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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Toxicological information

Skin sensitisation

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: Limited number of animals. Apart from that, study conducted according to GLP and OECD 406 test guideline. No information on positive controls.

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
1988
Report date:
1988

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
equivalent or similar to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
Version / remarks:
of 1981
Deviations:
yes
Remarks:
Number of animals lower than recommended in OECD TG 406.
GLP compliance:
yes
Type of study:
guinea pig maximisation test
Justification for non-LLNA method:
LLNA was not established in 1988

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
3-hydroxy-2-naphthoic acid
EC Number:
202-180-8
EC Name:
3-hydroxy-2-naphthoic acid
Cas Number:
92-70-6
Molecular formula:
C11H8O3
IUPAC Name:
3-hydroxynaphthalene-2-carboxylic acid
Details on test material:
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): BONS

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
other: Pirbright-White Hoe: DHPK(SPFLac)
Sex:
female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Hoechst AG, breeding colony
- Weight at study initiation: mean: 316 g, min: 280 g, max: 362 g
- Housing: groups of five, in macrolon cages
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): guinea pig diet, ERKA 8300
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): tap water ad libitum
- Acclimation period: at least 5 days

ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 22 +/-3
- Humidity (%): 50 +/- 20
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12

Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)

Inductionopen allclose all
Route:
intradermal and epicutaneous
Vehicle:
other: 1st induction (intradermal): paraffin; 2nd induction (epicutaneous): vaseline; challenge: vaseline
Concentration / amount:
1st induction (intradermal): 2 % test material in paraffin and in 50% Freund's Adjuvant,
2nd induction (epicutaneous): 0.25 % test material in vaseline
Challenge (epicutaneous): 0.25 % test material in vaseline

Challengeopen allclose all
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
other: 1st induction (intradermal): paraffin; 2nd induction (epicutaneous): vaseline; challenge: vaseline
Concentration / amount:
1st induction (intradermal): 2 % test material in paraffin and in 50% Freund's Adjuvant,
2nd induction (epicutaneous): 0.25 % test material in vaseline
Challenge (epicutaneous): 0.25 % test material in vaseline

No. of animals per dose:
dose group: 10
control group: 5
Details on study design:
1st Induction on day 1
2nd Induction on day 9
Challenge on day 22
1st reading on day 24
2nd reading on day 25
Positive control substance(s):
not specified

Results and discussion

In vivo (non-LLNA)

Resultsopen allclose all
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
0.5 ml of 0.25% test material in vaseline
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
5
Clinical observations:
none
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 0.5 ml of 0.25% test material in vaseline. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 5.0. Clinical observations: none.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
0.5 ml of 0.25% test material in vaseline
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
none
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 0.5 ml of 0.25% test material in vaseline. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: none.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
72
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
0.5 ml of 0.25% test material in vaseline
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
5
Clinical observations:
none
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 72.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 0.5 ml of 0.25% test material in vaseline. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 5.0. Clinical observations: none.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
72
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
0.5 ml of 0.25% test material in vaseline
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
none
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 72.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 0.5 ml of 0.25% test material in vaseline. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: none.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
not sensitising
Remarks:
Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: expert judgment
Conclusions:
There was no indication of any sensitising effect of the test substance in the present study.
Executive summary:

The test item was tested for skin sensitisation according to OECD Guideline 406 (Maximization Test) and in compliance with GLP. The first inductions was performed by intradermal injections of 2 % test material in paraffin and in 50% Freund's Adjuvant into the scapular region on day 1. On day 9 the second induction and  on day 22 the challenge were performed by occlusive, epicutaneous administration of 0.25 % test material in vaseline. There was no indication of any sensitising effect of the test substance in the present study. None of the animals showed any erythema or edema reactions at 48 and 72 h post challenge. Therefore, the test substance was considered to be "not sensitising". Signs of systemic toxicity were not evident during the study and bodyweight was not adversely affected by treatment with the test substance.