Registration Dossier

Toxicological information

Eye irritation

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
eye irritation: in vivo
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
20 December 1993 - 11 January 1994
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
guideline study

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
1994
Report Date:
1994

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
according to
Guideline:
EU Method B.5 (Acute Toxicity: Eye Irritation / Corrosion)
Deviations:
no
GLP compliance:
yes

Test material

Reference
Name:
Unnamed
Type:
Constituent
Details on test material:
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): Benzyl acetate
- Physical state:Clear liquid
- Analytical purity: 99.6%
- Lot/batch No.: T52/14/10
- Expiration date of the lot/batch: April 1994
- Storage condition of test material:Room temperature in the dark
Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): Benzyl acetate
- Physical state:Clear liquid
- Analytical purity: 99.6%
- Lot/batch No.: T52/14/10
- Expiration date of the lot/batch: April 1994
- Storage condition of test material:Room temperature in the dark

Test animals / tissue source

Species:
rabbit
Strain:
New Zealand White
Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Froxfield (U .K.) Ltd., Petersfield, Hampshire, England.
- Age at study initiation: 11 to 15 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: 2.6 to 3.4 kg
- Housing: individually in plastic cages with perforated floors
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): A standard laboratory diet SDS Stanrab (P) Rabbit Diet ad libitum
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): ad libitum


ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 19°C
- Humidity (%): 30 -70%.
- Air changes (per hr): 19 air changes per hour
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12 hours of artificial light in each 24 hours period.

IN-LIFE DATES: From: 20 December 1993 To: 11 January 1994

Test system

Vehicle:
unchanged (no vehicle)
Controls:
other: contralateral eye remained untreated
Amount / concentration applied:
TEST MATERIAL
- Amount(s) applied (volume or weight with unit):0.1 ml
Duration of treatment / exposure:
no rinsing of the treated eyes
Observation period (in vivo):
7 days
Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
3 animals
Details on study design:
REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
- Washing (if done): not done


SCORING SYSTEM:
Ocular irritation was assessed using the prescribed numerical system:
Cornea
Opacity: degree of density (area most dense taken for reading)
No ulceration or opacity 0
Scattered or diffuse areas of opacity (other than slight dulling of normal lustre), details of iris clearly visible 1
Easily discernible translucent areas, details of iris slightly obscured 2
Nacreous areas, no details of iris visible, size of pupil barely discernible 3
Opaque cornea, iris not discernible through the opacity 4
Iris
Normal 0
Markedly deepened rugae, congestion, swelling, moderate circumcorneal hyperaemia or injection, any of these or combination of any thereof, iris still reacting to light (sluggish reaction is positive) 1
No reaction to light, haemorrhage, gross destruction (any or all of these) 2
Conjunctivae
Redness (refers to the most severe reading of palpebral and bulbar conjunctivae, as compared to the control eye)
Blood vessels normal 0
Some blood vessels definitely hyperaemic (injected) 1
Diffuse, crimson colour, individual vessels not easily discernible 2
Diffuse beefy red 3
Chemosis (Iids and/or nictating membranes)
No swelling 0
Any swelling above normal (includes nictating membranes) 1
Obvious swelling with partial eversion of lids 2
Swelling with lids about half-closed 3
Swelling with lids more than half-closed 4

TOOL USED TO ASSESS SCORE: handheld light

Results and discussion

In vivo

Resultsopen allclose all
Irritation parameter:
cornea opacity score
Basis:
mean
Time point:
24/48/72 h
Score:
0
Max. score:
0
Reversibility:
fully reversible
Irritation parameter:
iris score
Basis:
mean
Time point:
24/48/72 h
Score:
0
Max. score:
0
Reversibility:
fully reversible
Irritation parameter:
conjunctivae score
Basis:
mean
Time point:
24/48/72 h
Score:
0.11
Max. score:
1
Reversibility:
fully reversible
Irritation parameter:
chemosis score
Basis:
mean
Time point:
24/48/72 h
Score:
0
Max. score:
0
Reversibility:
fully reversible
Irritant / corrosive response data:
The numerical values given to the ocular reactions elicited by Benzyl acetate are shown in the table below. No corneal damage or iridial inflammation was observed. Temporary well-defined conjunctival reactions only were seen. The eyes were normal two days after instillation.
Other effects:
There were no signs of toxicity or ill health in any rabbit during the observation period.
OCULAR RESPONSES

Any other information on results incl. tables

Rabbit number and sex

Region of eye

One hour

Day after instillation

1

2

3

4

7

2891 M

Cornea

0

0

0

0

0

0

Iris

0

0

0

0

0

0

Conjunctiva

Redness

2

1

0

0

0

0

Chemosis

1

0

0

0

0

0

2921 M

Cornea

0

0

0

0

0

0

Iris

0

0

0

0

0

0

Conjunctiva

Redness

2

0

0

0

0

0

Chemosis

1

0

0

0

0

0

2922 M

Cornea

0

0

0

0

0

0

Iris

0

0

0

0

0

0

Conjunctiva

Redness

1

0

0

0

0

0

Chemosis

1

0

0

0

0

0

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Conclusions:
Instillation of Benzyl acetate into the rabbit eye elicited transient well-defined conjunctival irritation only. According to Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008, no classification is warranted.
Executive summary:

A study was performed to assess the eye irritation potential of Benzyl acetate to the rabbit. Three rabbits were each administered a single ocular dose of 0.1 ml of the test substance and observed for seven days after instillation. A single instillation of Benzyl acetate into the eye of the rabbit elicited transient well-defined conjunctival irritation only. All reactions had resolved two days after instillation. According to Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008, no classification is warranted.