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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Description of key information

In vivo skin sensitisation (OECD 406, Buehler): not sensitising

QSAR skin sensitisation prediction: negative

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin sensitisation

Link to relevant study records

Referenceopen allclose all

Endpoint:
skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
17 May - 03 Jul 1996
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
guideline study with acceptable restrictions
Remarks:
no positive control data mentioned in study report
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
Version / remarks:
adopted in 1992
Deviations:
yes
Remarks:
no positive control data mentioned in study report
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
EU Method B.6 (Skin Sensitisation)
Version / remarks:
adopted in 1992
Deviations:
not specified
GLP compliance:
yes
Type of study:
Buehler test
Justification for non-LLNA method:
The study was conducted in 1996, prior to adoption of LLNA method in 2002.
Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
other: Pirbright-White
Remarks:
HsdPoc:DH
Sex:
female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
TEST ANIMALS
- Source: HARLAN WINKELMANN, Borchen, Germany
- Microbiological status of animals, when known: SPF breeding colony
- Weight at study initiation: 345 - 420 g
- Housing: in fully air-conditioned rooms in macrolon cages (type 4) on soft wood granulate in groups of 5 animals
- Diet: Commercial diet, (ssniff Ms-H(V2233), ad libitum
- Water: tap water ad libitum
- Acclimation period: at least 7 days

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 20 ± 3
- Humidity (%): 50 ± 20
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12
- IN-LIFE DATES: From: 17 May - 21 Jun 1996
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
other: 0.3 mL sesame oil
Remarks:
used to moisten the test substance
Concentration / amount:
100%
Day(s)/duration:
On each of days 1, 8, and 15 for 6-hour exposure duration
Adequacy of induction:
highest technically applicable concentration used
No.:
#1
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
other: 0.3 mL sesame oil
Remarks:
used to moisten the test substance
Concentration / amount:
100%
Day(s)/duration:
On day 29, 6-hour exposure
Adequacy of challenge:
highest non-irritant concentration
No. of animals per dose:
10 negative control
20 test animals
Details on study design:
RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Six animals were used for determination of non-irritant concentration: 4% and 20% in sesame oil, and 100% moistened with 0.3 mL sesame oil was applied topically to two guinea pigs per concentration. The hair on the left flank of the animals was removed mechanically. An amount of 0.5 g of the test substance preparation was applied to a 2 x 2 cm cellulose patch, which was fixed to the left flank and covered occlusively for 6 hours with a bandage and film. After 24 hours following removal of the patches, the treated skin areas were examined for erythema and oedema according to the score of Draize.

MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 3
- Exposure period: During Day 1-15 topical exposure was done once a week.
- Test groups: 20 animals
- Control group: 10 animals
- Site: Left flank: 0.5 mL of the test substance was applied over a 2 x 2 cm patch. Control animals were treated with analogously with sesame oil.
- Frequency of applications: once a week
- Duration: 6 hour exposure under occlusive bandage
- Concentrations: 100% moistened with 0.3 mL sesame oil
After induction exposure the occlusive bandage was removed and the skin washed with warm water. Clinical signs and irritant effects were recorded.

B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
The hair of the previously untreated right flank was removed mechanically.
- No. of exposures: 1
- Day(s) of challenge: Day 29
- Exposure period: 6 hour exposure under occlusive bandage
- Test groups: 20 animals
- Control group: 10 animals
- Site: Hind part of right flank: 0.5 g of the test substance preparation was applied over a patch. Vehicle alone was applied to the front part of right flank.
- Concentrations: 100% moistened with 0.3 mL sesame oil
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24 and 48 hours after removal of patches.
After removal of the occlusive bandage, any remnants of the substance were carefully washed off with warm water.
Positive control substance(s):
not specified
Remarks:
no positive control data mentioned in study report
Positive control results:
No positive control used.
Key result
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
100%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
none, no erythema, no oedema
Key result
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
100%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
none, no erythema, no oedema
Key result
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
100%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
none, no erythema, no oedema
Key result
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
100%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
none, no erythema, no oedema
Group:
positive control
Remarks on result:
other: no positive control data mentioned in study report

Range finding test: As no signs of irritation occurred after application of the different test concentrations, 100 % was selected for challenge application.

The body weight gains of the animals were not impaired.

The animals of the treatment and control group showed no signs of skin irritation during induction phase.

No signs of irritation (no erythema and no oedema) were observed in the control and the treatment group 24 and 48 hours after removal of challenge patches.

