be non-corrosive in Corrositex study.

Executive summary:

1,2-Ethanediamine, N-(2-aminoethyl)-, reaction products with glycidyl tolyl ether was found to be non-corrosive in Corrositex study.

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

adverse effect observed (corrosive)

Eye irritation

Link to relevant study records

Reference

Endpoint:

eye irritation: in vitro / ex vivo

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

key study

Reliability:

1 (reliable without restriction)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

guideline study

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

OECD Guideline 437 (Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability Test Method for Identifying i) Chemicals Inducing Serious Eye Damage and ii) Chemicals Not Requiring Classification for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage)

GLP compliance:

yes (incl. QA statement)

Species:

cattle

Strain:

not specified

Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:

The bovine eyes, in a Hank's Balanced Salt Solution with penicillin-streptomycin, were received from Spear Products on 11 Aug 2016 and transported to MB Research in a refrigerated container.

Vehicle:

unchanged (no vehicle)

Controls:

yes, concurrent positive control

yes, concurrent negative control

Amount / concentration applied:

A volume of 0.75 ml of ethanol, MEM or test article was applied to the epithelium of each of the three positive controls, three negative controls or three test article-treated corneas in a manner, which ensured the entire cornea was covered. All corneas were dosed via the closed-chamber method.

Duration of treatment / exposure:

All holders and corneas were placed in a horizontal position (anterior side up) in the 32ºC (± 1º) incubator. After 10 (± 1) minutes, the test article, ethanol or MEM solution was removed from the epithelium of the
cornea and anterior chamber of the holder by washing with MEM solution containing phenol red. A final rinse was made with MEM without phenol red. The anterior and posterior chambers of the holders were
refilled with fresh MEM solution. Opacity measurements were made following the 10-minute exposure and MEM solution refill. All corneas were incubated at 32ºC (± 1º) for an additional two hours at which time the MEM solution in the anterior and posterior chambers was removed and the holders refilled with fresh MEM solution. A measurement of opacity was taken with each treated cornea compared to the blank supplied with the
OP-KIT. This reading was used in the final IVIS calculations. Immediately following the two-hour opacity measurement, the MEM solution was removed from the anterior chamber and replaced with 1.0 ml of 0.4% sodium fluorescein solution in Dulbecco's Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS). Each holder was returned to the 32ºC (±1º) incubator in a horizontal position (anterior side up) ensuring contact of the fluorescein with the cornea.
After 90 (± 5) minutes, the fluid from the posterior chamber was removed and the amount of dye, which passed through the cornea (permeability), was measured as the optical density at 490 nm by a
spectrophotometer. A 1:1000 dilution of the fluorescein was prepared and measured in the spectrophotometer as a measure of consistency.

Observation period (in vivo):

Not applicable

Duration of post- treatment incubation (in vitro):

See Details on study design

Number of animals or in vitro replicates:

Not applicable

Details on study design:

