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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

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
Study period:
29-02-2000 to 30-03-2000
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: GLP study according to international guidelines.
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)
GLP compliance:
yes
Type of study:
Buehler test
Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
Hartley
Sex:
male
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Ace animals, Boyertown, PA on 22/2/2000
- Quarantine period of at least six days.
- Age at study initiation: 2 to 3 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: males: 235-322 g
- Fasting period before study: not applied
- Housing: 1/cage
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): Fresh Purina Rat Chow (Diet #5025)
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): Tap water
- Acclimation period: 1 to 3 weeks

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): No data
- Humidity (%): No data
- Air changes (per hr): No data
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
other: safflower oil
Concentration / amount:
1. 100% Ceraphyl RMT
2. 5% Ceraphyl RMT in safflower oil
3. 100% Safflower oil
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
other: safflower oil
Concentration / amount:
1. 100% Ceraphyl RMT
2. 5% Ceraphyl RMT in safflower oil
3. 100% Safflower oil
No. of animals per dose:
25
Details on study design:
20 animals per group were tested in the induction and challenging phases, while 5 animals per group were only challenged to serve as a naive control.The site reserved for induction was only clipped in ten animals, while it was abraded in the other ten animals. A volume of 0.4 ml of test substance, mixture of test substance with safflower or safflower only was applied for induction using a 25 mm Hilltop Chamber, which was covered and wrapped to provide full occlusion. Exposure lasted for 6 hours. This procedure was repeated two times with a period of one week between each of the exposures resulting in 3 x 6-h exposures on the same area of skin. Forteen days after the last induction the challenge was performed with the same procedure but using another site on the skin. A significant reaction/incidence = Erythema score ≥ 1.
Challenge controls:
Yes, naive controls of treated animals and vehicle controls.
Positive control substance(s):
yes
Remarks:
Sensitivity of the guina pigs to dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) performed every half year.
Positive control results:
24h: incidence was 0.50 and severity was 0.78
48h: incidence was 0.30 and severity was 0.58
Conclusion: DNCB is a sensitizer
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
100% abraded
No. with + reactions:
5
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 100% abraded. No with. + reactions: 5.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
100% clipped only
No. with + reactions:
6
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 100% clipped only. No with. + reactions: 6.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
5% abraded
No. with + reactions:
3
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 5% abraded. No with. + reactions: 3.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
5% clipped only
No. with + reactions:
1
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 5% clipped only. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
clipped only
No. with + reactions:
1
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: clipped only. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
100% abraded
No. with + reactions:
6
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 100% abraded. No with. + reactions: 6.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
100% clipped only
No. with + reactions:
4
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 100% clipped only. No with. + reactions: 4.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
5% abraded
No. with + reactions:
5
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 5% abraded. No with. + reactions: 5.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
5% clipped only
No. with + reactions:
1
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 5% clipped only. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
abraded
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: abraded. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
clipped only
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: clipped only. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.

Erthema incidences in the Ceraphyl RMT (RMT) treated groups:

100% RMT 24 48 5% RMT 24 48
ma1 1 1 ma1 2 2
ma2 0 0 ma2 1 1
ma3 1 0.5 ma3 1 1
ma4 0.5 0 ma4 0.5 1
ma5 0 0 ma5 0.5 0
ma6 2 1 ma6 0 1
ma7 1 1 ma7 0 0.5
ma8 0 0 ma8 0.5 0
ma9 2 2 ma9 0 0
ma10 0 0 ma10 0 0
Severity 0.75 0.55 Severity 0.55 0.65
Incidence 0.50 0.40 Incidence 0.30 0.50
100% RMT 24 48 5% RMT 24 48
m-1 1 1 m-1 0 0
m-2 0.5 0.5 m-2 0.5 0
m-3 0 0 m-3 0 0.5
m-4 1 1 m-4 0 0
m-5 0.5 0 m-5 0 0
m-6 2 2 m-6 0.5 0.5
m-7 1 1 m-7 0 0
m-8 0.5 0.5 m-8 0 0
m-9 1 1 m-9 + +
m-10 2 1 m-10 1 1
Severity 0.95 0.80 Severity 0.22 0.22
Incidence 0.60 0.60 Incidence 0.10 0.10
ma = abraded
Interpretation of results:
sensitising
Remarks:
Migrated information sub-category 1B Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
Conclusions:
Ceraphyl RMT is not classified as sub-category 1A ensitizer because no significant incidences (erythema score ≥ 1) were ≥ 60 % at 5% (= between 0,2 % to 20 %) topical induction dose. Ceraphyl RMT meets the criteria for classification as sub-category 1B sensitizer because incidences (erythema score ≥ 1) were between 15 and 60 % for 5 % topical induction on abraded skin and > 15 % at 100 % topical induction dose.
Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
adverse effect observed (sensitising)
Additional information:

The response after intradermal induction dose of 100% Ceraphyl RMT is > 30 % in a maximization test. Incidences (erythema score ≥ 1) were between 15 and 60 % for 5 % topical induction on abraded skin and > 15 % at 100 % topical induction dose in a Bueler test. Another maximization test showed a responding of > 60 % (100%) at 1 % intradermal induction dose.

A test item is regarded as a sensitizer in the LLNA if the exposure to one or more test concentrations resulted in 3-fold or greater increase in incorporation of HTdR compared with concurrent controls, as indicated by the S.l. In a study included in this dossier, S.I. values of 1.4, 1.9 and 2.9 were determined with the test item at concentrations of 2.5 %, 5 % and 10 % (w/v), respectively, in acetone/olive oil (4/1, vlv). Hence, CERAPHYL® RMT does not show an allergenic potential when tested up to the concentration of 10 % (w/v) in acetone/olive oil (4/1, vlv) in the LLNA. The results indicate that the EC3 is > 10%.

A repeated Insult Patch test (epicutaneous test) in humans showed that an analogue of the substance had no potential for dermal irritation or allergic contact sensitization at a dermal dose of 55 mg/cm2.


Migrated from Short description of key information:
Based on the results of four reliable studies, the substance is to be considered a sub-category 1B skin sensitizer.

Justification for selection of skin sensitisation endpoint:
The result of this test include both 5 and 100% of induction doses.

Respiratory sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no study available

Justification for classification or non-classification

Ceraphyl RMT is not classified as sub-category 1A sensitizer because no significant incidences (erythema score ≥ 1) were ≥ 60 % at 5% (= between 0,2 % to 20 %) topical induction dose. Ceraphyl RMT meets the criteria for classification as sub-category 1B sensitizer because incidences (erythema score ≥ 1) were between 15 and 60 % for 5 % topical induction on abraded skin and > 15 % at 100 % topical induction dose. This was confirmed in other animal studies.