Benzyl formate

Skin irritation / corrosion

Administrative data

Endpoint:

skin irritation: in vitro / ex vivo

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

key study

Study period:

2015-10-27 to 2015-11-23

Reliability:

1 (reliable without restriction)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

guideline study

Data source

Reference

Reference Type:

study report

Title:

Unnamed

Year:

2015

Report date:

2016

Materials and methods

Test guideline

Test guideline 1

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

OECD Guideline 439 (In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Test Method)

Version / remarks:

2013

Deviations:

no

Test guideline 2

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

EU Method B.46 (In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Model Test)

Deviations:

no

GLP compliance:

yes (incl. QA statement)

Test material

Test material information

Constituent 1

Reference substance name:

Benzyl formate

EC Number:

203-214-4

EC Name:

Benzyl formate

Cas Number:

104-57-4

Molecular formula:

C8H8O2

IUPAC Name:

benzyl formate

In vitro test system

Test system:

human skin model

Source species:

human

Cell type:

non-transformed keratinocytes

Vehicle:

unchanged (no vehicle)

Details on test system:

RECONSTRUCTED HUMAN EPIDERMIS (RHE) TISSUE
- Model used: EpiDerm™
- Delivery date: 17 November 2015

TEMPERATURE USED FOR TEST SYSTEM
- Temperature used during treatment / exposure:
- Temperature of post-treatment incubation (if applicable):

REMOVAL OF TEST MATERIAL AND CONTROLS
-Volume and number of washing steps:
- Observable damage in the tissue due to washing:
- Modifications to validated SOP:

MTT DYE USED TO MEASURE TISSUE VIABILITY AFTER TREATMENT / EXPOSURE
- MTT concentration:
- Incubation time:
- Spectrophotometer:
- Wavelength:
- Filter:
- Filter bandwidth:
- Linear OD range of spectrophotometer:

FUNCTIONAL MODEL CONDITIONS WITH REFERENCE TO HISTORICAL DATA
- Viability:
- Barrier function:
- Morphology:
- Contamination:
- Reproducibility:

NUMBER OF REPLICATE TISSUES: 3

CONTROL TISSUES USED IN CASE OF MTT DIRECT INTERFERENCE
- Fresh tissues / killed tissues
- Procedure used to prepare the killed tissues (if applicable):
- N. of replicates :
- Method of calculation used:

NUMBER OF INDEPENDENT TEST SEQUENCES / EXPERIMENTS TO DERIVE FINAL PREDICTION:

PREDICTION MODEL / DECISION CRITERIA (choose relevant statement)
- The test substance is considered to be corrosive to skin if [complete, e.g. the viability after 3 minutes exposure is less than 50%, or if the viability after 3 minutes exposure is greater than or equal to 50 % and the viability after 1 hour exposure is less than 15%.]
- The test substance is considered to be non-corrosive to skin if [complete, e.g. the viability after 3 minutes exposure is greater than or equal to 50% and the viability after 1 hour exposure is greater than or equal to 15%.]
- Justification for the selection of the cut-off point(s) if different than recommended in TG 431 and 439:

Control samples:

yes, concurrent negative control

yes, concurrent positive control

yes, concurrent MTT non-specific colour control

Amount/concentration applied:

TEST MATERIAL
- Amount applied: 30 µL
- Concentration: unchanged

NEGATIVE CONTROL
- Amount applied: 30 µL

POSITIVE CONTROL
- Amount applied: 30 µL
- Concentration: 5%

Duration of treatment / exposure:

60 minutes

Duration of post-treatment incubation (if applicable):

The colour of the test item/water mixture was observed during the whole incubation period (60 min). The test item and the positive and negative controls were washed off the skin tissues after treatment. After further incubation for about 43 hours the tissues were treated with the MTT solution for 3 hours following 68.5 hours extraction of the colorant from the cells. The amount of extracted colorant was determined photometrically at 570 nm.

Number of replicates:

3

Results and discussion

In vitro

Results

Irritation / corrosion parameter:

% tissue viability

Value:

29.6

Vehicle controls validity:

not applicable

Negative controls validity:

valid

Positive controls validity:

valid

Remarks on result:

positive indication of irritation

Any other information on results incl. tables

Table 1: Results after treatment with the test item and the controls

Dose Group	Exposure Interval	Absorbance 570 nm Tissue 1*	Absorbance 570 nm Tissue 2*	Absorbance 570 nm Tissue 3*	Mean Absorbance of 3 Tissues	Rel. Absor-bance [%] Tissue 1, 2 + 3**	Relative standard deviation [%]	Rel. Absorbance [% of Negative Control]**
Negative control	60 min	1.402	1.549	1.502	1.484	94.4 104.4 101.2	5.1	100.0
Positive control	60 min	0.066	0.064	0.067	0.066	4.5 4.3 4.5	2.7	4.4
Test item	60 min	0.444	0.433	0.441	0.439	29.9 29.1 29.7	1.4	29.6

* Mean of three replicate wells after blank correction
** relative absorbance per tissue [rounded values]: (100x(absorbance tissue))/ mean absorbance negative control
*** relative absorbance per treatment group [rounded values]: (100x(mean absorbance test item/positive control))/ mean absorbance negative control

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:

Category 2 (irritant) based on GHS criteria

Conclusions:

The test item was found to be irritating to skin according to UN GHS and EU CLP regulation.

Executive summary:

An in vitro study was performed to assess the irritation potential of the test item by means of the Human Skin Model Test. The test item did not reduce MTT (test for direct MTT reduction), and it did not change colour when mixed with deionised water (test for colour interference). Also its intrinsic colour was not intensive. Consequently, additional tests with freeze-killed or viable tissues were not necessary. Each three tissues of the human skin model EpiDermTM were treated with the test item, the negative or the positive control for 60 minutes. 30 μL of the test item were applied to each tissue, and spread to match the surface of the tissue. 30 μL of either the negative control (DPBS) or the positive control (5 % SLS) were applied to each tissue. After treatment with the negative control the absorbance values were well in the required range of the acceptability criterion of mean OD ≥ 0.8 and ≤ 2.8 for the 60 minutes treatment interval, thus assuring the quality of the tissues. Treatment with the positive control induced a sufficient decrease in the relative absorbance as compared to the negative control for the 60 minutes treatment interval, and thus assuring the validity of the test system. After treatment with the test item the mean relative absorbance value decreased to 29.6 % compared to the relative absorbance value of the negative control. This value is below the threshold for irritancy of ≤ 50 %. Therefore, the test item is considered to possess an irritant potential. In conclusion, it can be stated that in this study and under the experimental conditions reported, the substance is irritating to skin.