Registration Dossier

Toxicological information

Skin irritation / corrosion

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
skin irritation: in vivo
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
weight of evidence
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
data from handbook or collection of data
Remarks:
peer-reviewed OECD SIDS report
Cross-reference
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Remarks:
link to target
Reference
Endpoint:
skin irritation: in vivo
Type of information:
read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
Adequacy of study:
weight of evidence
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
data from handbook or collection of data
Remarks:
peer-reviewed OECD SIDS report, read-across
Justification for type of information:
REPORTING FORMAT FOR THE ANALOGUE APPROACH
1. HYPOTHESIS FOR THE ANALOGUE APPROACH
The ideal structure of the registered substance is a complex which consists of iron2+ as central ions and a hemiprophyrazine ring as ligand. Therefore, the endpoint in question may be both covered with data on Fe2+ salts as well as hemiprophyrazines and structurally related substances. So the read-across can be performed on both common functional groups and common breakdown products, as the read-across substances are considered breakdown products of the target substance.

2. SOURCE AND TARGET CHEMICAL(S) (INCLUDING INFORMATION ON PURITY AND IMPURITIES)
Source Chemicals, for individual read-across from an analogue in the required endpoints:
- Iron dichloride, CAS 7758-94-3
- Copper, (29H,31H-phthalocyaninato(2-)-kappaN29,kappaN30,kappaN31,kappaN32)-, ((3-(dimethylamino)propyl)amino)sulfonyl derivs., CAS 68411-04-1
- Copper phthalocyanine, CAS 147-14-8
Target Chemical:
(8,20-Dihydro-8,20-diphenyl-5,24:12,17-diimino-7,10:22,19-dinitrilodibenz(f,p)(1,2,4,9,11,12,14,19)
octaazacycloicosinato(2-)-N25,N26,N27,N28)iron, CAS 50293-39-5
All substances do not contain impurities to an extent which is expected to alter the outcome of the experimental results or read-across approach.

3. ANALOGUE APPROACH JUSTIFICATION
There are no data on the respective endpoints for all read-across substances available, but if data is available on all endpoints, a clear trend is available. So in general, read-across is justified. In detail, for the single possible structural analogues, the following is concluded:
CAS 7758-94-3: Both substances contain a Fe2+ ion, and with respect to acute oral toxicity, the substance provides the worst case scenario. So an underestimation of the actual risk here is unlikely. With regard to skin sensitization, iron does not need to be regarded, as it is an endogenous substance and no cases of sensitization were ever reported. Regarding gene mutation in bacteria, it was consistently with all the other possible analogues negative, so read-across is justified. For the irritation endpoints, it is not suitable, as based on the counterion, there are acidic iron salts available, clearly overestimating the possible hazard.
CAS 68411-04-1 / CAS 147-14-8: both source and target chemical contain structurally highly related chelating rings, i.e. a hemiprophyrazine ring or a phthalocyanine ring, they predominantly only differ in the central ion. The organic ring bearing all the chelating nitrogen atoms are identical, the only differ in the way the benzyl rings are attached, which are nevertheless identical chemical groups. With regard to acute oral toxicity, their acute oral LD50 values are way above the limit of classification, the precautionary classification of the target chemical as Acute tox. Cat. 4 does certainly not underestimate the actual risk. Regarding gene mutation in bacteria, all possible analogues are consistently negative ±S9. With regard to irritation and sensitisation, the organic functional groups are more relevant than the central ions, so read-across is also here justified.

