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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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:
skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Reliability:
1 (reliable without restriction)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: OECD 406 (1992) and EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (2003);GLP

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
2004
Report date:
2004

Materials and methods

Test guidelineopen allclose all
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
Deviations:
no
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)
Deviations:
no
GLP compliance:
yes
Remarks:
US EPA TSCA GLP (40 CFR, Part 792) and OECD GLP
Type of study:
guinea pig maximisation test

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
-
EC Number:
455-890-7
EC Name:
-
Cas Number:
6607-41-6
Molecular formula:
C26H19NO3
IUPAC Name:
455-890-7
Details on test material:
PPP-BP (CAS # 6607-41-6); 2-Phenyl, 3-3-Bis (4-Hydroxy phenyl) Phthalimidine; Purity: 99.8%

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
Hartley
Sex:
male/female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
Male and female Hartley guinea pigs were received from Elm Hill Breeding Labs, Inc., Chelmsford, MA. They weighed 363.5-440.2 g and were at least 21 days old. They were group-housed upon arrival in stainless steel suspended cages. The animals were acclimated for at least 5 days prior to dosing. Water and feed were provided ad libitum. The temperature and humidity were maintained at 68 +/- 5°F and 30-70%, respectively. Room lights were on a 12-hour light/dark cycle.

Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)

Inductionopen allclose all
Route:
other: Intradermal and Topical
Vehicle:
cotton seed oil
Concentration / amount:
10% PPP-BP for intradermal induction
100% for topical induction and topical challenge
Challengeopen allclose all
Route:
other: Topical
Vehicle:
cotton seed oil
Concentration / amount:
10% PPP-BP for intradermal induction
100% for topical induction and topical challenge
No. of animals per dose:
5 males/5 females Test group (10% PPP-BP intradermal; 100% PPP-BP topical)
2 males/3 females Negative control group
2 males/2 females for the preliminary irritation tests
Details on study design:
A preliminary intradermal irritancy test was conducted, in which PPP BP, at concentrations of 100, 50, 10 and 1% in CSO was injected intradermally (0.1 mL/site). It was determined that 10% PPP-BP in CSO caused well defined irritation without local toxicity while moderate to severe irritation was observed at the 50% concentration. In addition, a preliminary topical irritancy test was conducted and 100% PPP-BP was found to be non-irritating when applied topically. Therefore, PPP-BP at a concentration of 10% was chosen for the intradermal induction and a concentration of 100% was chosen as the topical induction and challenge doses.


The application sites were prepared by clipping the skin of the test site free of hair. On day 0 and day 7, an approximately 5 x7 cm area over the shoulder region was prepared. On day 21, an approximately 4 x 4 cm square of the flank was prepared.

On Day 0, for the intradermal induction, three pairs of intradermal injections were made so that on either side of the midline there were three injection sites. The dosing solution for each injection is listed below. Injection pairs 1 and 2 were given in close proximity to each other cranially and injection pair 3 was located more caudally. The injection sites were just within the boundaries of 2 x 4 cm.

Test Group
Injection Pair 1: 0.1 mL Freund’s Complete Adjuvant (FCA) 1:1 with CSO
Injection Pair 2: 0.1 mL PPP-BP at the selected concentration (10% formulation in CSO)
Injection Pair 3: 0.1 mL PPP-BP 1:1 with FCA

Negative Control Group
Injection Pair 1: 0.1 mL FCA 1:1 with CSO
Injection Pair 2: 0.1 mL CSO (undiluted)
Injection Pair 3: 0.1 mL 50% formulation of CSO 1:1 with FCA

The animals were not treated with sodium lauryl sulfate prior to the topical induction. On Day 7, for the topical induction, the experimental group was dosed with 100% PPP-BP. PPP-BP was placed on a 2 x 4 cm piece of filter paper in a thick even layer. The patch was placed on the dorsal surface of the animals, covered by an impermeable sheet, and secured with a non-adhesive bandage which was wound around the torso of the animal. The dressing was left in place for 48 hours. The negative control group was treated in a similar fashion with CSO.

On Day 21, for the topical challenge, pieces of filter paper measuring 2 x 2 cm were secured to the flanks for 24 hours, utilizing the same wrapping technique as previously described. For both the test and negative control groups, one patch was placed on the left side with PPP-BP at 100% and a second patch was placed on the right side with CSO.

Approximately 21 hours after patch removal, the flank skin was cleaned and clipped. Approximately 3 hours later, the first reading of the reactions was performed (Day 23) and the second reading was made on Day 24. For evaluation of skin reactions, the following four-point scale was used:

0 = No reactions
1 = Discrete or patchy erythema
2 = Moderate and confluent erythema
3 = Intense erythema and swelling

Challenge controls:
2 males/3 females Negative control group

Results and discussion

In vivo (non-LLNA)

Resultsopen allclose all
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
100 %
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
None
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 100 %. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: None.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
100%
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
10
Clinical observations:
None
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 100%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: None.
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
Vehicle (CSO)
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
5
Clinical observations:
None
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: Vehicle (CSO). No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 5.0. Clinical observations: None.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
negative control
Dose level:
Vehicle (CSO)
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
5
Clinical observations:
None
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: Vehicle (CSO). No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 5.0. Clinical observations: None.

Any other information on results incl. tables

All animals gained weight over the course of the study.  No systemic signs of toxicity were observed in any animal over the course of the study.  None of the test animals exhibited any signs of erythema at any of the observation points.  None of the negative control animals exhibited erythema at either the 24- or 48-hour observation periods following challenge application.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
not sensitising
Remarks:
Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: expert judgment
Conclusions:
Under the conditions of this study, PPP-BP elicited no reaction to the challenge in this skin sensitization study and was concluded to be a non-sensitiser.
Executive summary:

The study assessed the skin sensitisation potential of the test substance. Twenty female guinea-pigs were given test substance doses by intradermal injection and topical application of 10% PPP-BP intradermal; 100% PPP-BP topical in a cotton seed oil vehicle. PPP-BP at a concentration of 10% was chosen for the intradermal induction and a concentration of 100% was chosen as the topical induction and challenge doses following an initial intradermal irritancy test. Challenge sites were evaluated at 24, and 48 hours after removal against a negative control group. Daily observations were made for clinical signs of toxicity. Animals were weighed at the beginning and end of the observation period.

 

Reactions were scored on a scale from 0 to 5 for erythema, eschar formation and oedema formation. All test sites were scored 0 for both the test and control animals. The test substance did not produce evidence of delayed contact hypersensitivity.