Registration Dossier

Diss Factsheets

Administrative data

Endpoint:
eye irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
Oct 02, 2019 - Nov 29, 2019
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
guideline study

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
2019
Report date:
2019

Materials and methods

Test guidelineopen allclose all
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 492 (Reconstructed Human Cornea-like Epithelium (RhCE) Test Method for Identifying Chemicals Not Requiring Classification and Labelling for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage)
Version / remarks:
October 9, 2017
Deviations:
no
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
other: DB-ALM Protocol No. 164: Ocular Irritation Assay for Chemicals using EpiOcular™ EIT,
Version / remarks:
September 14, 2015
Deviations:
no
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
other: EpiOcular Eye Irritation Test (OCL-200-EIT) for the prediction of acute ocular irritation of chemicals; For use with MatTek Corporation`s Reconstructed Human EpiOcular Model; MatTek Corporation
Version / remarks:
June 29, 2015
Deviations:
no
GLP compliance:
yes (incl. QA statement)

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
608-148-3
EC Number:
608-148-3
Cas Number:
279246-65-0
Molecular formula:
C18H32
IUPAC Name:
608-148-3
Test material form:
solid: crystalline

Test system

Vehicle:
unchanged (no vehicle)
Controls:
yes, concurrent positive control
yes, concurrent negative control
Amount / concentration applied:
TEST MATERIAL: 50 mg per tissue

NEGATIVE / VEHICLE CONTROL: 50 µL per tissue

Sterile deionized water was used as negative control.

POSITIVE CONTROL: 50 µL per tissue

Designation: Art. 8.09711
Synonym: Methyl acetate
Supplier: Merck KGaA
CAS No.: 79-20-9
Batch No.: S7451611
Appearance: Liquid
Content (GC): 99.6 % (a/a)
Expiry Date: June 30, 2022
Storage conditions: Tightly closed, dark, at room temperature (15 – 25°C)


Duration of treatment / exposure:
30 ± 2 minutes
Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
in vitro: duplicate design

Results and discussion

In vitro

Results
Irritation parameter:
other: Viability %
Run / experiment:
Run 1 / Experiment 1
Value:
97.5
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Negative controls validity:
valid
Positive controls validity:
valid
Remarks on result:
no indication of irritation
Other effects / acceptance of results:
OTHER EFFECTS:
- Visible damage on test system: No observations

ACCEPTANCE OF RESULTS:
1. The negative control OD is >0.8 and <2.5 (1.806 and 1.931).
2. The mean relative viability of the positive control is below 50% of the negative control viability (26.5%).
3. The difference of viability between the two relating tissues of a single chemical is <20% (values between 3.1% to 9.3%) in the same run (for positive and negative control tissues and tissues of single chemicals).



Any other information on results incl. tables

   Mean OD  Mean Viability
 Negative Control 1.869 100.0% 
 Positive Control 0.495 2.19%
 Test Item 1.822 97.5%

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
GHS criteria not met
Conclusions:
Under the conditions of the present study, the test item did not show an eye hazard potential. The test item is identified as not requiring classification and labeling according to UN GHS (No Category).
Executive summary:

Objective

The objective of the present study was to investigate the potential of the test item to induce eye irritation in an in vitro human cornea model.

Study Design

The test item was applied topically to a reconstructed human cornea-like epithelium model (EpiOcular) followed by determination of the cell viability. Cell viability was determined by enzymatic conversion of vital dye MTT into a blue formazan salt and measurement of the formazan salt after extraction from tissues. The percent reduction of cell viability in comparison to untreated negative controls was used to predict the eye irritation potential.

Duplicates of the EpiOcular-model were treated with the test item, the negative or the positive control for 6 hours (± 15 minutes). 50 mg of the test item and 50 µL of either the negative control (sterile deionized water) or the positive control (methyl acetate) were applied to the tissues.

Results

After treatment with the negative control (sterile deionized water) the OD was 1.806 and 1.931 of the two treated tissue, respectively (study acceptance criterion: >0.8 and <2.5). Treatment with the positive control (methyl acetate) revealed a mean viability value of 26.5% (study acceptance criterion: <50%). Thus, the acceptance criteria were met.

Following treatment with the test item, the tissue viability was 97.5% and, thus, higher than 60%, i.e. according to OECD 492 the test item is identified as not requiring classification and labeling according to UN GHS (No Category).

Conclusion

Under the conditions of the present study, the test item did not show an eye hazard potential. The test item is identified as not requiring classification and labeling according to UN GHS (No Category).

Categories Display