m-bis(2,3-epoxypropoxy)benzene

Endpoint summary

Description of key information

The weight of evidence on the skin irritation properties of the substance was concluded based on the study in rabbits (Hine et al. 1958) and in silico assessment (Ruzgyte Frère, 2018). All used report results showed that the substance was skin irritating: in rabbits score 5 out of 8 (according Draize method), in humans severe skin irritation and in silico assessment the substance was predicted to be skin irritating but not corrosive.

As the information to decide on the skin irritating properties form the available literature and assessments was sufficient for the query substance, the in vitro studies were waived.

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin irritation / corrosion

Link to relevant study records

Reference

Reference 1

Endpoint:

skin irritation / corrosion, other

Remarks:

QSAR

Type of information:

(Q)SAR

Adequacy of study:

weight of evidence

Study period:

2 May 2018

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

results derived from a valid (Q)SAR model and falling into its applicability domain, with adequate and reliable documentation / justification

Justification for type of information:

1. TOPKAT
2. Toxicity Prediction (Extensible) Toxicity Prediction (Extensible) Skin Irritancy (None vs Irritant) 4.5
3. SMILES: c1cc(cc(c1)OCC2CO2)OCC3CO3

4. SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY OF THE (Q)SAR MODEL
5. APPLICABILITY DOMAIN
6. ADEQUACY OF THE RESULT

for the sections 4,5 and 6 please see the attached QSAR report

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

other: OECD TG 69

Version / remarks:

2007

Deviations:

not applicable

GLP compliance:

no

Irritation / corrosion parameter:

other: in vitro not performed

Remarks on result:

not measured/tested

Irritation parameter:

other: in vivo not performed

Remarks on result:

not measured/tested

Interpretation of results:

Category 2 (irritant) based on GHS criteria

Conclusions:

The weight of evidence of the assessed models suggests that m-bis(2,3-epoxypropoxy)benzene is a skin irritant.

Executive summary:

The prediction of the skin irritation potential of m-bis(2,3-epoxypropoxy)benzene (CAS: 101-90-6)was performed with QSAR models TOPKAT 4.5/Pipeline Pilot Client 9.5, Toxtree 2.6.13 and the current Danish QSAR Database. The assessment with OECD QSAR Toolbox v4.1 was based on the profiler only.

TOPKAT predicted m-bis(2,3-epoxypropoxy)benzene to be positive. The prediction was moderate reliable due to moderate structural similarity of structural analogues, moderate concordance of structural analogues with the query structure prediction and moderate prediction accuracy.

According to the Danish (Q)SAR database, with respect to severe skin irritation in rabbit, all computational tools (CASE Ultra, Leadscope and SciQSAR) predicted m-bis(2,3-epoxypropoxy)benzene to be positive within applicability domain.

Toxtree identified m-bis(2,3-epoxypropoxy)benzene to be not corrosive to skin.

The exclusion rules for skin irritation/corrosion in the OECD QSAR Toolbox profiler based on physicochemical cut-off values to identify chemicals that do not exhibit skin irritation or corrosion potential were undefined for m-bis(2,3-epoxypropoxy)benzene. The parameters used for defining skin irritation rules are: lipid solubility, surface tension, octanol/water partition coefficient, vapour pressure, aqueous solubility, melting point and molecular weight. The inclusion rules for skin irritation/corrosion in the OECD QSAR Toolbox profiler were not met: the target chemical does not matched any of the criteria specified in this profiling scheme.

The weight of evidence of the assessed models suggests that m-bis(2,3-epoxypropoxy)benzene is a skin irritant.

Reference 2

Endpoint:

skin irritation: in vivo

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

weight of evidence

Study period:

This study was submitted for publication in 1958

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

data from handbook or collection of data

Remarks:

The acute toxicity of this compound was assessed as part of a larger study on the toxicity of epoxy resins

Qualifier:

no guideline available

Principles of method if other than guideline:

Diglycidyl resorcinol was tested for effect on the skin of rabbits. Albino rabbits were clipped over the back and flank and four areas of the back designated for the test, two intact and two scarified with wire mesh. The animals were immobilised an multiple rabbit holder (Lang, 1944), and patches of gauze secured over the areas with adhesive taps. The compounds were introduced under the patches, and the entire trunk of the rabbits enveloped in rubber dam. After 24 hours the rabbits were released, the resins removed, and a first reading made. After 72 hours a second reading was made. Any irritation was scored according to the method of Draize (1955) - the maximum possible score was 8.

