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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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:
skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
2007
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Cross-referenceopen allclose all
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
reference to same study
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
reference to other study

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
2007
Report date:
2007

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
Deviations:
no
GLP compliance:
yes (incl. QA statement)
Type of study:
mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)

Test material

Reference
Name:
Unnamed
Type:
Constituent

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:
mouse
Strain:
CBA
Sex:
female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
according to guideline

Study design: in vivo (LLNA)

Vehicle:
dimethylformamide
Concentration:
2.5%, 5% or 10%
No. of animals per dose:
5
Details on study design:
No irritation of the ears was observed in any of the animals examined.
Positive control substance(s):
hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)

Results and discussion

Positive control results:
The six monthly reliability check with Hexylcinnamic aldehyde indicates that the LLNA as performed at NOTOX is an approbiate model for testing for contact hypersensitivity.

In vivo (LLNA)

Resultsopen allclose all
Parameter:
SI
Remarks on result:
other: 2.5%: 1.2 5%: 2.7 10%: 2.4
Parameter:
other: disintegrations per minute (DPM)
Remarks on result:
other: control: 343 2.5%: 427 5%: 940 10%: 831

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
not sensitising
Remarks:
Migrated information
Conclusions:
The substance is not subject of classification and labeling