Registration Dossier

Administrative data

Description of key information

Skin irritation (OECD 439): not irritating

Eye irritation (OECD 437): not irritating

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin irritation / corrosion

Link to relevant study records
Reference
Endpoint:
skin irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
08 - 15 Aug 2016
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
guideline study
Qualifier:
according to
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 439 (In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Test Method)
Version / remarks:
(adopted 28 Jul 2015)
Deviations:
no
Qualifier:
according to
Guideline:
EU Method B.46 (In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Model Test)
Version / remarks:
(Commission Regulation (EC) No 440/2008, 1st ATP 2009)
Deviations:
no
GLP compliance:
yes (incl. certificate)
Remarks:
Hess. Ministerium für Umwelt, Klimaschutz, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz, Wiesbaden, Germany
Test system:
human skin model
Source species:
human
Cell type:
non-transformed keratinocytes
Cell source:
other: EpiDerm™ (EPI-200)
Source strain:
not specified
Vehicle:
unchanged (no vehicle)
Details on test system:
RECONSTRUCTED HUMAN EPIDERMIS (RHE) TISSUE
- Model used: EpiDerm™ (EPI-200) (MatTek Corporation, Bratislava, Slovakia)
- Tissue batch number: 23349
- Delivery date: 09 Aug 2016
- Date of initiation of testing: 09 Aug 2016

TEMPERATURE USED FOR TEST SYSTEM
- Temperature used during treatment / exposure: 37 ± 1.5 °C for 35 min in the incubator; thereafter at room temperature for 25 min in a sterile bench
- Temperature of post-treatment incubation: 37 ± 1.5 °C for 42.5 h

REMOVAL OF TEST MATERIAL AND CONTROLS
-Volume and number of washing steps: Tissues were gently rinsed with DPBS at least 15 times in order to remove any residual test material. After the rinsing the inserts were submerged in DPBS at least three times. Afterwards the inserts were once again rinsed with sterile DPBS from the inside and the outside.

MTT DYE USED TO MEASURE TISSUE VIABILITY AFTER TREATMENT / EXPOSURE
- MTT concentration: 1 mg/mL
- Incubation time: 3 h
- Spectrophotometer: microplate reader (Versamax® Molecular Devices, Softmax Pro, v. 4.7.1)
- Wavelength: 570 nm

FUNCTIONAL MODEL CONDITIONS WITH REFERENCE TO HISTORICAL DATA
- Viability: The quality of the EpiDerm tissue was assessed by undertaking an MTT cell viability test. The determined OD (540 - 570 nm) was 2.141 ± 0.124 (acceptance criteria: 1.0 - 3.0).
- Barrier function: The barrier function was assessed by determination of the exposure time required to reduce tissue viability by 50% (ET-50) upon application of 100 µL of 1% Triton X-100. The ET-50 value was determined to be 6.16 h (acceptance criteria: 4.77 - 8.72 h).
- Contamination: The cells used to produce the EpiDerm tissue were screened for the presence of viruses, bacteria, yeast and other fungi.

NUMBER OF REPLICATE TISSUES: 3

CONTROL TISSUES USED IN CASE OF MTT DIRECT INTERFERENCE
Since the test substance did not directly reduce MTT, an additional test with freeze-killed tissues was not performed.

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

PREDICTION MODEL / DECISION CRITERIA
- The test substance is considered to be irritant to skin if the viability after 1 hour exposure is less or equal than 50%.
Control samples:
yes, concurrent negative control
yes, concurrent positive control
Amount/concentration applied:
TEST MATERIAL
- Amount applied: 30 µL

NEGATIVE CONTROL
- Amount applied: 30 µL

POSITIVE CONTROL
- Amount applied: 30 µL
- Concentration: 5% aqueous solultion
Duration of treatment / exposure:
60 min
Duration of post-treatment incubation (if applicable):
approx. 42.5 h
Number of replicates:
triplicates for each treatment and control group
Irritation / corrosion parameter:
% tissue viability
Remarks:
mean value of 3 tissues
Run / experiment:
60 min exposure
Value:
104.1
Vehicle controls validity:
not applicable
Negative controls validity:
valid
Positive controls validity:
valid
Other effects / acceptance of results:
OTHER EFFECTS:
- Direct-MTT reduction: The test substance did not interfere with the MTT assay (no reducing capacity).
- Colour interference with MTT: The test substance did not change colour when mixed with deionised water. Also its intrinsic colour was not intensive.

