Registration Dossier

Toxicological information

Skin sensitisation

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: GLP guideline study

Data source

Reference Type:
study report
Report date:

Materials and methods

Test guideline
according to guideline
OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
GLP compliance:
Type of study:
mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)

Test material

Constituent 1
Reference substance name:
Golpanol PAP
Golpanol PAP
Details on test material:
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): Golpanol PAP / 2-Propyn-1-ol, compd. with methyloxirane
- Physical state: liquid
- Analytical purity: 54.7 area %
- Impurities (identity and concentrations): 33.9 g/100 g water, propargyl alcohol 0.6 area %, propylene glycol 5.3 area %, higher alcoxylated products 5.4 area %
- Lot/batch No.: 88767924U0
- Stability under test conditions: The stability of the test item under storage conditions over the study period was guaranteed by the sponsor,
and the sponsor holds this responsibility.
- Storage condition of test material: Room temperature

In vivo test system

Test animals

Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- Source: Harlan Laboratories B.V.
- Age at study initiation: 10-11 weeks (beginning of treatment)
- Weight at study initiation: animals of comparable size and weight
- Housing: group housing
- Diet: ad libitum
- Water: ad libitum
- Acclimation period: At least 5 days prior to the start of dosing

- Temperature (°C): 20 +-2
- Humidity (%): 45 – 65%
- Air changes (per hr): ca. 10/h
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12

Study design: in vivo (LLNA)

25 %, 50 % and 100 %
No. of animals per dose:
Details on study design:
At the tested concentrations (50 % and 100 %) the animals did not show any signs of systemic toxicity. On days 3 and 4, both treated animals showed an erythema of the ear skin (Score 1). Other signs of irritation or signs of systemic toxicity were not observed.
Thus, the test item in the main study was assayed at 25, 50% (w/w), and 100%.

- Name of test method: OECD 429
- Criteria used to consider a positive response:
A test item is regarded as a sensitiser in the LLNA if the following criteria are fulfilled:
- First, that exposure to at least one concentration of the test item resulted in an incorporation of 3HTdR at least 3-fold or greater than that recorded in control mice, as indicated by the Stimulation Index.
- Second, that the data are compatible with a conventional dose response, although allowance must be made (especially at high topical concentrations) for either local toxicity or immunological suppression.

Each test group of mice was treated by topical (epidermal) application to the dorsal surface of each ear with test item concentrations of 25, 50% (w/w), and 100% in dimethylformamide. The application volume, 25 μL/ear/day, was spread over the entire dorsal surface of each ear once daily for three consecutive days. A further group of mice (control animals) was treated with an equivalent volume of the relevant vehicle alone.
Positive control substance(s):
hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
The mean values and standard deviations were calculated in the body weight tables, for the ear weights, the lymph node weights and lymph node cell count, and for the DPM values (group mean DPM ± standard deviation).
A statistical analysis was conducted on the DPM values, the ear weights, the lymph node weights and the lymph node cell count to assess whether the difference was statistically significant between test item groups and negative control group. For all statistical calculations SigmaStat for Windows (Version 2.0) was used. A One-Way-Analysis-of-Variance was used as statistical method. In case of significant results of the One-Way-ANOVA, multiple comparisons were performed with the Dunnett test or the Student Newman Keuls test. Statistical significance was set at the five per cent level (p < 0.05). The Dean-Dixon-Test and/or Grubb’s test was /were used for identification of possible outliers (performed with Microsoft Excel 2003).
However, both biological and statistical significance were considered together.

Results and discussion

In vivo (LLNA)

Resultsopen allclose all
Remarks on result:
other: S.I. control: 1.0 25 %: 0.60 50 %: 1.14 100 %: 0.71
other: disintegrations per minute (DPM)
Remarks on result:
other: Vehicle: 742.3 dpm 25 %: 445.3 dpm 50 %: 844.5 dpm 100 %: 524.1 dpm

Any other information on results incl. tables

Viability / Mortality

No deaths occurred during the study period.

Clinical Signs

No symptoms of local toxicity at the ears of the animals and no systemic findings were observed during the study period.

Body Weights

The body weight of the animals, recorded prior to the first application and prior to treatment with 3HTdR, was within the range commonly recorded for animals of this strain and age.

Lymph Node Weights and Cell Counts

The measured lymph node weights and –cell counts of all animals treated were recorded after sacrifice. A statistically significant or biologically relevant increase in lymph node weights was not observed in any of the test item treated groups in comparison to the vehicle control group. For BALB/c mice, a cutoff-value for the lymph node cell count index of 1.55 was reported for a positive response. The indices determined for the lymph node cell count did not exceed this threshold.

Ear Weights

The measured ear weights of all animals treated were recorded after sacrifice. A statistically significant or biologically relevant increase in ear weights was not observed in any treated group in comparison to the vehicle control group.

For BALB/c mice, a threshold for the ear weight index of 1.1 was reported for a positive response. The indices determined for the lymph node cell count did not exceed this threshold. Furthermore, according to OECD guideline 429, an increase in ear weight exceeding the threshold value of 25% was considered to be indicative for excessive local skin irritation. This threshold was not exceeded in any test item treated group.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
not sensitising
Migrated information