Search

Cosmetics Europe, the European Trade Association for the cosmetics and personal care industry, is conducting a multi-phase program to develop regulatory accepted, animal-free testing strategies enabling the cosmetics industry to conduct safety assessments. Based on a systematic evaluation of test methods for skin sensitization, five non-animal test methods (DPRA (Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay), KeratinoSensTM, h-CLAT (human cell line activation test), U-SENSTM, SENS-IS) were selected for inclusion in a comprehensive database of 128 substances. Existing data were compiled and completed with newly generated data, the latter amounting to one-third of all data. The database was complemented with human and local lymph node assay (LLNA) reference data, physicochemical properties and use categories, and thoroughly curated. Focused on the availability of human data, the substance selection resulted nevertheless resulted in a high diversity of chemistries in terms of physico-chemical property ranges and use categories. Predictivities of skin sensitization potential and potency, where applicable, were calculated for the LLNA as compared to human data and for the individual test methods compared to both human and LLNA reference data. In addition, various aspects of applicability of the test methods were analyzed. Due to its high level of curation, comprehensiveness, and completeness, we propose our database as a point of reference for the evaluation and development of testing strategies, as done for example in the associated work of Kleinstreuer et al. We encourage the community to use it to meet the challenge of conducting skin sensitization safety assessment without generating new animal data.

The use of this material under current conditions is supported by existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data show that this material is not genotoxic. Data from the suitable read across analog linalyl phenylacetate (CAS # 7143-69-3) show that this material does not have skin sensitization potential. The repeated dose toxicity endpoint was completed using linalyl cinnamate (CAS # 78-37-5) as a suitable read across analog, which provided a MOE > 100. The developmental and reproductive toxicity endpoint was completed using linalool (CAS # 78-70-6), dehydrolinalool (CAS # 29171-20-8), benzoic acid (CAS # 65-85-0) and sodium benzoate (CAS # 532-32-1) as suitable read across analogs, which provided a MOE > 100. The local respiratory toxicity endpoint was completed using linalool (CAS # 78-70-6) and benzoic acid (CAS # 65-85-0) as suitable read across analogs, which provided a MOE > 100. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework along with data from the suitable read across analog linalyl cinnamate (CAS # 78-375).

The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. p-Tolyl isobutyrate was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data from read-across analogs ethyl p-tolyl carbonate (CAS # 22,719-81-9) and p-tolyl acetate (CAS # 140-39-6) show that p-tolyl isobutyrate is not expected to be genotoxic. The repeated dose, reproductive, and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were evaluated using the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to p-tolyl isobutyrate is below the TTC (0.03 mg/kg/day, 0.03 mg/kg/day, and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The skin sensitization endpoint was completed using the Dermal Sensitization Threshold (DST) for reactive materials (64 μg/cm2); exposure is below the DST. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; p-tolyl isobutyrate is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The environmental endpoints were evaluated; p-tolyl isobutyrate was found not to be Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

The use of this material under current use conditions is supported by the existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity, skin sensitization potential, as well as, environmental safety. Repeated dose toxicity was determined to have the most conservative systemic exposure derived NO[A]EL of 37.5 mg/kg/day. A gavage 13-week subchronic toxicity study conducted in mice resulted in a MOE of 5769 while considering 38.4% absorption from skin contact and 100% from inhalation. A MOE of >100 is deemed acceptable.

Please cite this article as: A.M. Api, D. Belsito, S. Bhatia, M. Bruze, P. Calow, M.L. Dagli, W. Dekant, A.D. Fryer, L. Kromidas, S. La Cava, J.F. Lalko, A. Lapczynski, D.C. Liebler, Y. Miyachi, V.T. Politano, G. Ritacco, D. Salvito, J. Shen, T.W. Schultz, I.G. Sipes, B. Wall, D.K. Wilcox, RIFM FRAGRANCE INGREDIENT SAFETY ASSESSMENT, Linalyl acetate, CAS Registry Number 115-95-7, Food and Chemical Toxicology (2015), http://dx.doi.org/doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2015.01.010.