ACCEPTANCE OF RESULTS:
- Acceptance criteria met for negative control: The negative control OD (1.613, 1.738 and 1.718) was in the range of the required acceptability criterion of mean OD ≥ 0.8 and ≤ 2.8 for the 60 min treatment interval, thus showing the quality of the tissues.
- Acceptance criteria met for positive control: Exposure to the positive control induced a decrease in the relative absorbance as compared to the negative control to 3.5% thus confirming the validity of the test system.
- Acceptance criteria met for variability between replicate measurements: The relative standard deviations of the 3 identical replicates between the % variability values of the test substance, positive and negative control in the main test were below 6% (threshold of OECD 439: <18%), thus ensuring the validity of the study.

Table 2. Results after treatment with the test substance and the controls

 

 

Absorbance at 570 nm *

 

 

Mean absorbance of 3 tissues

Rel. absorbance (%) **

Rel. SD (%)

Rel. absorbance (% of negative control)***

Tissue 1

Tissue 2

Tissue 3

Tissue 1

Tissue 2

Tissue 3

Negative control

1.613

1.738

1.718

1.690

95.5

102.9

101.7

4.0

100.0

Positive control

0.063

0.057

0.059

0.060

3.7

3.4

3.5

5.3

3.5

Test substance

1.759

1.747

1.772

1.759

104.1

103.4

104.9

0.7

104.1

* Mean of 3 wells after blank correction (blank = 0.038)

** Relative absorbance per tissue (rounded values): 100 × (absorbance tissue) / (mean absorbance negative control)

*** Relative absorbance per treatment group (rounded values): 100 × (mean absorbance test item/positive control) / (mean absorbance negative control)

Interpretation of results:
other: CLP/EU GHS criteria not met, no classification required according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008
Conclusions:
Under the conditions of the Reconstructed Human Epidermis test the test substance does not possess any skin irritating potential.
Executive summary:

After treatment with the test item CITRONELLYL TIGLATE the mean relative absorbance value did not decrease (104.1%) compared to the relative absorbance value of the negative control. This value does not affect the threshold for irritancy of ≤ 50%. Therefore, the test item is not considered to possess an irritant potential.

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (not irritating)

Eye irritation

Link to relevant study records
Reference
Endpoint:
eye irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
12 Aug 2016
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
guideline study
Qualifier:
according to
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 437 (Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability Test Method for Identifying i) Chemicals Inducing Serious Eye Damage and ii) Chemicals Not Requiring Classification for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage)
Version / remarks:
July 2013
Deviations:
no
GLP compliance:
yes (incl. certificate)
Remarks:
Hess. Ministerium für Umwelt, Klimaschutz, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz, Wiesbaden, Germany
Species:
cattle
Strain:
not specified
Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
SOURCE OF COLLECTED EYES
- Source: Schlachthof Aschaffenburg, Aschaffenburg, Germany
- Characteristics of donor animals: at least 9 month old
- Storage, temperature and transport conditions of ocular tissue: The isolated eyes were transported in Hank's Buffered Salt Solution (HBSS) at ambient temperature.
- Time interval prior to initiating testing: The corneae were isolated on the same day after delivery of the eyes and directly used in the BCOP test.
- Indication of any existing defects or lesions in ocular tissue samples: All eyes were carefully examined macroscopically for defects. Those presenting defects such as vascularization, pigmentation, opacity and scratches were discarded.
Vehicle:
unchanged (no vehicle)
Controls:
yes, concurrent positive control
yes, concurrent negative control
Amount / concentration applied:
TEST MATERIAL
- Applied volume: 0.75 mL

POSITIVE SUBSTANCE
- Applied volume: 0.75 mL

NEGATIVE CONTROL
- Applied volume: 0.75 mL
Duration of treatment / exposure:
10 min at 32 ± 1 °C
Duration of post- treatment incubation (in vitro):
2 h
Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
triplicates for each treatment and control group
Details on study design:
SELECTION AND PREPARATION OF CORNEAS:
The cornea was carefully removed from the eye using scalpel and rounded scissors. A rim of about 2 mm of tissue (sclera) was left for stability and handling of the isolated cornea. Each cornea was mounted in a specially designed cornea holder.

QUALITY CHECK OF THE ISOLATED CORNEAS:
At the end of the equilibration period, the basal opacity was determined (t0). Each cornea with a value of a basal opacity >7 was discarded.

