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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Endpoint:
eye irritation: in vivo
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: No provided data on GLP compliance.

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
publication
Title:
EVALUATION OF THE OCULAR-IRRITATION POTENTIAL OF 56 COMPOUNDS
Author:
GUILLOT JP, GONNET JF,CLEMENT C, CAILLARD L, TRUHAUT R
Year:
1982
Bibliographic source:
Fd Chem. Toxic. Vol. 20. pp. 573 to 582, 1982
Report date:
1982

Materials and methods

Test guidelineopen allclose all
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
other: Journal Officiel 21 April 1971, p. 3862; ibid 5 June 1973, p. 3953) (official method approved by the French authorities for the testing of cosmetics and toiletries)
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
other: AFNOR (Association Francaise de Normalisation, 1982)
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
other: OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1979)
Deviations:
no
Principles of method if other than guideline:
This paper describes the results obtained on 56 substances tested at IFT (Institut François de Toxicologie) in a manner designed to permit a comparison between three of the available methods.
GLP compliance:
not specified

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
p-phenetidine
EC Number:
205-855-5
EC Name:
p-phenetidine
Cas Number:
156-43-4
Molecular formula:
C8H11NO
IUPAC Name:
4-ethoxyaniline

Test animals / tissue source

Species:
rabbit
Strain:
other: New Zealand albino
Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Roucher SA, Couhe
- Weight at study initiation: 2-5 kg

Test system

Vehicle:
unchanged (no vehicle)
Controls:
yes, concurrent no treatment
Amount / concentration applied:
TEST MATERIAL
- Amount(s) applied (volume or weight with unit): 0.1 ml
Duration of treatment / exposure:
First and second tests: one application
Third test: only rinsing
Observation period (in vivo):
First test: observations were recorded at 1 h and I, 2, 3, 4 and 7 days after instillation and, in cases where lesions persisted, also at later stages.
Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
groups of 6
Details on study design:
First test:
6 rabbits: 0.1 ml was instilled and observations were recorded at 1 h and I, 2, 3, 4 and 7 days after instillation and, in cases where lesions persisted, also at later stages.
Second and third tests:
Test materials showing any degree of irritancy more severe than that classified as slightly irritant (see below) in this first test were similarly instilled into another group of six rabbits, and the eyeball and related structures were rinsed 30 sec after the instillation. If the material was still found to be irritant, a third test was run with rinsing after 4 sec.

REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
- Washing (if done): in the second and third tests

SCORING SYSTEM: since the Cosmetic and OECD protocols specify no numerical system for the scoring and interpretation of results, a scoring system based on the AFNOR recommendations was used throughout, with modifica¬tions where appropriate to enable direct comparisons between the protocols to be made.

Results and discussion

In vivo

Resultsopen allclose all
Irritation parameter:
other: AOI: acute ocular irritation index
Basis:
mean
Score:
41.67
Reversibility:
fully reversible within: 7 days
Remarks on result:
other: without rinsing
Irritation parameter:
other: acute ocular irritation index
Basis:
mean
Score:
34.33
Remarks on result:
other: rinsing in 30 seconds
Irritation parameter:
other: acute ocular irritation index
Basis:
mean
Score:
13.33
Remarks on result:
other: rinsing in 4 seconds
Irritation parameter:
other: MOI: mean ocular irritation index
Basis:
mean
Time point:
other: 7 days
Score:
0.33
Remarks on result:
other: without rinsing
Irritation parameter:
other: MOI: mean ocular irritation index
Basis:
mean
Time point:
other: 7 days
Score:
6.33
Remarks on result:
other: rinsing in 30 seconds
Irritation parameter:
other: MOI: mean ocular irritation index
Basis:
mean
Time point:
other: 2 days
Score:
0
Remarks on result:
other: rinsing in 4 seconds
Irritation parameter:
other: IOI: individual ocular irritation index
Basis:
mean
Time point:
other: day 7
Max. score:
15
Remarks on result:
other: without rinsing
Irritation parameter:
other: IOI: individual ocular irritation index
Basis:
mean
Time point:
other: day 7
Max. score:
15
Remarks on result:
other: rinsing in 30 seconds
Irritant / corrosive response data:
Without rinsing: very irritant
Rinsing in 30 seconds: very irritant
Rinsing in 4 seconds: slightly irritant

Any other information on results incl. tables

No more available data on the results.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
Category II
Remarks:
Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
Conclusions:
The substance is considered as very irritant based on the results of the study.
Executive summary:

The ocular irritancy of 56 chemicals was tested in the rabbit eye, with and without rinsing, using a procedure that complied with the main requirements of three protocols, namely those proposed by the Association Francaise de Normalisation (AFNOR) in 1982 and by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development in 1979 for the testing of chemicals and that published by the French authorities(Journal Officiel21 April 1971, p. 3862;ibid5 June 1973, p. 3953) for the testing of cosmetics and toiletries. The results obtained were used to establish the extent to which the assessment of a chemical's irritation potential was affected by the differences between the three protocols in respect of the observation times prescribed, the inclusion and timing of rinsing, the number of animals used and the interpretation procedure. Conclusions were also drawn about the influence of the physical state and pH of a material on its potential irritancy and about the level of irritancy that necessitates the use of eye protection.

The experience has shown that the various ocular irritation indices are not a particularly helpful guide in themselves; a graduated scale of irritancy taking into account both these indices and the reversibility of the lesions seems a preferable basis for the interpretation of results.