1,1-dimethylurea

Endpoint summary

Description of key information

A Local Lymph Node Assay was performed according to OECD Guideline 429 to evalute a possible skin sensitising potential of 1,1 -Dimethylurea.

Three test substance concentrations (2.5, 5 and 7.2 % solution of 1,1 -Dimethylurea in 1,2 -Propanediol) were administered to three groups of 5 female CBA/Ca mice. All animals survived till the end of the study. One animal of the positive control group had reduced motor activities on Day 2, which is not of relevance for the results. No adverse effects were noted in this animal on the other days and in all other animals throughout the whole study. No local irritations were observed at the application sited of all animals of all test substance groups and both control groups throughout the whole study. Body masses and body mass gains of all animals were in the range to be expected from animals of the same strain, sex and age.

The SIs of the tested test substance concentrations were 2.8 (low dose), 1.1 (mid dose) and 0.7 (high dose). Although one SI value is very near the limit of 3, 1,1 -Dimethylurea is regarded as a non sentiser in the LLNA, since the SIs of all examines test substance concentrations were smaller than 3 and no concentration related response was observed.

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin sensitisation

Link to relevant study records

Reference

Endpoint:

skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

key study

Study period:

April - June 2004

Reliability:

1 (reliable without restriction)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

guideline study

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)

GLP compliance:

yes

Type of study:

mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)

Specific details on test material used for the study:

- Analytical purity: at least 98 %
- Impurities (identity and concentrations): max. 2 % Urea, max. 0.2 % Isopropanol, max. 0.5 % diethyleneglycolmonoethylether
- Lot/batch No.: KG 03-13

Species:

mouse

Strain:

CBA

Sex:

female

Details on test animals and environmental conditions:

TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Harlan Winkelman GmbH, 33176 Borchen, Germany
- Age at study initiation: about 8 weeks at the first administration
- Weight at study initiation: 16.9 g - 20.8 g
- Housing: Single caging. Makrolon cages type II, (22 cm x 16.5 cm ground area, 15 cm high)
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): Altromin maintenance diet for rats and mice, item No. 1324forte, ad libitum
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): Tap water offered in Makrlon-bottles with stainless steel canules, ad libitum.
- Acclimation period: 6 days

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): Average of 21.8 °C (continuous monitoring and recording)
- Humidity (%): Average of 55.7 % (continuous monitoring and recording)
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): only artifical light from 6.00 a.m. to 6 p.m.

Vehicle:

propylene glycol

Concentration:

Group A (low dose): 2.5 % solution of 1,1-Dimethylurea in Propyleneglycol.
Group B (mid dose): 5 % solution of 1,1-Dimethylurea in Propyleneglycol.
Group C (high dose): 7.2 % (w/w) solution of 1,1-Dimethylurea in Propyleneglycol.

No. of animals per dose:

five females per group

Details on study design:

see "any other information on material and methods incl. tables"

Positive control substance(s):

hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)

Positive control results:

Application of 25 % Hexyl Cinnamic Aldehyde in Acetone:olive oil (4:1, v/v) resulted in an SI (Stimulation Index) of 35.8. This result proves the sensitivity of the strain of animals used and the reliability of the experimental technique.

Parameter:

SI

Value:

1

Test group / Remarks:

negative control

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Value:

2.8

Test group / Remarks:

low dose

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Value:

1.1

Test group / Remarks:

mid dose

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Value:

0.7

Test group / Remarks:

high dose

Parameter:

SI

Value:

35.8

Test group / Remarks:

positive control

Mortality:

All animals survived till the end of the study.

General observations:

One animal of the positive control group had reduced motor activities on Day 2, which is not of relevance for the results. No adverse effects were noted in this animal on the other days and in all other animals throughout the whole study.

Skin reactions:

No local irritations were observed at the application sites of all animals of the test substance groups and both control groups throughout the whole study.

Body mass:

Body masses and body mass gains of all animals were in the range of to be expected from animals of the same strain, sex and age. Body weight loss was noted in 1/5 animals in the negative control group.

Calculation of the stimulation indices (SIs)

The SIs of the substance groups were between 0.7 and 2.8. There was no concentration related response.

Interpretation of results:

GHS criteria not met

Conclusions:

Although one SI value is very near the limit of 3, 1,1 -Dimethylurea is regarded as a non sentiser in the LLNA, since the SIs of all examines test substance concentrations were smaller than 3 and no concentration related response was observed.

Executive summary:

A Local Lymph Node Assay was performed according to OECD Guideline 429 to evalute a possible skin sensitising potential of 1,1 -Dimethylurea.

Three test substance concentrations (2.5, 5 and 7.2 % solution of 1,1 -Dimethylurea in 1,2 -Propanediol) were administered to three groups of 5 female CBA/Ca mice. All animals survived till the end of the study. One animal of the positive control group had reduced motor activities on Day 2, which is not of relevance for the results. No adverse effects were noted in this animal on the other days and in all other animals throughout the whole study. No local irritations were observed at the application sited of all animals of all test substance groups and both control groups throughout the whole study. Body masses and body mass gains of all animals were in the range to be expected from animals of the same strain, sex and age.

The SIs of the tested test substance concentrations were 2.8 (low dose), 1.1 (mid dose) and 0.7 (high dose). Although one SI value is very near the limit of 3, 1,1 -Dimethylurea is regarded as a non sentiser in the LLNA, since the SIs of all examines test substance concentrations were smaller than 3 and no concentration related response was observed.

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)

Respiratory sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion

Endpoint conclusion:

no study available

Justification for classification or non-classification

One Local Lymph Node Assay was performed according to OECD Guideline 429 to evalute a possible skin sensitising potential of 1,1 -Dimethylurea.

The SIs of the tested test substance concentrations were 2.8 (low dose), 1.1 (mid dose) and 0.7 (high dose). Although one SI value is very near the limit of 3, 1,1 -Dimethylurea is regarded as a non sentiser in the LLNA, since the SIs of all examined test substance concentrations were smaller than 3 and no concentration related response was observed. Therefore 1,1 -Dimethylurea does not have to be classified as skin sensitiser.