1,1'-isopropylidenebis(p-phenyleneoxy)dipropan-2-ol

Endpoint summary

Description of key information

A LLNA study according to OECD guidelines and GLP principles is available to assess the skin sensitising properties of the substance, showing no skin sensitisation.

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin sensitisation

Link to relevant study records

Reference

Endpoint:

skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

key study

Study period:

24 November - 13 December 2010

Reliability:

1 (reliable without restriction)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

guideline study

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)

Deviations:

no

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

EU Method B.42 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)

Deviations:

no

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)

Deviations:

no

GLP compliance:

yes (incl. QA statement)

Type of study:

mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)

Species:

mouse

Strain:

other: CBA/J

Sex:

female

Details on test animals and environmental conditions:

TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Charles River France, L’Arbresle Cedex, France.
- Age at study initiation: Young adult animals (approx. 9 weeks old)
- Weight at study initiation: Body weight variation was within +/- 20% of the sex mean.
- Housing: Animals were group housed in labeled Makrolon cages (MIII type; height 18 cm) containing sterilised sawdust as bedding material (Litalabo, S.P.P.S., Argenteuil, France). Paper (Enviro-dri, Wm. Lillico & Son (Wonham Mill Ltd), Surrey, United Kingdom) was supplied as cage-enrichment. The acclimatization period was at least 5 days before the start of treatment under laboratory conditions. On Day 6, the animals were group housed in Makrolon MII type cages with a sheet of paper instead of sawdust and cage enrichment.
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): Free access to pelleted rodent diet (SM R/M-Z from SSNIFF® Spezialdiäten GmbH, Soest, Germany).
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): Free access to tap water.
- Acclimation period: The acclimatization period was at least 5 days before the start of treatment under laboratory conditions.
- Health inspection: A health inspection was performed prior to treatment, to ensure that the animals are in a good state of health. Special attention was paid to the ears, which were intact and free from any abnormality.

Results of analysis for diet (nutrients and contaminants), sawdust, paper and water were assessed and did not reveal any findings that were considered to have affected the study integrity. All certificates and results of analysis are retained in the NOTOX archives.

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 17.9 – 21.5ºC
- Humidity (%): 39 - 60%
Temporary deviations from the minimum level of temperature and relative humidity occurred. Laboratory historical data do not indicate an effect of the deviations.
- Air changes (per hr): approximately 15 air changes per hour- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12 hours artificial fluorescent light and 12 hours darkness per day.

IN-LIFE DATES: From: 24 November - 13 December 2010

Vehicle:

acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v)

Concentration:

0, 10, 25, 50%

No. of animals per dose:

5

Details on study design:

The vehicle was selected based on trial formulations performed at NOTOX and on test substance data supplied by the sponsor.

RANGE FINDING TESTS:
A Pre-screen test was conducted in order to select the highest test substance concentration to be used in the main study. In principle, this highest concentration should cause no systemic toxicity, may give moderate irritation at the most (maximum grade 2 (see section 6.6)) and is the highest possible concentration that can technically be applied.

Two test substance concentrations were tested; a 25% and 50% concentration. The highest concentration was the maximum concentration as required in the test guidelines (undiluted for liquids, 50% for solids).

The test system, procedures and techniques were identical to those used in the main study except that assessment of lymph node proliferation and necropsy were not performed. Two young adult animals per concentration were selected (in the range of 8 to14 weeks old). Each animal was treated with one concentration on three consecutive days. Animals were group housed in labeled Makrolon cages (MII type, height 12.5 cm). Animals were sacrificed after the final observation.

MAIN STUDY
ANIMAL ASSIGNMENT AND TREATMENT
- Name of test method: Local Lymph Node Assay
- Criteria used to consider a positive response: DPM values are presented for each animal and for each dose group. A Stimulation Index (SI) is calculated for each group. The SI is the ratio of the DPM/group compared to DPM/vehicle control group. If the results indicate a SI = 3, the test substance may be regarded as a skin sensitizer, based on the test guideline and recommendations done by ICCVAM (Reference 1). The results were evaluated according to the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) of the United Nations (2007) and the Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures. Consideration was given to the EC3 value (the estimated test substance concentration that will give a SI =3) (Reference 2).

Ref 1. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, The Murine Lymph Node Assay: A test method for assessing the allergic contact dermatitis potential of chemicals/compounds. Independent peer review by the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) and the National Toxicology Program Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM), NIH publication; No 99-4494, February 1999.
Ref 2. Basketter DA, Lea LJ, Dickens A, Briggs, D, Pate I, Dearman RJ and Kimber I. A comparison of statistical approaches to the derivation of EC3 values from local lymph node assay dose responses. J Appl Toxicol 1999;19:261-266.