The Research Institute for Fragrance Materials, Inc. (RIFM) has been engaged in the generation and evaluation of safety data for fragrance materials since its inception over 45 years ago. Over time, RIFM's approach to gathering data, estimating exposure and assessing safety has evolved as the tools for risk assessment evolved. This publication is designed to update the RIFM safety assessment process, which follows a series of decision trees, reflecting advances in approaches in risk assessment and new and classical toxicological methodologies employed by RIFM over the past ten years. These changes include incorporating 1) new scientific information including a framework for choosing structural analogs, 2) consideration of the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC), 3) the Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) for dermal sensitization, 4) the respiratory route of exposure, 5) aggregate exposure assessment methodology, 6) the latest methodology and approaches to risk assessments, 7) the latest alternatives to animal testing methodology and 8) environmental risk assessment. The assessment begins with a thorough analysis of existing data followed by in silico analysis, identification of 'read across' analogs, generation of additional data through in vitro testing as well as consideration of the TTC approach. If necessary, risk management may be considered.

• Methyl hexyl oxo cyclopentanone carboxylate safety assessment based on RIFM's criteria.

Quantitative risk assessment for skin sensitization is directed towards the determination of levels of exposure to known sensitizing substances that will avoid the induction of contact allergy in humans. A key component of this work is the predictive identification of relative skin sensitizing potency, achieved normally by the measurement of the threshold (the ‘‘EC3’’ value) in the local lymph node assay (LLNA). In an extended series of studies, the accuracy of this murine induction threshold as the predictor of the absence of a sensitizing effect has been verified by conduct of a human repeated insult patch test (HRIPT). Murine and human thresholds for a diverse set of 57 fragrance chemicals spanning approximately four orders of magnitude variation in potency have been compared. The results confirm that there is a useful correlation, with the LLNA EC3 value helping particularly to identify stronger sensitizers. Good correlation (with half an order of magnitude) was seen with three-quarters of the dataset. The analysis also helps to identify potential outlier types of (fragrance) chemistry, exemplified by hexyl and benzyl salicylates (an over-prediction) and trans-2-hexenal (an under-prediction).

The use of this material under current conditions is supported by existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data from the suitable read across analog linalool (CAS # 78-70-6) show that this material is not genotoxic nor does it have skin sensitization potential and also provided a MOE > 100 for the local respiratory endpoint. The repeated dose, developmental and reproductive toxicity endpoints were completed using nerolidol (isomer unspecified, CAS # 7212-44-4) as a suitable read across analog, which provided a MOE > 100. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework.

Summary : The use of this material under current conditions is supported by existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data show that this material is not genotoxic nor does it have skin sensitization potential. The local respiratory toxicity endpoint was completed using the TTC (Threshold of Toxicological Concern) for a Cramer Class I material (1.4 mg/day). The repeated dose toxicity endpoint was completed using ethylene dodecanedioate (CAS # 54982-83-1) as a suitable read across analog, which provided a MOE > 100. The developmental and reproductive toxicity endpoint was completed using oxacyclohexadec-12-en-2-one, (12E)- (CAS # 111879-80-2) as a suitable read across analog, which provided a MOE > 100. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra along with data on the target material. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework along with data on the suitable read across analog oxacyclohexadec-12-en-2-one, (12E)- (CAS # 111879-80-2).

The use of this material under current conditions is supported by existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data show that this material is not genotoxic. Data from the suitable read across analog 2-butyloctan-1-ol (CAS # 3913-02-8) show that this material does not have skin sensitization potential. The reproductive and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were completed using the TTC (Threshold of Toxicological Concern) for a Cramer Class I material (0.03 and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The developmental and repeat dose toxicity endpoints were completed data on the target material which provided a MOE > 100. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework.