GLP compliance:

no

Remarks:

pre-GLP study

Specific details on test material used for the study:

Diglycidyl resorcinol; no other details reported.

Species:

rabbit

Strain:

not specified

Remarks:

Albino

Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:

TEST ANIMALS
- Weight at study initiation: 2.0 - 3.2 kg

Type of coverage:

occlusive

Preparation of test site:

other: clipped and abraded

Vehicle:

unchanged (no vehicle)

Controls:

not specified

Amount / concentration applied:

TEST MATERIAL
- Amount(s) applied (volume or weight with unit): Not reported

Duration of treatment / exposure:

24 hours

Observation period:

72 Hours

Number of animals:

Males; number not specified

Details on study design:

Diglycidyl resorcinol was tested for effect on the skin of rabbits. Albino rabbits were clipped over the back and flank and four areas of the back designated for the test, two intact and two scarified with wire mesh. The animals were immobilised an multiple rabbit holder (Lang, 1944), and patches of gauze secured over the areas with adhesive taps. The compounds were introduced under the patches, and the entire trunk of the rabbits enveloped in rubber dam. After 24 hours the rabbits were released, the resins removed, and a first reading made. After 72 hours a second reading was made. Any irritation was scored according to the method of Draize (1955) - the maximum possible score was 8.

Irritation parameter:

primary dermal irritation index (PDII)

Basis:

mean

Remarks:

reading after 24 and 72 hours

Time point:

72 h

Score:

5

Max. score:

8

Reversibility:

not specified

Remarks on result:

positive indication of irritation

Remarks:

Moderately irritating

Interpretation of results:

other: Moderately irritating with a score of 5

Remarks:

According to Draize, compounds producing combined averages (primary irritation indices) above 6 are considered severe irritants

Conclusions:

In a skin irritation study with rabbits, diglycidyl resorcinol was applied to the back and flanks of albino rabbits. Based on the results of this study, the substance is considered to be irritating to skin

Executive summary:

The substance was tested in a skin irritation test in rabbits. Exposure to the test item was 24 hours. The mean irritation score of 24 and 72 hours was 5 (maximal score 8). The substance is considered to be moderately irritating to skin. This result is used as weight of evidence with other studies to justify the irritating property of diglycidyl resorcinol to skin.

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

adverse effect observed (irritating)

Eye irritation

Link to relevant study records

Reference

Endpoint:

eye irritation: in vivo

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

weight of evidence

Study period:

The study was published in 1958

Reliability:

2 (reliable with restrictions)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

data from handbook or collection of data

Qualifier:

no guideline available

Principles of method if other than guideline:

The material was tested on normal rabbit eyes as a 20% suspension in propylene glycol. Observations were made 1, 24 and 48 h after application and any injury scored according to the method of Draize (1955)

GLP compliance:

no

Species:

rabbit

Strain:

not specified

Remarks:

Albino

Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:

- Source: Not reported
- Age at study initiation: Not reported
- Weight at study initiation: Body weights were 2.0 - 3.2 kg
- Housing: Not reported
- Diet: Not reported
- Water: Not reported
- Acclimation period: Not reported

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS: Not reported

Vehicle:

other: Propylene glycol

Controls:

not specified

Amount / concentration applied:

Amount applied: 0.1 mL of a 20% suspension in propylene glycol

Duration of treatment / exposure:

Single instillation on Day 1

Observation period (in vivo):

48 h

Number of animals or in vitro replicates:

not specified

Details on study design:

STUDY DESIGN
The test material was applied as a 20% suspension in propylene glycol on the center of the cornea

REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
-Washing: No

OBSERVATIONS
- Irritation: Readings were made at 1, 24 and 48 hours, with the corneas unstained and then stained with a 2% solution of fluorescein sodium. Injury was scored according to the method of Draize (1955)

