Polar modified Rice Bran Wax

Skin sensitisation

Some information in this page has been claimed confidential.

Administrative data

Endpoint:

skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

key study

Study period:

27 January, 2016 - 15 February, 2016

Reliability:

1 (reliable without restriction)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

guideline study

Data source

Reference

Reference Type:

study report

Title:

Unnamed

Year:

2016

Report date:

2016

Materials and methods

Test guideline

Test guideline 1

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)

Version / remarks:

(July 2010)

Deviations:

no

Test guideline 2

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

EU Method B.42 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)

Version / remarks:

(May 2008, including most recent amendments)

Deviations:

no

Test guideline 3

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)

Version / remarks:

(March 2003)

Deviations:

no

GLP compliance:

yes

Type of study:

mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)

Test material

Test material information

Constituent 1

Test material form:

solid: particulate/powder

Remarks:

migrated information: powder

Specific details on test material used for the study:

- Stability at higher temperatures Degradation at 470°C- pH (1% in water, indicative range): 6.46 – 5.72

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:

mouse

Strain:

other: CBA/J

Sex:

female

Details on test animals and environmental conditions:

TEST ANIMALS- Source: Janvier, Le Genest-Saint-Isle, France- Age at study initiation: Young adult animals (approx. 10 weeks old)- Weight at study initiation: 19.9 - 23.3 g- Housing: Animals were group housed in labeled Makrolon cages. - Diet: Free access to pelleted rodent diet (SM R/M-Z from SSNIFF® Spezialdiäten GmbH, Soest, Germany).- Water: Free access to tap water.- Acclimation period: At least 5 days ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS (set conditions)- Temperature (°C): 18 – 24- Humidity (%): 40 - 70- Air changes (per hr): at least 10 - Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12

Study design: in vivo (LLNA)

Vehicle:

methyl ethyl ketone

Concentration:

0, 2, 5 and 10%

No. of animals per dose:

5

Details on study design:

WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE ANALYSISIn the interest of animal welfare and to minimize any testing likely to produce severe responses in animals, a weight of evidence analysis was performed prior to the start of this study. All available information was evaluated (e.g. existing human and animal data, literature, item data supplied by theSponsor, analysis of structure activity relationships (SAR), physicochemical properties and reactivity (pH, buffering capacity)). It was concluded by the Study Director that no severe effects were to be expected.RANGE FINDING TESTS:Two test item concentrations were tested; a 5% and 10% concentration. The highest concentration was the highest concentration that could be prepared homogeneously. The test system, procedures and techniques were identical to those used in the main study except that the assessment of lymph node proliferation and necropsy were not performed. Two young adult animals per concentration were selected. Each animal was treated with one concentration on three consecutive days. Animals were group housed in labeled Makrolon cages. Ear thickness measurements were conducted using a digital thickness gauge prior to dosing on Days 1 and 3, and on Day 6. Animals were sacrificed after the final observation.MAIN STUDYANIMAL ASSIGNMENT AND TREATMENT- Name of test method: Local Lymph Node Assay- Criteria used to consider a positive response: DPM values are presented for each animal and for each dose group. A Stimulation Index (SI) is calculated for each group using the individual SI values. The individual SI is the ratio of the DPM/animal compared to the DPM/vehicle control group mean.If the results indicate a SI ≥ 3, the test item may be regarded as a skin sensitizer.ANIMAL ASSIGNMENTThree groups of five animals were treated with one test substance concentration per group. One group of five animals was treated with vehicle.TREATMENT PREPARATION AND ADMINISTRATION:Test substance preparation: The test item preparations (w/w) were prepared within 4 hours prior to each dosing. No adjustment was made for specific gravity of the vehicle. Homogeneity was assessed by visual inspection of the solutions.Rationale for vehicle: The vehicle was selected on the basis of maximizing the solubility using the test item data provided by the Sponsor and trial preparation results performed at WIL Research Europe. The vehicle was chosen from the vehicles specified in the test guideline. There was no information available regarding the solubility or stability in vehicle.Induction - Days 1, 2 and 3; Excision of nodes - Day 6; Tissue processing for radioacitivity - Day 6; Radioactivity measurements - Day 7; Performed according to test guidelines.Observations:Mortality/Viability: Twice daily.Body weights: On Day 1 (pre-dose) and Day 6 (prior to necropsy).Clinical signs: Once daily on Days 1-6 (on Days 1-3 between 3 and 4 hours after dosing).Irritation: Once daily on Days 1-6 (on Days 1 - 3 immediately after dosing) according to a numerical scoring system. Furthermore, a description of all other (local) effects was recorded according to guidelines.Necropsy: No necropsy for gross macroscopic examination was performed according to study plan.

