Registration Dossier

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:
key study
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
Remarks:
Description of a well conducted human study reported in a peer reviewed journal.

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
publication
Title:
Evaluation of skin sensitization response of dialkyl (C6-C13) phthalate esters
Author:
Medeiros A M
Year:
1999
Bibliographic source:
Contact Dermatitis, 1999, 41, 287–289

Materials and methods

Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Principle of test: DUP was tested in a 104 person panel human repeated insult patch test (HRIPT) using the modified Draize procedure
- Short description of test conditions: see below
- Parameters analysed / observed: see below
GLP compliance:
not specified
Type of study:
patch test
Justification for non-LLNA method:
An appropriate patch test in human is available which would not justify conducting an additional LLNA due to animal welfare.

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
Diundecyl phthalate
EC Number:
222-884-9
EC Name:
Diundecyl phthalate
Cas Number:
3648-20-2
Molecular formula:
C30H50O4
IUPAC Name:
1,2-diundecyl benzene-1,2-dicarboxylate
Test material form:
liquid

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:
other: Human
Sex:
male/female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
N/A human study

Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)

Induction
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
unchanged (no vehicle)
Concentration / amount:
undiluted DUP at 100% concentration
Day(s)/duration:
3 weeks
Adequacy of induction:
not specified
Challenge
No.:
#1
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
unchanged (no vehicle)
Concentration / amount:
undiluted DUP at 100% concentration
Day(s)/duration:
24 h
Adequacy of challenge:
not specified
No. of animals per dose:
104 male & female individuals
Details on study design:
RANGE FINDING TESTS: yes; irritation test in 14 female & 1 male subjects with undiluted DUP applied to a cotton pad covered by occlusive hypoallergenic tape. Responses evaluated 30 minutes & 24h after patch removal.

MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 9 applications
- Exposure period: a 24h contact period per application
- Test groups: 1
- Control group: no
- Site: deltoid area of the arm
- Frequency of applications: 3 X weekly (Monday, Wednesday & Friday) for 3 weeks
- Duration: 72h (reactions scored 48 or 72h after each induction application)
- Concentrations: 0.2 mL 100% undiluted DUP

B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1 (following 10-17 day recovery period) in wk 6
- Day(s) of challenge: 1
- Exposure period: 24h
- Test groups: 1
- Control group: No
- Site: Naive site
- Concentrations: 0.2 mL 100% undiluted DUP
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 48 & 96h



Challenge controls:
not applicable
Positive control substance(s):
no

Results and discussion

In vivo (non-LLNA)

Resultsopen allclose all
Key result
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
0.2 ml 100 % undiluted DUP
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
104
Clinical observations:
none reported
Remarks on result:
no indication of skin sensitisation
Key result
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
96
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
0.2 ml 100 % undiluted DUP
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
104
Clinical observations:
none reported
Remarks on result:
no indication of skin sensitisation
Key result
Reading:
1st reading
Group:
negative control
Remarks on result:
other: No data
Key result
Reading:
1st reading
Group:
positive control
Remarks on result:
other: No data

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
other: No category (CLP Regulation EC no. 1272/2008)
Conclusions:
DUP was found without skin sensitization potential in a human repeated insult patch test (HRIPT).

Executive summary:

Diundecyl phthalate was tested in a 104-person panel human repeated insult patch test (HRIPT) using the modified Draize procedure. Undiluted 100% DUP was used for the induction and challenge phases based upon a 24-h occluded irritation test on 15 panelists. The induction phase consisted in 9 applications of the test material to the same site, with a contact period of 24 h per application, and the challenge phase consisted in 1 application of 24 h to a naive site located away from the application site. Under the conditions of this HRIPT, no evidence of dermal irritation or sensitization was observed in the 104-person panel. These HRIPT data provide evidence for the lack of experimental skin sensitization potential for DUP in humans.