Irritation parameter:

overall irritation score

Remarks:

according to the method of Draize (1955)

Basis:

mean

Time point:

24/48 h

Score:

45

Max. score:

120

Reversibility:

not specified

Remarks on result:

positive indication of irritation

Remarks:

Severely irritating

Interpretation of results:

other: Eye irritation scores ahoed Diglycidyl resorcinol to be severely irritating

Conclusions:

In an eye irritation study with rabbits, the eye irritation scores showed Diglycidyl resorcinol to be severely irritating

Executive summary:

The substance was tested in an eye irritation test in rabbits. The results showed that the substance is a severe ocular irritant.

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

adverse effect observed (irritating)

Additional information

In vitro tests

Eye irritation: Further to the eye serious damage assessment, the eye irritation potential of the test substance was assessed using the SkinEthic reconstructed Human Corneal Epithelium model after a treatment period of 10 minutes. Cytotoxicity was determined by the reduction of MTT to formazan by viable cells in the test item treated tissues (quantitative measurement of tissue viability) relative to the negative control.The SkinEthic HCE model consists of transformed human corneal epithelial cells that form a corneal epithelial tissue (mucosa), devoid of stratum corneum, resembling, histologically, the mucosa of the human eye (Nguyenet al., 2003). This test is under the validation at ECVAM and therefore the model is considered to be sufficiently valid to be used for eye irritation testing of the test substance (van Goethem et al., 2006).The test item is applied directly to the culture surface, at the air interface, so that undiluted and/or end use dilutions can be tested directly. The model consists of an airlifted, living, corneal tissue construct, produced in polycarbonate inserts in serum free and chemically defined medium. Cytotoxicity is determined by the reduction of MTT to formazan by viable cells in the test item treated tissues (quantitative measurement of tissue viability) relative to the negative control. Relative mean tissue viability of ≤ 60 % results in a prediction of ocular irritancy. After a 10 minute exposure, the relative mean viability of the test item treated tissues was 69.5% and the test substance is therefore considered to be non-irritant, according to EU CLP criterial. 

The test is based on the hypothesis that irritant chemicals are able to penetrate the stratum corneum of the SkinEthic HCE model and are sufficiently cytotoxic to cause cell death in the underlying cell layers.

The result of this test is considered to be sufficiently reliable and the model sufficiently valid (Klimisch 2) to be used for assessing this eye irritation potential. An in vivo eye irritation test using rabbits seems outside the scope of REACH, minimising the use of vertebrate animals when a sufficiently valid method is available for testing.

Van Goethem, F., Adriaens, E., Alepee, N., Straube, F., De Wever, B., Cappadoro, M., Catoire, S., Hansen, E., Wolf, A., and Vanparys, P., 2006, Prevalidation of a new in vitro reconstituted human cornea model to assess the eye irritation potential of chemicals, Toxicol. in vitro, 20, 1 -17.

Nguyen, D.H., Beureman, R.W., De Wever, B., and Rosdy, M., 2003, Three dimensional construct of the human corneal epithelium for in vitro toxicology, In: H. Salem and S.A Katz, Editors, Altern. Toxicol. Meth., CRC Press, pp. 147 -159.

Eye irritation OECD TG 405 e.g.:

The substance was tested in an eye irritation test in rabbits according to OECD 405 (1981). Ocular effects include a summary of the grades were observed, which were fully reversible within x days". The results showed that the substance is (not) an ocular irritant.

Respiratory irritation

Justification for selection of skin irritation / corrosion endpoint:
The result of the study is reliable and adequate for covering the endpoint.

Justification for selection of eye irritation endpoint:
The result of the study is reliable and adequate for covering the endpoint.

Justification for classification or non-classification

Based on the positive results in the skin irritation test in rabbits and in silico the substance needs to be classified as a skin irritant. According to EU Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP) Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008 this results in skin irritation, Category 2, H315: Causes skin irritation.

For Eye irritation the study indicates no hazard therefore the test substance is not classified for Eye irritation according to EU Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP) Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008