Aluminium metaphosphate

Endpoint summary

Description of key information

Data on repeated dose toxicity are available for the target substances aluminium dihydrogen triphosphate and sodium aluminium phosphate covering both short- and Long-term exposures. In an OECD 422 study administration of the test substance resulted in severe atrophy in 1/10 males exposed to 1000 mg aluminium dihydrogen triphosphate/kg bw/day for over 46 days. Further, altered calcium and total protein levels were determined in females exposed to 1000 mg/kg bw/day. Based on these results, a conservative NOAEL of 300 mg/kg bw/day was derived in the conducted Combined Repeated Dose Toxicity Study with the Reproduction/Developmental Toxicity Screening Test (OECD 422).

Exposure to sodium aluminium phosphate for over 90 days induced renal concretions in 2/4 male and 1/4 female beagle dogs, resulting in a NOAEL of 322.88 mg/kg bw/day.

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Repeated dose toxicity: via oral route - systemic effects

Link to relevant study records

Reference

Endpoint:

sub-chronic toxicity: oral

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

key study

Study period:

No data

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

guideline study with acceptable restrictions

Remarks:

The test substance identity has not been clarified in the study report, however composition of the test material is known and the study is considered to be reliable for use as a key study.

Justification for type of information:

REPORTING FORMAT FOR THE ANALOGUE APPROACH
See read-across justification report under Section 13 ‘Assessment Reports’.

1. HYPOTHESIS FOR THE ANALOGUE APPROACH
In accordance with REACH Annex XI, Section 1.5, of Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006 (REACH) the standard testing regime may be adapted in cases where a grouping or read-across approach has been applied.

The similarities may be based on:
(1) a common functional group
(2) the common precursors and/or the likelihood of common breakdown products via physical or biological processes, which result in structurally similar chemicals; or
(3) a constant pattern in the changing of the potency of the properties across the category

The source substance and the target substance are considered to be similar enough to facilitate read-across for the following reasons:
(1) Both substances are inorganic salts containing a trivalent aluminium cation and phosphoric acid. Thus, they all share the Al3+ cation and the PO43- anion as common functional groups.
(2) Both substances will ultimately dissociate into the common breakdown products of the Al3+ cations and the PO43- anion. The addition of the sodium ion in the source substance is not considered to have an impact on the toxicological profile since Na+ is a common physiological ion.
(3) In general, independently of the cation under consideration, the water solubility of phosphates decreases with increasing degree of phosphate condensation (orthophosphate > diphosphate > triphosphate > polyphosphate). The source substance in this case is more soluble than the target substance and as such the results are considered to be relevant as a worst-case.
In accordance with the provisions set out in Annex XI, Section 1.5, the results of the studies used for assessment and read-across are adequate for the purpose of classification and labelling and/or risk assessment; have adequate and reliable coverage of the key parameters addressed in the corresponding test method; cover an exposure duration comparable to or longer than the corresponding test method; and adequate and reliable documentation of the applied method is provided in the technical dossier.

2. SOURCE AND TARGET CHEMICAL(S) (INCLUDING INFORMATION ON PURITY AND IMPURITIES)
See read-across justification report under Section 13 ‘Assessment Reports’.

3. ANALOGUE APPROACH JUSTIFICATION
See read-across justification report under Section 13 ‘Assessment Reports’.

4. DATA MATRIX
See read-across justification report under Section 13 ‘Assessment Reports’.

Reason / purpose for cross-reference:

read-across source

Qualifier:

no guideline followed

Principles of method if other than guideline:

A 90 day oral toxicity study was conducted with purebred beagle dogs fed KASAL at dietary levels of 0.3, 1.0 and 3.0%.

GLP compliance:

no

Remarks:

Study predates GLP

Limit test:

no

Species:

dog

Strain:

Beagle

Sex:

male/female

Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:

TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Laboratory's own IBTL colony
- Age at study initiation: See Table 1
- Weight at study initiation: See Table 1
- Fasting period before study: No data
- Housing: Animals were housed in kennels equipped with outside runs. Four dogs of the same sex and group were accommodated in a single kennel.
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): Stock diet (Golden Choice Meals, Adolph Coors Company, Denver, Colorado) available ad libitum
- Water: available ad libitum
- Acclimation period: The dogs were observed for two weeks prior to the start of the investigation during which time they were reimmunised against rabies, distemper, infectious canine hepatitis and leptospirosis and rendered clinically free of any existing parasitic infestation.


ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
No data


IN-LIFE DATES: No data

Route of administration:

oral: feed

Vehicle:

unchanged (no vehicle)

Details on oral exposure:

PREPARATION OF DOSING SOLUTIONS: No data


DIET PREPARATION
- Rate of preparation of diet (frequency): At the beginning of each week
- Mixing appropriate amounts with (Type of food): The appropriate dietary constituents for each group were thoroughly blended in a Hobart mixer. Preweighed amounts were distributed into self-feeding units and maintained in excess of the animals' consumption. One such unit was available to the dogs in each kennel on an ad libitum basis 24 hours per day.
- Storage temperature of food: No data


VEHICLE
Not applicable

Analytical verification of doses or concentrations:

no

Details on analytical verification of doses or concentrations:

Not applicable

Duration of treatment / exposure:

90 days

Frequency of treatment:

Continuous exposure in feed

Remarks:

Doses / Concentrations:
Male: 94.23, 322.88 and 1107.12 mg/kg bw/day Female: 129.31, 492.77 and 1433.56 mg/kg bw/day
Basis:
other: Calculated using the mean of the weekly body weight and food consumption (Week 5 has been discounted from the 492.77 mg/kg bw/day femal group due to illegible figures in the report)

Remarks:

Doses / Concentrations:
0.3, 1.0 and 3.0%
Basis:
nominal in diet

No. of animals per sex per dose:

4 animals/sex/dose

Control animals:

yes, plain diet

Details on study design:

No data

Positive control:

Not used

Observations and examinations performed and frequency:

CAGE SIDE OBSERVATIONS: Yes
- Time schedule: Daily


DETAILED CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS: Yes
- Time schedule: Daily


BODY WEIGHT: Yes
- Time schedule for examinations: The body weight of each dog in every group was determined and recorded at the start of the study and weekly thereafter.


FOOD CONSUMPTION AND COMPOUND INTAKE (if feeding study): At the end of each 7 day period, all unconsumed food was collected and weighed. Food consumption was calculated and recorded.


FOOD EFFICIENCY: No


OPHTHALMOSCOPIC EXAMINATION: No


HAEMATOLOGY: Yes
- Time schedule for collection of blood: Prior to inception of the study and after 42 and 84 days of testing
- Anaesthetic used for blood collection: No data
- Animals fasted: No data
- How many animals: all animals
- Parameters: Total leukocyte count, erythrocyte count, haemoglobin, haematocrit, differential leukocyte count


CLINICAL CHEMISTRY: Yes
- Time schedule for collection of blood: Prior to inception of the study and after 42 and 84 days of testing
- Animals fasted: No data
- How many animals: all animals
- Parameters: Blood urea nitrogen, serum glucose, serum alkaline phosphatase, serum glutamic-oxalacetic transaminase, serum glutamic-pyruvic transaminase


URINALYSIS: Yes
- Time schedule for collection of urine: Prior to inception of the study and after 42 and 84 days of testing
- Metabolism cages used for collection of urine: No data
- Animals fasted: No data
- Parameters: Albumin, glucose, pH, microscopic elements (leukocytes, erythrocytes, crystals)


NEUROBEHAVIOURAL EXAMINATION: No

Sacrifice and pathology:

GROSS PATHOLOGY: Yes
All major tissues and organs were examined grossly. The weights of the following organs were obtained: liver, kidneys, heart, brain, spleen, gonads, adrenal glands, thyroid gland and pituitary gland.

HISTOPATHOLOGY: Yes (see table)

Other examinations:

None

Statistics:

No data

Clinical signs:

no effects observed

Mortality:

no mortality observed

Body weight and weight changes:

no effects observed

Food consumption and compound intake (if feeding study):

no effects observed

Food efficiency:

not examined

Water consumption and compound intake (if drinking water study):

not examined

Ophthalmological findings:

not examined

Haematological findings:

no effects observed

Clinical biochemistry findings:

no effects observed

Urinalysis findings:

no effects observed

Behaviour (functional findings):

not examined

Organ weight findings including organ / body weight ratios:

no effects observed

Gross pathological findings:

no effects observed

Histopathological findings: non-neoplastic:

effects observed, treatment-related

Description (incidence and severity):

The kidneys of group 3 animals were found to have large and more numerous renal concretions as compared to the controls and other treatment groups. As such these were attributed to the test material.