The eyes were examined prior to use on the day of dosing. Any eye with a cornea exhibiting evidence of vascularization, pigmentation, opacity or scratches was discarded.
Corneas from eyes that were free of defects were dissected from the surrounding tissues. A 2-3 mm rim of sclera was left attached to each cornea. The corneas were then placed in a container of fresh HBSS.
The dissected corneas were mounted in specially designed holders that were separated into anterior and posterior chambers and filled separately. Each cornea was mounted allowing the epithelium of the cornea to project into the anterior chamber. The posterior chamber was filled with MEM solution ensuring contact with the endothelium. The anterior chamber was filled with MEM solution, ensuring contact with the epithelium. Each cornea was visually inspected again to ensure there were no defects.
The entire holder was incubated at 32ºC (± 1º) and allowed to equilibrate for at least one hour but not longer than two hours.
A pre-exposure determination of opacity was made for each cornea by measuring each against the blank supplied with the opacitometer. Any cornea with a value greater than 7 units was discarded.
Following the pretest observations, the MEM solution was removed from the anterior chamber. A volume of 0.75 ml of ethanol, MEM or test article was applied to the epithelium of each of the three positive controls, three negative controls or three test article-treated corneas in a manner, which ensured the entire cornea was covered. The closed-chamber method of dose administration was used.
All holders and corneas were placed in a horizontal position (anterior side up) in the 32ºC (± 1º) incubator. After 10 (± 1) minutes, the test article, ethanol or MEM solution was removed from the epithelium of the cornea and anterior chamber of the holder by washing with MEM solution containing phenol red. A final rinse was made with MEM without phenol red. The anterior and posterior chambers of the holders were refilled with fresh MEM solution. Opacity measurements were made following the 10-minute exposure and MEM solution refill.
All corneas were incubated at 32ºC (± 1º) for an additional two hours at which time the MEM solution in the anterior and posterior chambers was removed and the holders refilled with fresh MEM solution. A measurement of opacity was taken with each treated cornea compared to the blank supplied with the
OP-KIT. This reading was used in the final IVIS calculations.
Immediately following the two-hour opacity measurement, the MEM solution was removed from the anterior chamber and replaced with 1.0 ml of 0.4% sodium fluorescein solution in Dulbecco's Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS). Each holder was returned to the 32ºC (±1º) incubator in a horizontal position (anterior side up) ensuring contact of the fluorescein with the cornea.
After 90 (± 5) minutes, the fluid from the posterior chamber was removed and the amount of dye, which passed through the cornea (permeability), was measured as the optical density at 490 nm by a spectrophotometer. A 1:1000 dilution of the fluorescein was prepared and measured in the spectrophotometer as a measure of consistency.
Data analysis
Individual corrected opacity scores were calculated by subtracting the pretest score from the ten-minute and two-hour scores. Corrected mean opacity scores were calculated by averaging the individual two-hour corrected opacity scores for a given dose group and subtracting the mean opacity score for the negative control group. A corrected mean opacity score was not calculated for the negative control, rather only the mean of the individual two-hour corrected opacity scores were calculated (with no subtraction of mean opacity score for negative control.)
Individual corrected optical densities were calculated by subtracting the mean optical density for the negative control group from the individual optical density values. Individual corrected optical densities were not calculated for the negative control group. Corrected mean optical densities were calculated by averaging the individual corrected optical density values for a given dose group. A corrected mean optical density was not calculated for the negative control, rather only the mean of the individual optical densities was calculated.
The In Vitro Irritancy Score (IVIS) for the test article and Vehicle control was calculated by adding the corrected mean opacity score to fifteen times the corrected mean optical density, as shown by the equation below. The calculation to obtain an IVIS for the positive control was performed in the same manner as the test article.
In Vitro Irritancy Score (IVIS) = Corrected Mean Opacity Score + (15 x Corrected Mean Optical Density Score)
The calculation to obtain an IVIS for the negative control was performed by adding the mean opacity score to fifteen times the mean optical density, as shown by the equation below.
In Vitro Irritancy Score (IVIS) = Mean Opacity Score + (15 x Mean Optical Density Score)

Based on the IVIS score, the test article was classified according to the prediction model described in DB-ALM Protocol No. 1271, a modification of the prediction model suggested by Gautheron, et al. (1994). Results from test situations should be compared to known materials tested under similar conditions. This classification system is the most consistent with recent regulatory reviews of the assay performance.
IVIS CLASSIFICATION
0 to 3 Non-Irritant
3.1 to 25 Mild Eye Irritant
25.1 to 55 Moderate Eye Irritant
55.1 and above Severe/Corrosive Eye Irritant
OECD Guideline #437 defines a substance that produces an IVIS of > 55 as Category 1, a substance that causes “Serious eye damage.”
IVIS UN GHS2
≤ 3 No Category
>3 to ≤55 No prediction can be made
>55 Category 1
The assay was accepted because the positive control had an IVIS that fell between two standard deviations of the historical mean.

Irritation parameter:

in vitro irritation score

Run / experiment:

Mean value for 3 experiments

Value:

49.77

Vehicle controls validity:

not applicable

Negative controls validity:

valid

Positive controls validity:

valid

Irritation parameter:

cornea opacity score

Run / experiment:

Mean of 3 experiments

Value:

3.67

Vehicle controls validity:

not applicable

Negative controls validity:

valid

Positive controls validity:

valid

Interpretation of results:

Category 2 (irritating to eyes) based on GHS criteria

Conclusions:

Based on an In Vitro Irritatancy Score between 25 and 55, 1,2-Ethanediamine, N-(2-aminoethyl)-, reaction products with glycidyl tolyl ether is considered to be moderate eye irritant.

Executive summary:

Based on an In Vitro Irritatancy Score between 25 and 55, 1,2-Ethanediamine, N-(2-aminoethyl)-, reaction products with glycidyl tolyl ether is considered to be moderate eye irritant.

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

adverse effect observed (irritating)