Registration Dossier

Diss Factsheets

Administrative data

Endpoint:
skin sensitisation
Remarks:
in vivo
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
supporting study
Reliability:
4 (not assignable)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
documentation insufficient for assessment

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
1972
Report date:
1972

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
no guideline followed
Principles of method if other than guideline:
A solution of the test item in DMF was applied over three days to the ears of four guinea pigs. Four days after the last induction, the flanks of the animals have been challenged with different concentrations of the test item. The skin reaction produced 24 h later was rated and compared to unsensitized controls.

method publication; Stevens MA, 1967
Use of the albino guinea-pig to detect the skin-sensitizing ability of chemicals
Br J Ind Med. 1967, 24(3):189-202;
GLP compliance:
no
Type of study:
other: Study performed according to the method of Stevens (Br J Ind Med. 1967, 24(3):189-202)

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
2,2'-bipyridyl
EC Number:
206-674-4
EC Name:
2,2'-bipyridyl
Cas Number:
366-18-7
Molecular formula:
C10H8N2
IUPAC Name:
2,2'-bipyridyl
Details on test material:
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): 2,2'-bipyridyl
- Substance type: yellowish-fawn crystalline solid
- Physical state: solid

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
other: albino
Sex:
not specified

Results and discussion

Positive control results:
no positive controls were reported.

Any other information on results incl. tables

After challenge of the shaved guinea pig flank with different concentrations of 2,2'-bipyridine in DMF, only the 10 % concentration produced erythema, whereas the 1.0 % and the 0.1 % solutions did not.

Erythema were also observed in the 10 % group of unsensitized controls.

It can therefore be concluded that the observed reaction is due to potential skin irritating properties of 2,2'-bipyridine and that the test item is not a skin sensitizer.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Conclusions:
The test item 2,2'-bipyridine was found not to be a strong sensitizer to skin in the ear-flank test according to Stevens (1967).
Executive summary:

Skin sensitizing properties of the test item 2,2’-bipyridine were assessed according to the method of Stevens (Br J Ind Med. 1967, 24(3):189-202): the test item (dissolved in DMF) was applied over three days to the ears of four guinea pigs. Four days after the last induction, the flanks of the animals have been challenged with different concentrations of the test item. The skin reaction produced 24 h later was rated and compared to unsensitized controls.

After challenge of the shaved guinea pig flank with different concentrations of 2,2'-bipyridine in DMF, only the 10 % concentration produced erythema, whereas the 1.0 % and the 0.1 % solutions did not. As erythema were also observed in the 10 % group of unsensitized controls, it can be concluded that the observed reaction is due to potential skin irritating properties of 2,2'-bipyridine and that the test item is not a strong skin sensitizer.