ANIMAL ASSIGNMENT
Three groups of five animals were treated with one test substance concentration per group. One group of five animals was treated with vehicle.

TREATMENT PREPARATION AND ADMINISTRATION:
Test substance preparation: The test substance formulations (w/w) were prepared within 4 hours prior to each treatment. No adjustment was made for specific gravity of the vehicle. Homogeneity was obtained to visually acceptable levels.
Rationale for vehicle: The vehicle was selected based on trial formulations performed at NOTOX and on test substance data supplied by the sponsor.

Induction - Days 1, 2 and 3:
The dorsal surface of both ears was epidermally treated (25 µL/ear) with the test substance concentration, at approximately the same time per day. The concentrations were stirred with a magnetic stirrer immediately prior to dosing. The control animals were treated the same as the experimental animals, except that the vehicle was administered instead of the test substance.

Excision of the nodes - Day 6:
Each animal was injected via the tail vein with 0.25 mL of sterile phosphate buffered saline (PBS) (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) containing 20 µCi of 3H-methyl thymidine (PerkinElmer Life and Analytical Sciences, Boston, MA, US). After approximately five hours, all animals were killed by intraperitoneal injection with Euthasol® 20% (AST Farma BV, Oudewater, The Netherlands). The draining (auricular) lymph node of each ear was excised. The relative size of the nodes (as compared to normal) was estimated by visual examination and abnormalities of the nodes and surrounding area were recorded. The nodes were pooled for each animal in approximately 3 mL PBS.

Tissue processing for radioactivity - Day 6:
A single cell suspension of lymph node cells (LNC) was prepared in PBS by gentle separation through stainless steel gauze (diameter 125 µm). LNC were washed twice with an excess of PBS by centrifugation at 200g for 10 minutes at 4ºC. To precipitate the DNA, the LNC were exposed to 5% trichloroacetic acid (TCA) (Merck, Darmstadt, Germany) stored in the refrigerator until the next day.

Radioactivity measurements - Day 7
Precipitates were recovered by centrifugation, resuspended in 1 mL TCA and transferred to 10 mL of Ultima Gold cocktail (PerkinElmer Life and Analytical Sciences, Boston, MA, US) as the scintillation fluid. Radioactive measurements were performed using a Packard scintillation counter (2800TR). Counting time was to a statistical precision of ± 0.2% or a maximum of 5 minutes whichever came first. The scintillation counter was programmed to automatically subtract background and convert Counts Per Minute (CPM) to Disintegrations Per Minute (DPM).

Observations:
Mortality/Viability: Twice daily.
Body weights: On Day 1 (pre-dose) and Day 6 (prior to necropsy).
Clinical signs: Once daily on Days 1-6 (on Days 1-3 between 3 and 4 hours after dosing).
Irritation: Once daily on Days 1-6 (on Days 1 - 3 immediately after dosing) according to the following numerical scoring system. Furthermore, a description of all other (local) effects was recorded.

Grading Irritation Reactions:
Erythema and eschar formation:
0: No erythema
1: Very slight erythema (barely perceptible)
2: Well-defined erythema
3: Moderate to severe erythema (beet redness) to slight eschar formation (injuries in depth)
4: Severe erythema (beet redness) to eschar formation preventing grading of erythema

Oedema formation:
0: No oedema
1: Slight oedema (barely perceptible)
2: Moderate oedema
3: Severe oedema

Necropsy: All animals were sacrificed by intra-peritoneal injection with Euthasol® 20% (0.2 mL/animal).

Positive control substance(s):

hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)

Statistics:

Not performed.

Positive control results:

The six-month reliability check with Alpha-hexylcinnamicaldehyde indicates that the Local Lymph Node Assay as performed at NOTOX is an appropriate model for testing for contact hypersensitivity. See attached document 'Reliability check'.

Parameter:

SI

Value:

0.9

Remarks on result:

other: 10%

Parameter:

SI

Value:

0.9

Remarks on result:

other: 25%

Parameter:

SI

Value:

0.7

Remarks on result:

other: 50%

Tables and figures of the Pre-screen test and Main study have been included in the attached document "LLNA tables and figures".

Results Pre-screen test:

Slight irritation was observed for all animals at 25 and 50% on Days 1, 2 and/or 3. White remnants were present on the ears of all animals at 25 and 50% on Day 4, which did not hamper scoring for skin irritation reactions. No signs of systemic toxicity were observed in any of the animals examined. Based on these results, the highest test substance concentration selected for the main study was a 50% concentration.