Histopathological findings: neoplastic:

not examined

Details on results:

CLINICAL SIGNS AND MORTALITY: No untoward behavioural reactions were recorded during the investigation and no fatalities occurred.


BODY WEIGHT AND WEIGHT GAIN: No significant deviations from normally expected body weight gains for dogs of this age were noted.


FOOD CONSUMPTION AND COMPOUND INTAKE : There is no significant difference between the untreated control group and the three test groups.


HAEMATOLOGY: No significant abnormalities were noted at any level tested.


CLINICAL CHEMISTRY: There is no significant difference between the untreated control group and the three test groups.


URINALYSIS: Urinalysis revealed no significant abnormalities at any of the levels tested.


ORGAN WEIGHTS: No significant abnormalities were noted among any levels tested.


GROSS PATHOLOGY: All of the findings noted are attributed to spontaneous disease. All tissues and organs not mentioned were normal.

HISTOPATHOLOGY: NON-NEOPLASTIC: The kidneys of animals tested in group 3 were found to have large and more numerous renal concretions thought to be as a result of test material consumption. All other findings noted were attributed to spontaneous disease.

Dose descriptor:

NOAEL

Effect level:

322.88 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)

Based on:

other: test material, calculated based on food consumption

Sex:

male

Basis for effect level:

other: histopathology; specific to kidneys

Dose descriptor:

NOAEL

Effect level:

492.77 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)

Based on:

other: test material, calculated based on food consumption

Sex:

female

Basis for effect level:

other: histopathology; specific to kidneys

Critical effects observed:

yes

Lowest effective dose / conc.:

322.88 mg/kg bw/day (nominal)

System:

urinary

Organ:

kidney

Treatment related:

yes

Dose response relationship:

not specified

Relevant for humans:

not specified

Table 1: Mean body weight data and age for males and females

Group	Dietary level (%)	Males			Females
		Mean age at inception of test (months)	Mean body weight at week 0 (kg)	Overall weight gain (kg)	Mean age at inception of test (months)	Mean body weight at week 0 (kg)	Overall weight gain (kg)
UC	None	5.9	9.5	1.9	6.0	7.3	1.7
T-I	0.3%	5.9	8.2	1.8	5.6	7.6	1.4
T-II	1.0%	5.9	9.2	2.1	5.6	5.5	1.4
T-III	3.0%	6.0	7.6	2.0	5.5	7.1	1.4

 

Table 2: Mean food consumption data

Week	-	Mean food consumed during week indicated (g/day)
	Sex:	Males				Females
	Group:	UC	T-I	T-II	T-III	UC	T-I	T-II	T-III
	Dietary level (%):	None	0.3	1.0	3.0	None	0.3	1.0	3.0
1	-	352	375	388	401	380	451	436	385
2	-	361	381	385	430	417	407	458	418
3	-	366	362	359	392	397	378	410	386
4	-	338	371	353	342	366	382	407	375
5	-	356	358	336	363	399	359	391	369
6	-	348	335	332	366	375	352	394	351
7	-	319	347	328	364	343	369	398	352
8	-	285	305	277	323	323	331	358	346
9	-	315	335	268	325	321	361	377	363
10	-	333	303	274	328	362	370	361	356
11	-	300	336	321	317	341	332	334	330
12	-	286	268	261	287	298	302	279	288
13	-	281	338	304	346	285	344	423	350
Mean	-	326	340	322	353	354	364	387	359

 

Table 33: Gross and histologicfindings – Untreated control group

Dog number and sex	Organ	Gross	Grade	Histologic	Grade
1-M	Liver	-	-	Focal lymphoid infiltration	+
	Lungs	-	-	Focal interstitial pneumonia	++
	Prostate	-	-	Chronic focalprostatitis	++
	Spleen	-	-	Haemosiderosis	+
2-M	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	++
3-M	Heart	-	-	Congestion	+
	Liver	-	-	Focal lymphoid infiltration	+
	Lungs	-	-	Focal interstitial pneumonia	++
4-M	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	++
	Spleen	-	-	Haemosiderosis	+
5-F	Liver	-	-	Congestion	++
				Focal lymphoid infiltration	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+
		-	-	Hyperemia	+
6-F	Liver			Congestion	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+
	Uterus	-	-	In estrus	-
7-F	Ovaries	-	-	Proestrus	-
	Liver	-	-	Congestion	++
8-F	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+

