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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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:
2004-02-17 to 2004-03-26
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: Well documented guideline conform, scientific GLP report
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
EU Method B.6 (Skin Sensitisation)
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)
GLP compliance:
yes
Type of study:
guinea pig maximisation test
Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
other: HsdPoc:DH
Sex:
female
Route:
intradermal and epicutaneous
Vehicle:
water
Concentration / amount:
intradermal induction: 0.04 % (test substance in deionized water)
epicutanous induction: 5 % (test substance in deionized water)
epicutanous challenge: 1 % (test substance in deionized water)
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
water
Concentration / amount:
intradermal induction: 0.04 % (test substance in deionized water)
epicutanous induction: 5 % (test substance in deionized water)
epicutanous challenge: 1 % (test substance in deionized water)
No. of animals per dose:
Control group: 5
Treatment group: 10
Positive control substance(s):
yes
Remarks:
ALPHA-HEXYL CINNAMIC ALDEHYDE
Positive control results:
Positve control assay with Alpha-hexyl cinnamic aldehyde
Challenge treatment - control and treatment group:
25 % Alpha-hexyl cinnamic aldehyde in polyethylene glycole 400 (day 22)
Treated area: left flank
Time of observation: approx. 24 hours after removal of the patches (day :24).
24 hours after the challenge treatment, 9/10 animals of the treatment group (90 %) showed a positive reaction during the observation period. The corresponding 5 control animals did not show any reaction to treatment.
Time of observation: approx. 48 hours after removal of the patches (day :25).
48 hours after the challenge treatment, all ten animals of the treatment group (l00 %) showed a positive reaction during the observation period. The corresponding 5 control animals did not show any reaction to treatment.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
1% (test substance in deionized water)
No. with + reactions:
10
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
Discrete or patchy up to intense erythema and swelling were observed in the treatment group 24 hours after removal of the occlusive bandage.
Remarks on result:
other: see Remark
Remarks:
Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 1% (test substance in deionized water). No with. + reactions: 10.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: Discrete or patchy up to intense erythema and swelling were observed in the treatment group 24 hours after removal of the occlusive bandage..
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
1 % (test substance in deionized water)
No. with + reactions:
10
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
Discrete or patchy up to intense erythema and swelling were observed in the treatment group 48 hours after removal of the occlusive bandage.
Remarks on result:
other: see Remark
Remarks:
Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 1 % (test substance in deionized water). No with. + reactions: 10.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: Discrete or patchy up to intense erythema and swelling were observed in the treatment group 48 hours after removal of the occlusive bandage..
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
0 %
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
5
Clinical observations:
No skin reactions were observed in the control group 24 and 48 hours after removal of the occlusive bandage.
Remarks on result:
other: see Remark
Remarks:
Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 0 %. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 5.0. Clinical observations: No skin reactions were observed in the control group 24 and 48 hours after removal of the occlusive bandage..
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
positive control
Dose level:
25 %
No. with + reactions:
9
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
Discrete or patchy up to intense erythema and swelling were observed in the treatment group 24 hours after removal of the occlusive bandage.
Remarks on result:
other: see Remark
Remarks:
Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: positive control. Dose level: 25 %. No with. + reactions: 9.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: Discrete or patchy up to intense erythema and swelling were observed in the treatment group 24 hours after removal of the occlusive bandage..
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
positive control
Dose level:
25 %
No. with + reactions:
10
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
Discrete or patchy up to intense erythema and swelling were observed in the treatment group 48 hours after removal of the occlusive bandage.
Remarks on result:
other: see Remark
Remarks:
Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: positive control. Dose level: 25 %. No with. + reactions: 10.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: Discrete or patchy up to intense erythema and swelling were observed in the treatment group 48 hours after removal of the occlusive bandage..
Interpretation of results:
sensitising
Remarks:
Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
Conclusions:
Under the conditions of the present OECD 406 study (Magnusson & Kligman), all of ten animals of the treatment group showed a positive skin response after the challenge procedure. Based on the results of this study Dodigen 5356 AS may cause sensitization by skin contact .
Executive summary:

In order to evaluate the test substance for its skin sensitizing property, a test was performed in female guinea pigs according to the method of MAGNUSSON & KLIGMAN (OECD 406). Intradermal induction was performed using 0.04 % test substance in deionized water. Dermal induction treatment was carried out with 5 % test substance in deionized water. Challenge treatment was carried out with 1 % test substance in deionized water. Bodyweight of the treated animals were not impaired. The treated animals showed no clinical signs of intoxication throughout the study.

All animals of the treatment group (10/10) were positive in this test (100%) whereas all control animals (5/5) were negative.

The validity of the test system is confirmed by the periodically conducted positive control test using Alpha-hexylcinnamaldehyde for the maximization test.

Based on the results of this study the test substance may cause sensitization by skin contact

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
adverse effect observed (sensitising)
Additional information:

Under the conditions of the present OECD 406 study (Magnusson & Kligman), all of ten animals of the treatment group showed a positive skin response after the challenge procedure. Based on the results of this study Dodigen 5356 AS may cause sensitization by skin contact .


Migrated from Short description of key information:
In order to evaluate Dodigen 5356 AS for its skin sensitizing property, a test was performed in female guinea pigs according to the method of MAGNUSSON & KLIGMAN (OECD 406). Intradermal induction was performed using 0.04 % Dodigen 5356 AS in deionized water. Dermal induction treatment was carried out with 5 % Dodigen 5356 AS in deionized water. Challenge treatment was carried out with 1 % Dodigen 5356 AS in deionized water. Bodyweight of the treated animals were not impaired. The treated animals showed no clinical signs of intoxication throughout the study.

Justification for selection of skin sensitisation endpoint:
Well documented guideline conform, scientific GLP report

Respiratory sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no study available

Justification for classification or non-classification

According to Regulation No. 1272/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 Dec.2008 the test substance has to be classified as skin sensitizer Category 1.