Positive control substance(s):

hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)

Statistics:

Not performed.

Results and discussion

Positive control results:

The six-month reliability check with Alpha-hexylcinnamicaldehyde indicates that the Local Lymph Node Assay as performed at WIl Research Europe is an appropriate model for testing for contact hypersensitivity (see attached background material).

In vivo (LLNA)

Results

Results 1

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Value:

1.3

Test group / Remarks:

2%

Results 2

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Value:

1.3

Test group / Remarks:

5%

Results 3

Key result

Parameter:

SI

Value:

1.3

Test group / Remarks:

10%

Cellular proliferation data / Observations:

Results - main study:No irritation was observed in any of the animals. White staining of the dorsal surface of the ears by test item remnants was noted for the experimental animals between Days 1 and 4. The staining did not hamper the scoring of the ears.  All auricular lymph nodes of the animals of the experimental and control groups were considered normal in size. No macroscopic abnormalities of the surrounding area were noted for any of the animals. No mortality occurred and no clinical signs of systemic toxicity were observed in the animals of the main study. Body weights and body weight gain of experimental animals remained in the same range as controls over the study period.Mean DPM/animal values for the experimental groups treated with test item concentrations 2, 5 and 10% were 1006, 1015 and 948 DPM, respectively. The mean DPM/animal value for the vehicle control group was 756 DPM and for the positive control group (25%) was 4551 DPM.

Any other information on results incl. tables

Results Pre-screen test:

No irritation and no signs of systemic toxicity were observed in any of the pre-screen animals. White staining of the dorsal surface of the ears by test item remnants was noted for both animals at 5% (Days 1, 2 and 3) and 10% (Days 1-5). The staining did not hamper the scoring of the ears.

Variations in ear thickness during the observation period were less than 25% from Day 1 pre-dose values.

Based on these results, the highest test item concentration selected for the main study was a 10% concentration.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:

other: not sensitising

Conclusions:

In an LLNA skin sensitisation study, performed according to OECD 429 test guideline and GLP principles, Licocare RBW 106 was considered not to be a skin sensitiser, as the SI appeared not to be ≥ 3 when tested up to and including 10% v/v.

Executive summary:

An LLNA skin sensitisation study with Licocare RBW 106 was performed according to OECD 429 test guideline and GLP principles. Based on the results of a pre-screen test, the test concentrations were selected at 2%, 5% and 10% v/v. Reliable positive and negative controls were included.

No irritation was observed in any of the animals. White staining of the dorsal surface of the ears by test item remnants was noted for the experimental animals between Days 1 and 4. The staining did not hamper the scoring of the ears.

All auricular lymph nodes of the animals of the experimental and control groups were considered normal in size. No macroscopic abnormalities of the surrounding area were noted for any of the animals. No mortality occurred and no clinical signs of systemic toxicity were observed in the animals of the main study. Body weights and body weight gain of experimental animals remained in the same range as controls over the study period.

Mean DPM/animal values for the experimental groups treated with test item concentrations 2, 5 and 10% were 1006, 1015 and 948 DPM, respectively. The mean DPM/animal value for the vehicle control group was 756 DPM and for the positive control group (25%) was 4551 DPM. The SI values calculated for the test item concentrations 2, 5 and 10% were 1.3, 1.3 and 1.3, respectively.

As the SI appeared not to be ≥ 3 when tested up to and including 10% v/v, Licocare RBW 106 was considered not to be a skin sensitiser and does not have to be classified according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of items and mixtures (including all amendments).