[No public or meaningful name is available]

Skin sensitisation

Administrative data

Endpoint:

skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

key study

Study period:

From March 19, 1990 to May 2, 1990

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

guideline study

Data source

Reference

Reference Type:

study report

Title:

Unnamed

Year:

1990

Report date:

1990

Materials and methods

Test guideline

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)

Deviations:

no

GLP compliance:

no

Type of study:

guinea pig maximisation test

Justification for non-LLNA method:

Study available before the requirement for testing using the LLNA method was implemented.

Test material

Test material information

Constituent 1

Reference substance name:

Reaction products of C14-C18 (even numbered) and C14-C18-unsatd. (even numbered) fatty acids or triglycerides with diethanolamine

Molecular formula:

not applicable gor UVCB

IUPAC Name:

Reaction products of C14-C18 (even numbered) and C14-C18-unsatd. (even numbered) fatty acids or triglycerides with diethanolamine

Test material form:

liquid: viscous

Details on test material:

see Section 1.2 for detailed composition

Reference

Constituent 1

Reference substance name:

Amides, C16-18 and C18-unsatd., N,N-bis(hydroxyethyl)

EC Number:

271-653-9

EC Name:

Amides, C16-18 and C18-unsatd., N,N-bis(hydroxyethyl)

Cas Number:

68603-38-3

Molecular formula:

The alkyl chain length of the amide ranges between 16 and 18 carbon atoms

Test material form:

liquid

Details on test material:

- Name of test material (as cited in study report): Marlamid DF 1818
- Physical state: yellow liquid
- Composition of test material, percentage of components:
80% soybean oil diethanolamide, 10% glycerin, 5% diethanolamine salt of the fatty acids, 3% sodium salt of the fatty acids, 2% free diethanolamine
- Lot/batch No.: 13

Specific details on test material used for the study:

The discrepancy between originally usded identifier of the substance and new test material information is due to change in the main identifier through the Substance identity adaptation service offered by ECHA. The new identifier is covered by old identifier mentioned in Additional test material information section

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:

guinea pig

Strain:

other: Albino Bor:DHPW

Sex:

female

Details on test animals and environmental conditions:

TEST ANIMALS
- Source: F. Winkelmann, Borchem, Germany
- Average weight at study initiation: controls: 467 g; test group: 471 g
- Housing: 1 5 animals in macrolon Type IV cages
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): G4 diet for guinea-pig, Ssniff Spezialfutter GmbH, Soest, Germany
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): Yes
- Acclimation period: 5 - 8 days


ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 20 +/- 1°C
- Humidity (%): 60 +/- 5%
- Air changes (per hr): 15
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12


IN-LIFE DATES: From: 19-03-1990 To: 12-04-1990

Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)

Induction

Induction 1

Route:

intradermal

Vehicle:

corn oil

Induction 2

Concentration / amount:

0.5%

Challenge

Challenge 1

Route:

epicutaneous, occlusive

Vehicle:

corn oil

Challenge 2

Concentration / amount:

0.5%

No. of animals per dose:

Test group: 20
Controls: 10

Details on study design:

A 4 x 6 cm2 area was shaved on the shoulders of test animals. 2 to 3 h later, 6 intracutaneoius injections were made, simultaneously right and left: 0.1 cm3 of a mix of Freund's Complete Adjuvant (FCA) and water (1+1), 0.1 cm3 of 0.5% test substance in maize oil, 0.1 cm3 of 0.5% test substance in FCA/water (1+1). Controls received 0.1 cm3 of a mix of Freund's Complete Adjuvant (FCA) and water (1+1), 0.1 cm3 maize oil, 0.1 cm3 of FCA/maize oil (1+1).

One week later, a patch test was conducted: a 2 x 4 cm filter paper to which 60% test material in maize oil was applied to freshly shaved skin. The whole was covered with an adhesive bandage for 48 h. Controls received maize oil.

Two weeks later, the right and left flanks were shaved. After 2 - 3 h, a 2x2 cm filter paper with 20% test substance in maize oil was applied for 24 h to the left flank and covered with an adhesive bandage. The same treatment was made on the right flank of each animal with maize oil.

24 and 48 h after removal of the adhesive bandage, the reaction was scored.

Positive control substance(s):

no

Results and discussion

In vivo (non-LLNA)

Results

Results 1

Reading:

1st reading

Hours after challenge:

24

Group:

test chemical

Dose level:

0.5%

No. with + reactions:

0

Total no. in group:

20

Clinical observations:

None

Remarks on result:

other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 0.5%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: None.

Results 2

Reading:

2nd reading

Hours after challenge:

48

Group:

test chemical

Dose level:

0.5%

No. with + reactions:

0

Total no. in group:

20

Clinical observations:

None

Remarks on result:

other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 0.5%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: None.

Results 3

Reading:

1st reading

Hours after challenge:

24

Group:

negative control

Dose level:

0%

No. with + reactions:

0

Total no. in group:

10

Clinical observations:

None

Remarks on result:

other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 0%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: None.

Results 4

Reading:

2nd reading

Hours after challenge:

48

Group:

negative control

Dose level:

0%

No. with + reactions:

0

Total no. in group:

10

Clinical observations:

None

Remarks on result:

other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 0%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: None.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:

GHS criteria not met

Conclusions:

Under the conditions of the guinea-pig maximisation study, the test substance was considered to be non-sensitising.

Executive summary:

A study was conducted to assess the sensitising potential of the test substance in a guinea-pig maximisation test according to OECD Guideline 406. A 4 x 6 cm2 area was shaved on the shoulders of the test animals. Two to three hours later, 6 intracutaneous injections were made, simultaneously on the right and left: 0.1 cm3 of a mix of Freund's Complete Adjuvant (FCA) and water (1+1), 0.1 cm3 of 0.5% test substance in maize oil, 0.1 cm3 of 0.5% test substance in FCA/water (1+1). Controls received 0.1 cm3 of a mix of Freund's Complete Adjuvant (FCA) and water (1+1), 0.1 cm3 maize oil, 0.1 cm3 of FCA/maize oil (1+1). One week later, a patch test was conducted: a 2 x 4 cm filter paper to which 60% test substance in maize oil was applied to freshly shaved skin. The skin was covered with an adhesive bandage for 48 h. Controls received maize oil. Two weeks later, the right and left flanks were shaved. After 2 - 3 h, a 2 x 2 cm filter paper with 20% test substance in maize oil was applied for 24 h to the left flank and covered with an adhesive bandage. The same treatment was made on the right flank of each animal with maize oil. At 24 and 48 h after removal of the adhesive bandage, the reaction was scored. No effects were noted. Under the conditions of the guinea-pig maximisation study, the test substance was considered to be non-sensitising (Mürmann, 1990).