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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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:
sensitisation data (humans)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
supporting study
Study period:
1987
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
publication
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
1987
Report date:
1987

Materials and methods

Type of sensitisation studied:
skin
Study type:
case report
Test guideline
Qualifier:
no guideline followed
Principles of method if other than guideline:
Case report. Patch test with the European standard series (ICDRG) and lauryl pyridinium chloride 0.1% aqueous solution, amongst other substances (ingredients of a hair conditioner).
GLP compliance:
no

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
1-dodecylpyridinium chloride
EC Number:
203-232-2
EC Name:
1-dodecylpyridinium chloride
Cas Number:
104-74-5
Molecular formula:
C17H30N.Cl
IUPAC Name:
1-dodecylpyridin-1-ium chloride
Test material form:
solid

Method

Type of population:
general
Ethical approval:
not specified
Subjects:
- Number of subjects exposed: 1
- Sex: male
- Age: 28
Clinical history:
- History of allergy or casuistics for study subject or populations:
- Symptoms: recurrent itchy dermatitis on the left side of the chest and adjacent area of the arm.
- Exposure history: the patient had noted that the eruption alsways developed after his wife had used a hair conditioner and rested hear head in the area when sleeping.
Controls:
23 healthy patients
Route of administration:
dermal
Details on study design:
TYPE OF TEST(S) USED: patch test (epicutaneous test). No further details.

Results and discussion

Results of examinations:
SYMPTOMS
- Frequency, level, duration of symptoms observed: recurrent itchy dermatitis, that disappeared after exposure was discontinued.

NO. OF PERSONS WITH/OUT REACTIONS COMPARED TO STUDY POPULATION
- Number of subjects with positive reactions: the test subject and 1/23 control patients
- Number of subjects with negative reactions: 16/23 control patients
- Number of subjects with equivocal reactions: 6/23 control patients

RESULT OF CASE REPORT: In the tes subject, a positive reaction was found to lauryl pyridinium chloride 0.1% aq. (48h +, 72h ++), but not to 0.01% aq. Of 23 controls tested with lauryl pyridinium chloride 0.1% aq., 16 were negative, 6 had an equivocal reaction, and 1 had a positive reaction. Control tests indicated a delayed time course of irritation. The strength and appearance of the patch test reaction compared to the controls, and the patient's clinical features favoured an allergic mechanism.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:
Based on the available data, the test item may cause allergic contact dermatitis.
Executive summary:

A 28-year-old male presented recurrent itchy dermatitis on the left side of the chest and adjacent area of the arm, where his wife usually rested her head when sleeping. The patient had noted that the eruption always developed after his wife had used a hair conditioner. The patient was subjected to patch tests with the European standard series (ICDRG), the hair conditioner, and later, its ingredients, separately. A positive reaction was found to lauryl pyridinium chloride 0.1% aq. (48h +, 72h ++), but not to 0.01% aq. Of 23 controls tested with lauryl pyridinium chloride 0.1% aq., 16 were negative, 6 had an equivocal reaction, and 1 had a positive reaction. Control tests indicated a delayed time course of irritation. The strength and appearance of the patch test reaction compared to the controls, and the patient's clinical features favoured an allergic mechanism. Based on the available data, the test item may cause allergic contact dermatitis.