Other results - main study:

Slight irritation was observed for all animals at 25 and 50% on Days 1, 2 and/or 3, which was considered not to have a toxicologically significant effect on the activity of the nodes. No oedema was observed in any of the animals examined. White remnants were present on the ears of all animals at 25 and 50% on Days 4 and 5, which did not hamper scoring for skin irritation reactions.

All auricular lymph nodes of the animals of the experimental and control groups were considered normal in size. No macroscopic abnormalities of the surrounding area were noted in any of the animals.

Body weights and body weight gain of experimental animals remained in the same range as controls over the study period. The slight body weight loss, noted in some animals, was considered not toxicologically significant.

No mortality occurred and no symptoms of systemic toxicity were observed in the animals of the main study.

Interpretation of results:

GHS criteria not met

Remarks:

Not skin sensitising

Conclusions:

Since there was no indication that the test substance elicits an SI = 3 when tested up to 50%,4,4’-Isopropylidenediphenol, propoxylated (BPA+2PO) was considered not to be a skin sensitizer.

Based on these results 4,4’-Isopropylidenediphenol, propoxylated (BPA+2PO) would not be regarded as a skin sensitizer according to the recommendations made in the test guidelines. It does not have to be classified and has no obligatory labelling requirement for sensitization by contact according to the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) of the United Nations (2007) and the Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures.

Executive summary:

The aim of this study was to determine the skin sensitisation potential of 4,4’-Isopropylidenediphenol, propoxylated (BPA+2PO) following dermal exposure. The study was carried out based on the guidelines described in:

OECD, Section 4, Health Effects, No.429 (2010),

EC, No 440/2008; B42: "Skin Sensitization: Local Lymph Node Assay"

EPA, OPPTS 870.2600 (2003) “Skin Sensitization”.

Test substance concentrations selected for the main study were based on the results of a preliminary study. Three experimental groups of five female CBA/J mice were treated with test substance concentrations of 10, 25 or 50% w/w on three consecutive days, by open application on the ears. Five vehicle control animals were similarly treated, but with vehicle alone (Acetone/Olive oil (4:1 v/v).Three days after the last exposure, all animals were injected with3H-methyl thymidine and after five hours the draining (auricular) lymph nodes were excised and pooled for each animal.

After precipitating the DNA of the lymph node cells, radioactivity measurements were performed. The activity was expressed as the number of Disintegrations Per Minute (DPM) and a stimulation index (SI) was subsequently calculated for each group.

Slight irritation was observed for all animals at 25 and 50% on Days 1, 2 and/or 3, which was considered not to have a toxicologically significant effect on the activity of the nodes. No oedema was observed in any of the animals examined. White remnants were present on the ears of all animals at 25 and 50% on Days 4 and 5, which did not hamper scoring for skin irritation reactions.

All auricular lymph nodes of the animals of the experimental and control groups were considered normal in size. No macroscopic abnormalities of the surrounding area were noted in any of the animals.

Mean DPM/animal values for the experimental groups treated with test substance concentrations 10, 25 and 50% were 572, 541 and 452 DPM respectively. The mean DPM/animal value for the vehicle control group was 609 DPM.

The SI values calculated for the substance concentrations 10, 25 and 50% were 0.9, 0.9 and 0.7 respectively.

Since there was no indication that the test substance elicits an SI = 3 when tested up to 50%,

4,4’-Isopropylidenediphenol, propoxylated (BPA+2PO) was considered not to be a skin sensitizer.

The six-month reliability check with Alpha-hexylcinnamicaldehyde indicates that the Local Lymph Node Assay as performed at the laboratory is an appropriate model for testing for contact hypersensitivity.

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)

Additional information:

An LLNA study performed according to OECD, EC and EPA test guidelines was performed. Groups of 5 female mice were exposed to 0, 10, 25 and 50% of test substance. Since there was no indication that the test substance elicits an SI = ou > 3 when tested up to 50%, 1,1-isopropylidenebis(p-phenyleneoxy)dipropan-2-ol was considered not to be a skin sensitizer.

Respiratory sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

no study available

Justification for classification or non-classification

Based on the results of the LLNA test the substance would not be regarded as a skin sensitizer according to the recommendations made in the test guidelines. It does not have to be classified and has no obligatory labelling requirement for sensitization by contact according to the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) of the United Nations (2007) and the Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of substances and mixtures.