Interpretation of results:
other: CLP/EU GHS criteria not met, no classification required according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008.
Endpoint:
skin sensitisation, other
Remarks:
: QSAR prediction on skin sensitisation
Type of information:
(Q)SAR
Adequacy of study:
supporting study
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. SOFTWARE
The OECD QSAR Toolbox v4.1 is a Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship model that was developed by the Laboratory of Mathematical Chemistry, Burgas, Bulgaria (http://toolbox.oasis-lmc.org).

2. MODEL (incl. version number)
OECD QSAR Toolbox version 4.1

3. SMILES OR OTHER IDENTIFIERS USED AS INPUT FOR THE MODEL
See “Test material information”

4. SCIENTIFIC VALIDITY OF THE (Q)SAR MODEL
See "Any other information of materials and methods incl. tables"

5. APPLICABILITY DOMAIN
See "Any other information of materials and methods incl. tables"

6. ADEQUACY OF THE RESULT
The results may be used in a weight-of-evidence approach together with other information to reach a conclusion regarding the skin sensitising potential of the test substance.
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
other: REACH Guidance on QSARs
Deviations:
not applicable
Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Principle of test: The OECD QSAR Toolbox v4.1 is a Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship model that was developed by the Laboratory of Mathematical Chemistry, Burgas, Bulgaria (http://toolbox.oasis-lmc.org).
GLP compliance:
no
Key result
Run / experiment:
other:
Parameter:
other: QSAR
Remarks on result:
no indication of skin sensitisation
Interpretation of results:
other: The prediction result was negative for skin sensitising potential, based on QSAR prediction (OECD QSAR Toolbox v4.1, ECHA database). The results may only be used for classification purposes together with other data in a weight-of-evidence approach.
Conclusions:
The skin sensitisation potential of  Fatty acids C16-18(even numbered), oligoesters with sucrose was predicted using OECD QSAR Toolbox v4.1. The tested substances fall within the domain for profiling based on Protein binding alerts for skin sensitization by OASIS (primary grouping). The prediction for skin sensitisation (II, ECETOC) was negative for all four SMILES codes representing 4 out of 16 constituents of the UVCB substance. Therefore, Fatty acids C16-18(even numbered), oligoesters with sucrose is not expected to have a skin sensitising potential.
Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)

Respiratory sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no study available
Additional information:

Animal data

A Buehler test was performed with Fatty acids C16-18 (even numbered), oligoesters with sucrose (no CAS) under GLP conditions according to OECD guideline 406 (key study, 1996). In a range finding test the undiluted solid test substance moistened with 0.3 mL sesame oil was found to be non-irritant to the skin. In the main test, 20 test and 10 control guinea pigs were topically induced with the 0.5 g solid test substance moistened in 0.3 mL sesame oil on the left flank for 6 hours of exposure under occlusive conditions. Induction procedure was repeated after 7 and 14 days. Two weeks after the last induction animals were challenged topically on the right flank with 0.5 g of the test substance moistened in 0.3 mL sesame oil for 6 hours under occlusive conditions. The animals of the treatment and control group showed no signs of skin irritation during induction phase. No signs of irritation (no erythema and no oedema) were observed in the control and the treatment group 24 and 48 hours after removal of challenge patches. No positive control data were reported. Based on the results, the test substance had no sensitising effect in guinea pigs under the experimental conditions.

QSAR prediction

The skin sensitising potential of four representative constituents (C16 monoester, C18 diester, C18 pentaester and C18 octaester) of the UVCB substance Fatty acids C16-18 (even numbered), oligoesters with sucrose (no CAS) was predicted in the OECD QSAR Toolbox v4.1 (supporting study, 2018). The UVCB substance consists of C16 and C18 mono- to octaesters with sucrose. The tested substances fall within the domain for the protein binding alerts for skin sensitization by OASIS (primary grouping)'. The result of the prediction was negative, no skin sensitising potential for Fatty acids C16-18(even numbered), oligoesters with sucrose (no CAS) was predicted.

Overall conclusion for skin sensitisation

In addition to an available Buehler study conducted under GLP conditions with omission of reporting on control data, an OECD QSAR Toolbox prediction was done for four representative constituents of the UVCB substance. No sensitising potential was indicated in the QSAR prediction, supporting the absence of skin sensitising potential reported in the Buehler guinea pig study. Therefore, Fatty acids C16-18(even numbered), oligoesters with sucrose (no CAS) was found not to be sensitising to skin.

Justification for classification or non-classification

The available data on skin sensitisation do not meet the classification criteria according to Regulation (EC) 1272/2008, and are therefore conclusive but not sufficient for classification.