 

Table 34: Gross and histologic findings – Test group I: 0.3 percent

Dog number and sex	Organ	Gross	Grade	Histologic	Grade
9-M	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Lungs	-	-	Hyperemia	+
10-M	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+
11-M	Kidneys	-	-	Focal lymphoid infiltration	+
	Lungs	-	-	Congestion Focal lymphoid infiltration	+ +
12 -M	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Lung	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	++
13-F	Liver	-	-	Focal lymphoid infiltration	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+
14-F	Liver	-	-	Congestion	++
	Lungs	-	-	Bronchopneumonia	++
15-F	Liver	-	-	Focal lymphoid infiltration	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	++
16 -F	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	++

 

Table 35: Gross and histologic findings – Test group II: 1.0 percent

Dog number and sex	Organ	Gross	Grade	Histologic	Grade
17-M	Lungs	-	-	Hyperemia Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+ ++
18-M	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+
19 -M	-	-	-	-	-
20 -M	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+
21 -F	Liver	-	-	-Congestion	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia Bronchopneumonia	++ ++
22-F	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+
23 -F	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+
	Mesenteric lymph node	-	-	Hyperemia	+
	Pancreas	-	-	Hyperemia	+
24 -F	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+

 

Table 36: Gross and histologicfindings – Test group III: 3.0 percent

Dog number and sex	Organ	Gross	Grade	Histologic	Grade
25-M	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Kidney	-	-	Tubular concretions	+++
26-M	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Kidney	-	-	Tubular concretions	+++
27-M	Liver	-	-	Congestion	++
	Lung	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+
	Prostate	-	-	Chronic focal prostatitis	+
28 -M	Kidneys	-	-	Focal lymphoid infiltration	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	++
29 -F	Liver	-	-	Congestion	++
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	++
30 -F	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
	Lungs	-	-	Chronic interstitial pneumonia	+
31-F	Liver	-	-	Congestion	+
32 -F	Gonads	-	-	Calcified follicle	+
	Kidneys	-	-	Tubular concretions	+++
	Liver	-	-	Focal lymphoid infiltration	+
	Spinal cord	-	-	Calcified debris in central canal	+

 Grading system:

+ = minimal or slight

++ = mild

+++ = moderate

++++ = severe

Conclusions:

The 90-day oral administration of KASAL to purebred beagle dogs at dietary levels of 0.3, 1.0 and 3.0% revealed in three of the Group T-III animals renal concretions which were unusually large and more numerous than those normally observed in untreated dogs. The few other calcified microconcretions present in the lumen of renal tubules located at the corticomedullary junction and/or medulla of the kidney were attributed to normally occurring disease.
No significant other changes were noted. Thus the dieatry level of 1% can be considered as NOAEL (this is equivalent to 322.88 mg/kg bw/day).

This study is considered to satisfy the guideline requirements for this endpoint and also be adequate for the purposes of risk assessment. Therefore, the study is submitted as a key study and the NOAEL reported in this study is used to derive the inhalation and dermal DNELs. On consideration of all the available data, the ratio of sodium, aluminium and phosphate in the test material is not considered to be of key relevance in determining the derived no effect levels.

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

no adverse effect observed

Dose descriptor:

NOAEL

322.88 mg/kg bw/day

Study duration:

subchronic

Species:

dog

Quality of whole database:

The available information comprises adequate, reliable (Klimisch score 1 - 2) and consistent studies from the target substance and a reference substances with similar structure and intrinsic properties. Read-across is justified based on common functional group(s), common precursors/breakdown products, similarities in PC/ECO/TOX properties (refer to endpoint discussion for further details). The selected study is thus sufficient to fulfil the standard information requirements set out in Annex VIII-IX, 8.6, in accordance with Annex XI, 1.5, of Regulation (EC) No. 1907/2006.

Repeated dose toxicity: inhalation - systemic effects

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

no study available

Repeated dose toxicity: inhalation - local effects

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

no study available

Repeated dose toxicity: dermal - systemic effects

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

no study available

Repeated dose toxicity: dermal - local effects

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

no study available

Additional information

Read-across is justified in the endpoint records and in the read-across report attached in Section 13 of this technical dossier.

Justification for classification or non-classification

The available data indicate that the substance does not meet the classification criteria in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (EU CLP)