TREATMENT METHOD:
The cornea holder consists of anterior and posterior compartments, which interface with the epithelial and endothelial sides of the cornea, respectively. The endothelial side of the cornea was positioned against the sealing ring (O-ring) of the posterior part of the holder. The cornea was gently flattened over the O-ring but stretching was avoided. The anterior part of the holder was positioned on the top of the cornea and fixed in place with screws. Both compartments of the holder were filled with incubation medium. The posterior compartment was filled first to return the cornea to its natural convex position. After equilibration for about 1 hour, the anterior compartment received the test substance or the controls on the surface of the corneae. The corneae were incubated in a horizontal position at 32 ± 1 °C in the water-bath for 10 minutes.

NUMBER OF REPLICATES: 3 corneae per test group

REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE:
The test substance was rinsed off from the application side with saline.
- POST-EXPOSURE INCUBATION: 2 h in a vertical position

METHODS FOR MEASURED ENDPOINTS:
- Corneal opacity: Corneal opacity was determined by the amount of light transmission through the cornea via an opacitometer (OP_KiT opacitometer, Electro Design, France).
- Corneal permeability: The passage of sodium fluorescein dye was measured with the aid of a microplate reader (Versamax Molecular Devices) at 490 nm (OD490).

SCORING SYSTEM: In Vitro Irritancy Score (IVIS), IVIS = opacity value + (15x OD490 value)

DECISION CRITERIA:
Test substance with an IVIS > 55 was regarded as serious eye damaging and labelled Category 1 according to CLP/EPS/GHS.
Test substance with an IVIS ≤ 3 was regarded as non-irritant and labelled in no category.
Test substance with an IVIS > 3; ≤ 55: no prediction can be made.
Irritation parameter:
in vitro irritation score
Run / experiment:
mean value of 3 corneae
Value:
0.94
Vehicle controls validity:
not applicable
Negative controls validity:
valid
Positive controls validity:
valid
Other effects / acceptance of results:
With the negative control (0.9% (w/v) NaCl solution in deionised water) neither an increase of opacity nor permeability of the corneae was observed.
The positive control (2-ethoxyethanol) showed clearly increased opacity and distinctive permeability of the corneae (mean IVIS = 82.80) fullfilling the criteria as severe irritating/corrosive.
Relative to the negative control, the test substance did not cause an increase of the corneal opacity or permeability.

ACCEPTANCE OF RESULTS:
- Acceptance criteria met for positive control: The positive control resulted in an IVIS which was within two standard deviations of the current historical mean.
- Acceptance criteria met for negative control: The negative control resulted in opacity and permeability values that were less than the established upper limits for background opacity and permeability values for bovine corneae treated with the respective negative control.

Table 2. Results after 10 min incubation time.

Test group

Opacity value =
Difference (t130-t0) of Opacity

Permeability at 490 nm (OD490)

IVIS

Mean IVIS

 

Mean

 

Mean

 

 

Negative

control

0

0.00

0.066

0.060

0.99

0.90

0

0.058

0.87

0

0.055

0.83

Positive

control

62.00*

1.435*

83.53

82.80

66.00*

1.317*

85.76

57.00*

1.473*

79.10

Test substance

0.00*

0.007*

0.11

0.94

0.00*

0.004*

0.07

1.00*

0.109*

2.64

*: corrected values

Interpretation of results:
other: CLP/EU GHS criteria not met, no classification required according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008
Conclusions:
Under the conditions of the BCOP assay the test substance was not irritating to the eye. Application of the test substance to bovine corneae resulted in a calculated mean IVIS of 0.94.
Executive summary:

Relative to the negative control, the test item CITRONELLYL TIGLATE did not cause an increase of the corneal opacity or permeability. The calculated mean in vitro irritancy score was 0.94. According to OECD 437 (see table in chapter 3.8.3) the test item is not categorized (GHS).

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (not irritating)

Respiratory irritation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no study available

Additional information

Skin

The skin irritation potential of the test substance was determined by an in vitro skin irritation test using a human skin model according to OECD Guideline 439 and in compliance with GLP (2016). After treatment with the test item the mean relative absorbance value did not decrease (104.1%) compared to the negative control (threshold for irritancy ≤ 50%). Therefore, the test substance is not considered to possess skin irritating properties.

Eye

The eye irritation potential of the test substance was determined by a bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) test according to OECD Guideline 437 and in compliance with GLP (2016). Application of the test substance to bovine corneae resulted in a calculated mean IVIS of 0.94. Thus, the test substance is not considered to be irritant to the eye.

Justification for classification or non-classification

The available data on skin and eye irritation do not meet the criteria for classification according to Regulation (EC) 1272/2008, and are therefore conclusive but not sufficient for classification.