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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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 (non-LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
2007-02-05 to 2007-03-29
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: The study was conducted according to the appropriate OECD test guideline, and in compliance with GLP.

Data source

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

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
Deviations:
no
GLP compliance:
yes
Type of study:
Buehler test

Test material

Constituent 1
Reference substance name:
Tall-oil pitch
EC Number:
232-414-4
EC Name:
Tall-oil pitch
Cas Number:
8016-81-7
Molecular formula:
UVCB substance molecular formula unknown
IUPAC Name:
8016-81-7
Details on test material:
- Name of test material (as cited in study report): Tall Oil Pitch PN

- Physical state: Viscous liquid

- Storage conditions: Room temperature < 25°C, in the dark, may be used under light

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
Dunkin-Hartley
Sex:
female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
TEST ANIMALS

- Source: Charles River Laboratories, Research Models and Services, Germany GmbH, Sandhofer Weg 7, D-97633 Sulzfeld

- Age at study initiation: 5 - 7 weeks

- Weight at study initiation: 363 g to 429 g

- Housing: Group caging in plastic containers (46 cm x 105 cm x 36 cm), partly shaded, 10 animals per container.

- Diet: Ssniff Ms-H (Guinea Pig Maintenance Diet V2233), includes ascorbic acid (2400 mg/kg), ad libitum.

- Water: Tap water from Makrolon-bottles with stainless steel canules, ad libitum.

- Acclimation period: 12 days


ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

- Temperature (°C): Mean of 22.0°C (continuous control and recording)

- Humidity (%): Mean of 47.1 % (continuous control and recording)

- Air changes (per hr): Approximately 12/h

- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12



IN-LIFE DATES: From: 2007-02-21 To: 2007-03-29

Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)

Inductionopen allclose all
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
corn oil
Concentration / amount:
Induction: 75%

Challenge: 25%
Challengeopen allclose all
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
corn oil
Concentration / amount:
Induction: 75%

Challenge: 25%
No. of animals per dose:
Test group: 20

Control group: 10
Details on study design:
RANGE FINDING TESTS:

To obtain the appropriate concentrations of the test substance for the definitive study, a preliminary test was carried out with 3 female guinea pigs. 4 different concentrations of the test substance were administered epicutaneously. The modes of application were the same as in the definitive study. The duration of the epicutaneous exposure was 6 hours.See Table 1 for scores.


MAIN STUDY

A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE

- No. of exposures: 3

- Test groups: Test substance in corn oil

- Control group: Corn oil only

- Site: Left flank

- Frequency of applications: Days 0, 7 and 14

- Duration: 6 hours

- Concentrations: 75% w/v


B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE

- No. of exposures: 1

- Test groups: Test substance in corn oil

- Control group: Corn oil only

- Day(s) of challenge: Day 28

- Exposure period: 6 hours

- Site: Right posterior flank (test susbtance); Right anterior flank (corn oil)

- Concentrations: 25% w/v

- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24 and 48


Positive control substance(s):
yes
Remarks:
hexyl cinnamic aldehyde

Results and discussion

Positive control results:
The sensitivity and the reliability of the experimental procedure is checked separately, twice a year, using !-hexyl cinnamic aldehyde as sensitizer and the same strain of animals and the same experimental procedure as in the study.

5/10 animals had a positive response in this test, which is markedly more than the minimum of 15 %, the threshold for classification requested by the guideline.

In vivo (non-LLNA)

Resultsopen allclose all
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
25%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
Shortly after the beginning of all exposures (induction and challenge) animals exhibited increased motor activity that was attributed to restricted movement due to the dressings used.
Remarks on result:
other: see Remark
Remarks:
Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 25%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: Shortly after the beginning of all exposures (induction and challenge) animals exhibited increased motor activity that was attributed to restricted movement due to the dressings used. .
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
25%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 25%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
25%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 25%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
25%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 25%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.

Any other information on results incl. tables

No skin reactions were observed at any time in either test group or negative control animals.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
not sensitising
Remarks:
Migrated information
Conclusions:
In a reliable study conducted according to OECD Test Guideline 406, Tall Oil Pitch was found to be not sensitising. The test was conducted in compliance with GLP.