Trans-2-[4'-[Difluor(3,4,5-trifluorphenoxy)methyl]-3',5'-difluor[1,1'-biphenyl]-4-yl]-5-propyl-tetrahydro-2H-pyran

Eye irritation

Administrative data

Endpoint:

eye irritation: in vivo

Type of information:

experimental study

Adequacy of study:

key study

Study period:

2007-09-10 to 2007-10-02

Reliability:

1 (reliable without restriction)

Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:

guideline study

Cross-reference

Reason / purpose for cross-reference:

reference to other study

Data source

Reference

Reference Type:

study report

Title:

Unnamed

Year:

2008

Report date:

2008

Materials and methods

Test guideline

Test guideline 1

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

OECD Guideline 405 (Acute Eye Irritation / Corrosion)

Version / remarks:

2002-04-24

Deviations:

no

Test guideline 2

Qualifier:

according to guideline

Guideline:

EU Method B.5 (Acute Toxicity: Eye Irritation / Corrosion)

Version / remarks:

2004/73/EC

Deviations:

no

GLP compliance:

yes

Test material

Test material information

Constituent 1

Reference substance name:

Reference substance 001

EC Number:

616-651-4

Cas Number:

787582-75-6

Molecular formula:

C26H2 lF702

Constituent 2

Reference substance name:

APUQU-2-F

IUPAC Name:

APUQU-2-F

Details on test material:

Batch: E06000594
Purity (GC): 99.9 %

Test animals / tissue source

Species:

rabbit

Strain:

New Zealand White

Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:

Strain: Albino rabbit, Crl:KBL(NZW), female (f)
Source: Charles River Wiga GmbH, Kißlegg
Age: Approx. 24 weeks

Test system

Vehicle:

unchanged (no vehicle)

Controls:

no

Amount / concentration applied:

0.1 g

Duration of treatment / exposure:

Information regarding rinsing after instillation not provided.

Observation period (in vivo):

For the test of primary eye irritation, the test material was applied into the conjunctival sac of rabbits. The first examination followed The rabbits were examined for skin alterations, behaviour and general condition 1 hour after removal of the patches, after 24, 48 and 72 hours, and then daily up to experimental day 8.

Number of animals or in vitro replicates:

3 females

Details on study design:

The test item was tested for its eye irritating properties. Prior to testing, the test material was screened for its irritating potential using hen's egg test on the chorioallantoic membrane (HET-CAM). In the main study on eye irritation, 0.1 g of the test material was grounded in a mortar using a pestle and instilled into the conjunctival sac of the left eye of each animal by gently pulling the lid away from the eyeball to form a cup into which the test material was placed. The right eye remained untreated and served as control. After instillation, the eyelids were closed for 1 second. The test for primary eye irritation was performed initially with one animal and followed by the confirmatory test with two further animals. For the test of primary eye irritation, the test material was applied into the conjunctival sac of rabbits. The first examination of the eyes followed 1 hour after instillation. The other examinations of the eyes were performed daily for a further 7 days.

Results and discussion

In vivo

Results

Results 1

Irritation parameter:

cornea opacity score

Basis:

mean

Time point:

24/48/72 h

Score:

0

Max. score:

0

Results 2

Irritation parameter:

iris score

Basis:

mean

Time point:

24/48/72 h

Score:

0

Max. score:

0

Results 3

Irritation parameter:

conjunctivae score

Basis:

mean

Time point:

24/48/72 h

Score:

0

Max. score:

0

Results 4

Irritation parameter:

chemosis score

Basis:

mean

Time point:

24/48/72 h

Score:

0

Max. score:

0

Irritant / corrosive response data:

No relevant eye irritating potential could be detected. According to CLP the test item does not have to be classified as an eye irritant.

Any other information on results incl. tables

No signs of irritation were observed at the cornea or iris. All animals showed redness of the conjunctivae (score 1) one hour after instillation of the test material.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:

GHS criteria not met

Conclusions:

No relevant eye irritating potential could be detected. According to CLP the test material does not have to beclassified as an eye irritant.

Executive summary:

The test item was tested for its eye irritating properties. Prior to testing, the test material was screened for its irritating potential using hen's egg test on the chorioallantoic membrane (HET-CAM). In the main study on eye irritation, 0.1 g of the test material was grounded in a mortar using a pestle and instilled into the conjunctival sac of the left eye of each animal by gently pulling the lid away from the eyeball to form a cup into which the test material was placed. The right eye remained untreated and served as control. After instillation, the eyelids were closed for 1 second. The test for primary eye irritation was performed initially with one animal and followed by the confirmatory test with two further animals. For the test of primary eye irritation, the test material was applied into the conjunctival sac of rabbits. The first examination of the eyes followed 1 hour after instillation. The other examinations of the eyes were performed daily for a further 7 days. No signs of irritation were observed at the cornea or iris. All animals showed redness of the conjunctivae (score 1) one hour after instillation of the test material. No relevant eye irritating potential could be detected. According to CLP test material does not have to be classified as an eye irritant.