4. DATA MATRIX
There is currently no data on the target chemical available, so an estimation using a worst case approach based on the properties of the available surrogates will be used:
Property CAS 50293-39-5 (target) CAS 7758-94-3 (source 1) CAS 68411-04-1 (source 2) CAS 147-14-8 (source 3)
LD50 (oral) Acute tox. Cat. 4 >300, <2000 mg/kg (rats) > 5000 mg/kg (rats) > 10000 mg/kg (rats)
>16000 mg/kg (rabbits)
Skin irritation Not irritating No data No data Not irritating
Eye irritation Not irritating No data No data Not irritating
Skin sensitization Not sensitizing No data No data Not sensitizing
Gene mutation in bacteria Negative ± S9 Negative ± S9 (OECD 471) Negative ± S9 (OECD 471) Negative ± S9 (various assays)
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
other: The Consumer Product Safety Commission of the U.S.A. in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16, section 1550.41
Deviations:
not specified
GLP compliance:
not specified
Species:
other: not specified
Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
n/a
Type of coverage:
not specified
Preparation of test site:
not specified
Vehicle:
not specified
Controls:
not specified
Amount / concentration applied:
not specified
Duration of treatment / exposure:
not specified
Observation period:
not specified
Number of animals:
not specified
Details on study design:
Skin irritation potential was tested.
Irritation parameter:
other:
Remarks on result:
no indication of irritation
Remarks:
The test substance was classified as negative for skin irritation potential under the test condition.
Irritation parameter:
erythema score
Basis:
mean
Time point:
24/48/72 h
Remarks on result:
other: information not given
Irritation parameter:
edema score
Basis:
mean
Time point:
24/48/72 h
Remarks on result:
other: information not given
Irritant / corrosive response data:
The test substance was classified as negative for skin irritation potential under the test condition.
Conclusions:
Information was gathered from a peer-reviewed report / collection of data, hence, the information can be considered as sufficiently reliable to assess the irritating potential of the test item. The test substance was classified as negative for skin irritation potential under the test condition. No classification as skin irritant is needed.
Executive summary:

The irritating potential of the test item was determined according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission of the U.S.A. in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16, section 1550.41. The test substance was classified as negative for skin irritation potential under the test condition.

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
review article or handbook
Title:
OECD SIDS, COPPER PHTHALOCYANINE, CAS N°: 147-14-8
Author:
OECD SIDS
Year:
1993
Bibliographic source:
UNEP PUBLICATIONS, IRPTC Data Profile, OECD/SIDS. Screening Information Data Set (SIDS) of OECD High Production Volume Chemicals Programme, 10, (1993)

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
other: The Consumer Product Safety Commission of the U.S.A. in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16, section 1550.41
Deviations:
not specified
GLP compliance:
not specified

Test material

Constituent 1
Reference substance name:
29H,31H-phthalocyaninato(2-)-N29,N30,N31,N32 copper
EC Number:
205-685-1
EC Name:
29H,31H-phthalocyaninato(2-)-N29,N30,N31,N32 copper
Cas Number:
147-14-8
IUPAC Name:
[29H,31H-phthalocyaninato(2-)-kappa~2~N~29~,N~31~]copper
Test material form:
solid
Details on test material:
Molecular Formula : C32H16CuN8
Molecular Weight : 576.08
Melting Point : 600C, DCP
State : Solid
Density : 1.62 (.alpha. Form)*
Vapour Pressure : 375E-7kPa(295E-6mmHg) at 384C
Water Solubility : Not soluble
Particle : Microcrystals
Colour : Bright blue with purple lustre
Impurities : Water
General Comments : Soluble in 98% H2SO4, stable toward heat. *Density for the .beta. form = 1.61-1.62

Test animals

Species:
other: not specified
Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
n/a

Test system

Type of coverage:
not specified
Preparation of test site:
not specified
Vehicle:
not specified
Controls:
not specified
Amount / concentration applied:
not specified
Duration of treatment / exposure:
not specified
Observation period:
not specified
Number of animals:
not specified
Details on study design:
Skin irritation potential was tested.

Results and discussion

In vivo

Resultsopen allclose all
Irritation parameter:
other:
Remarks on result:
no indication of irritation
Remarks:
The test substance was classified as negative for skin irritation potential under the test condition.
Irritation parameter:
erythema score
Basis:
mean
Time point:
24/48/72 h
Remarks on result:
other: information not given
Irritation parameter:
edema score
Basis:
mean
Time point:
24/48/72 h
Remarks on result:
other: information not given
Irritant / corrosive response data:
The test substance was classified as negative for skin irritation potential under the test condition.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:
Information was gathered from a peer-reviewed report / collection of data, hence, the information can be considered as sufficiently reliable to assess the irritating potential of the test item. The test substance was classified as negative for skin irritation potential under the test condition. No classification as skin irritant is needed.
Executive summary:

The irritating potential of the test item was determined according to the Consumer Product Safety Commission of the U.S.A. in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16, section 1550.41. The test substance was classified as negative for skin irritation potential under the test condition.