Registration Dossier

Data platform availability banner - registered substances factsheets

Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.

The new ECHA CHEM database has been released by ECHA, and it now contains all REACH registration data. There are more details on the transition of ECHA's published data to ECHA CHEM here.

Diss Factsheets

Administrative data

Description of key information

Beta-lactam compounds are know to elicit skin and respiratory sensitisation in sensitive individuals, the substance in question is a non-penicillin betalactam drug intermediate where the beta-lactam ring structure is intact. All non-penicillin beta-lactams have the potential to sensitize individuals, and subsequent exposure to penicillin may result in severe allergic reactions in some patients. Although the frequency of hypersensitivity reactions due to cross-reactivity between beta-lactam classes can be lower than the risk within a class, the hazard posed is present and potentially lifethreatening.

The potential health hazard of non-penicillin beta-lactams therefore is similar to that of penicillins. Further similarities between non-penicillin beta-lactams and penicillins are as follows:

• It is difficult to define the minimal dose below which allergic responses are unlikely to occur in humans.

• There is a lack of suitable animal or receptor testing models that are predictive of human sensitivity.

• The threshold dose at which allergenic response could occur is extremely low and difficult to detect with current analytical methods.

Non-Penicillin Beta-Lactam Drugs:

A CGMP Framework for Preventing Cross Contamination: US Food and Drug Administration, April 2013

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin sensitisation

Link to relevant study records

Referenceopen allclose all

Endpoint:
skin sensitisation: in chemico
Data waiving:
study scientifically not necessary / other information available
Justification for data waiving:
other:
Justification for type of information:
All non-penicillin beta-lactams have the potential to sensitize individuals, and subsequent exposure to penicillin may result in severe allergic reactions in some patients. Although the frequency of hypersensitivity reactions due to cross-reactivity between beta-lactam classes can be lower than the risk within a class, the hazard posed is present and potentially lifethreatening. The potential health hazard of non-penicillin beta-lactams therefore is similar to that of penicillins. Further similarities between non-penicillin beta-lactams and penicillins are as follows:
• It is difficult to define the minimal dose below which allergic responses are unlikely to occur in humans.
• There is a lack of suitable animal or receptor testing models that are predictive of human sensitivity.
• The threshold dose at which allergenic response could occur is extremely low and difficult to detect with current analytical methods.

Non-Penicillin Beta-Lactam Drugs:
A CGMP Framework for Preventing Cross Contamination: US Food and Drug Administration, April 2013
Endpoint:
skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
supporting study
Study period:
not specified
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
comparable to guideline study with acceptable restrictions
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
other: Guinea pig topical sensitisation test
GLP compliance:
no
Type of study:
other: guinea pig topical sensitisation test
Justification for non-LLNA method:
Study was carried out before LLNA was considered a requirement. It is considered sufficient for the endpoint, so there was no need for an additional LLNA study, which would involve more animals.
Specific details on test material used for the study:
Batch No: RJ1173
Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
not specified
Sex:
male/female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
Five male and five female guinea pigs, initially weighing 250-300 g.
Route:
other: epicutaneous, no other information mentioned
Vehicle:
other: saline:2-methoxyethanol:Tween 80 (45:45:10)
Concentration / amount:
not mentioned
Day(s)/duration:
not mentioned
Adequacy of induction:
not specified
No.:
#1
Route:
other: epicutaneous, not specified
Vehicle:
other: saline:2-methoxyethanol:Tween 80 (45:45:10)
Concentration / amount:
Not specified
Day(s)/duration:
Not specified
Adequacy of challenge:
not specified
No. of animals per dose:
5
Positive control substance(s):
yes
Remarks:
Benzyl penicillin
Positive control results:
At 24 hours, only 2/9 animals treated with Benzyl Penicillin gave positive results. This increased to 5/9 animals at 48 hours. This is a low result for the positive control substance, as sensitisation usually occurs in >80% of the animals.
Key result
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
Not available
No. with + reactions:
1
Total no. in group:
10
Key result
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
Not available
No. with + reactions:
2
Total no. in group:
10
Key result
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
positive control
Dose level:
Not available
No. with + reactions:
2
Total no. in group:
9
Key result
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
positive control
Dose level:
Not available
No. with + reactions:
5
Total no. in group:
9
Interpretation of results:
Category 1 (skin sensitising) based on GHS criteria
Conclusions:
Skin sensitising potential of 1132/4 DMF (CQ Intermediate) is low, but cannot be ignored.
Over 20% of the animals showed positive responses to the challenge after 48 hours, which is sufficient to classify the substance as a Skin Sensitiser Category 1, according to the criteria set for animal studies in section 3.4.2.2.4.1 of Annex I of the CLP Regulation.
Executive summary:

The skin sensitisation potential of 0/4 dihydrochloride dihydrate, 1132/4 DMF and 1132/4 bis hydrochloride was assessed in the guinea pig topical sensitisation test. The results indicate that repeated contact of the human skin with 0/4 dihydrochloride dihydrate might produce contact dermatitis. The contact allergenic potential of 1132/4 DMF although low, cannot be ignored, and that of 1132/4 bis hydrochloride, if any, is very low.

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
adverse effect observed (sensitising)

Respiratory sensitisation

Link to relevant study records
Reference
Endpoint:
respiratory sensitisation: in chemico
Data waiving:
study scientifically not necessary / other information available
Justification for data waiving:
other:
Justification for type of information:
All non-penicillin beta-lactams have the potential to sensitize individuals, and subsequent exposure to penicillin may result in severe allergic reactions in some patients. Although the frequency of hypersensitivity reactions due to cross-reactivity between beta-lactam classes can be lower than the risk within a class, the hazard posed is present and potentially lifethreatening. The potential health hazard of non-penicillin beta-lactams therefore is similar to that of penicillins. Further similarities between non-penicillin beta-lactams and penicillins are as follows:
• It is difficult to define the minimal dose below which allergic responses are unlikely to occur in humans.
• There is a lack of suitable animal or receptor testing models that are predictive of human
sensitivity.
• The threshold dose at which allergenic response could occur is extremely low and
difficult to detect with current analytical methods.

Non-Penicillin Beta-Lactam Drugs:
A CGMP Framework for Preventing Cross Contamination: US Food and Drug Administration, April 2013
Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
adverse effect observed (sensitising)

Justification for classification or non-classification

Based upon the human experience of individual sensitivity to penicillin and non-penicillin beta-lactam drugs, it is appropriate to classify the substance for both respiratory and skin sensitisation in accordance with 1272/2008/EC. A supporting study conducted in guinea pigs resulted in a positive response rate of 20% to the challenge after 48 hours, which is sufficient to classify the substance as a Skin Sensitiser Category 1. The substance has been classified as a Respiratory Sensitiser Category 1 on the basis of human experience.