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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

In the key in vivo skin sensitisation study, conducted according to OECD Test Guideline 406 and in compliance with GLP, triethoxy(2,4,4-trimethylpentyl)silane was concluded to be not sensitising to the skin (BSL Bioservice, 2001c).

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin sensitisation

Link to relevant study records
Reference
Endpoint:
skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
guideline study
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
Deviations:
no
GLP compliance:
yes (incl. QA statement)
Type of study:
guinea pig maximisation test
Justification for non-LLNA method:
An LLNA study was not performed because there is an existing reliable study for skin sensitisation using the Guinea Pig Maximisation test method, which pre-dates the change of the REACH Regulation requirement for an LLNA skin sensitisation study from 2008.
Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
Dunkin-Hartley
Sex:
female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Harlan Winkelmann GmbH
- Age at study initiation: No data
- Weight at study initiation: 300-500 g
- Housing:Groups in Terluran cages
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): Ad libitum
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): Ad libitum
- Acclimation period: Described as 'adequate'


ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 22 ±3
- Humidity (%): 55 ±10
- Air changes (per hr): At least 10
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12

Route:
intradermal and epicutaneous
Vehicle:
cotton seed oil
Concentration / amount:
Induction: Intradermal injection of 5% test substance
Induction: Topical exposure to 100% test substance
Challenge: 100% test substance
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
cotton seed oil
Concentration / amount:
Induction: Intradermal injection of 5% test substance
Induction: Topical exposure to 100% test substance
Challenge: 100% test substance
No. of animals per dose:
Ten in test groups and five in negative control.
Details on study design:
RANGE FINDING TESTS: For the justification of the dose levels a preliminary test was performed. Four animals were topically treated with 25%, 50% or 100% of the test substance in cotton seed oil. No signs of irritation or systemic toxicity were recorded after a contact period of 48 hours after application of 100% concentration. Therefore the 100% concentration was chosen as the concentration for the topical and challenge exposures. For the justification of the first stage of the induction three animals were intradermally treated with 1%, 2.5% or 5% test substance. Slight erythema was found in the animals treated with 5%, until 48 hours after application. No signs were recorded at 72 hours. Therefore the concentration of 5% was chosen for the intradermal induction injection.

MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE: intradermal injection
- No. of exposures: One
- Exposure period: Single injection
- Test groups: Injection 1: Freund's Adjuvant complete, 1+1 (v/v) diluted with isotonic saline (FCA). Injection 2: Test substance (5%). Injection 3: Prepared test substance at a concentration of 50% (v/v) in FCA, 1+1 (v/v) diluted with isotonic saline.
- Control group: Injection 1: FCA. Injection 2: Cotton seed oil. Injection 3: cotton seed oil at a concentration of 50% (v/v) FCA.
- Site: Shoulder region (Injections 1 and 2 close to each other and nearest the head. Injection 3 towards the caudal part of the test region).

B. INDUCTION EXPOSURE: topical application
- On Day 6, approximately 24 hours before the topical induction the test area, after close clipping, was painted with 0.5 ml of 10% sodium lauryl sulfate in vaseline, to create a local irritation.
- On Day 7, a patch saturated with either 0.5 ml 100% test substance (test group) or 0.5 ml of cotton seed oil (control group) was applied to the test site and held in contact by an occlusive dressing for 48 hours.

C. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE: topical
A patch saturated with 0.5 ml of the test substance (100%) was applied to the left flank of the animals. A patch saturated with 0.5 ml cotton seed oil was applied to the right flank. The patches were held in place with an occlusive dressing for 24 hours. At the end of the challenge period the skin was cleaned with moistened gauze patches. Skin reactions were assessed 24, 48 and 72 hours after removal of the dressings.
Challenge controls:
POSITIVE CONTROLS: Mercaptobenzothiazole (10 animals): 2% for intradermal induction, 25% or topical induction and 15% for challenge.
NEGATIVE CONTROLS: cotton seed oil.
Positive control substance(s):
yes
Remarks:
Mercaptobenzothiazole
Positive control results:
7 of 10 animals gave a positive result.
Key result
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
100 % test substance
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
no indication of skin sensitisation
Key result
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
100 % test substance
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
no indication of skin sensitisation
Key result
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
cotton seed oil
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
5
Remarks on result:
no indication of skin sensitisation
Key result
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
cotton seed oil
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
5
Remarks on result:
no indication of skin sensitisation
Key result
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
positive control
Dose level:
15% Mercaptobenzothiazole
No. with + reactions:
7
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
positive indication of skin sensitisation
Remarks:
70% of the animals had skin sensitisation
Key result
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
positive control
Dose level:
15% Mercaptobenzothiazole
No. with + reactions:
7
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
positive indication of skin sensitisation
Remarks:
70% of the animals had skin sensitisation
Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Conclusions:
In the in vivo skin sensitisation study, conducted according to OECD Test Guideline 406 and in compliance with GLP, triethoxy(2,4,4-trimethylpentyl)silane was concluded to be not sensitising to the skin.
Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
Additional information:

In the key in vivo skin sensitisation study, conducted according to OECD Test Guideline 406 and in compliance with GLP, triethoxy(2,4,4-trimethylpentyl)silane has been tested in for skin sensitisation in a Guinea-Pig Maximisation test. During the induction phase the Dunkin-Hartley guinea-pigs (10 test group and 5 control group, all females) were injected intradermally with 5% test substance (in cotton seed oil) and, after treatment with sodium lauryl sulfate, topically treated with 100% test substance. After a latency of 14 days, to allow a potential reaction of the immune system, the animals were challenged with 100% test substance on the flank. The grade of the skin reactions was compared to that of the control animals, which were treated with cotton seed oil only during the induction phase and, with the test substance during the challenge phase. The animals had normal weight gain and there were no clinical signs of toxicity. The sensitisation rate for triethoxy(2,4,4-trimethylpentyl)silane was 0 %. Therefore, triethoxy(2,4,4-trimethylpentyl)silane was concluded to be not sensitising to the skin (BSL Bioservice, 2001c).

Respiratory sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no study available

Justification for classification or non-classification

Based on the available data, no classification is proposed for skin sensitisation according to Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008.