The use of this material under current use conditions is supported by the existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data from the target material and the suitable read across analog 6-acetyl-1,1,2,4,4,7-hexamethyltetraline (CAS # 21145-77-7) show that this material is not genotoxic. Data from the suitable read across analog 6-acetyl-1,1,2,4,4,7-hexamethyltetraline (CAS # 21145-77-7) provided a MOE > 100 for the repeat dose and developmental toxicity endpoints. The reproductive and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were completed using the TTC (Threshold of Toxicological Concern) for a Cramer Class II material (0.009 mg/kg/day and 0.47 mg/day, respectively). Data on the target material showed that this material is below the non-reactive DST for skin sensitization and did not have the potential for phototoxicity or photoallergenicity. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework.

The use of this material under current use conditions is supported by the existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data from the suitable read across analog benzyl acetate (CAS # 140-11-4) show that this material is not genotoxic nor does it have skin sensitization potential and also provided a MOE100 for the repeated dose, developmental and reproductive, and local respiratory toxicity endpoints. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework.

The use of this material under current use conditions is supported by the existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity, skin sensitization potential, as well as, environmental safety. Developmental toxicity was determined to have the most conservative systemic exposure derived NO[A]EL of 100 mg/kg/day. A gavage developmental toxicity study conducted in rats on a suitable read across analog resulted in aMOE of 3571 while considering 78.7% absorption from skin contact and 100% from inhalation. A MOE of >100 is deemed acceptable.

The use of this material under current use conditions is supported by the existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity, skin sensitization potential, as well as, environmental safety. Repeated dose toxicity was determined to have the most conservative systemic exposure derived NO[A]EL of 10 mg/kg/day. A dietary 90-day subchronic toxicity study conducted in rats resulted in a MOE of 182 while assuming 100% absorption from skin contact and inhalation. A MOE of >100 is deemed acceptable.

This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental and reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data show that this material is not genotoxic nor does it have skin sensitization potential. The repeated dose, developmental and reproductive, and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were completed using the TTC (Threshold of Toxicological Concern) for a Cramer Class I material (0.03, 0.03 mg/kg/day and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework.

This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data from the suitable read across analogs 2-butyloctan-1-ol (CAS # 3913-02-8) and 2-ethyl-1-hexanol (CAS # 104-76-7) show that this material is not genotoxic nor does it have skin sensitization potential. The reproductive and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were completed using the TTC (Threshold of Toxicological Concern) for a Cramer Class I material (0.03 and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The repeated dose toxicity endpoint was completed using 2-ethyl-1-hexanol (CAS # 104-76-7) and 1-heptanol, 2-propyl (CAS # 10042-59-8) as suitable read across analogs, which provided a MOE > 100. The developmental toxicity endpoint was completed using 2-ethyl-1-hexanol (CAS # 104-76-7) as a suitable read across analog, which provided a MOE > 100 The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework.

The use of this material under current use conditions is supported by the existing information.This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity, skin sensitization, as well as environmental safety. Data from the suitable read across analog, benzyl acetate (CAS # 140-11-4), show that this material is not genotoxic nor does it have skin sensitization potential. The repeated dose, developmental and reproductive, and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were completed using benzyl acetate (CAS # 140-11-4) as a suitable read across analog, which provided a MOE > 100. The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on suitable UV spectra. The environmental endpoint was completed as described in the RIFM Framework. (Less)

The use of this material under current use conditions is supported by the existing information. This material was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, developmental toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity, skin sensitization potential, as well as, environmental safety. Repeated dose toxicity was determined using a suitable read across analog to have the most conservative systemic exposure derived NO[A]EL of 36 mg/kg/day. A dermal 90-day subchronic toxicity study conducted in rats resulted in a MOE of 2250 while considering 14.4% absorption from skin contact and 100% from inhalation. A MOE of >100 is deemed acceptable.

It is well established that certain chemicals cause respiratory allergy. In common with contact allergens, chemicals that induce sensitization of the respiratory tract must form stable associations with host proteins to elicit an immune response. Measurement of the reactivity of chemical allergens to single nucleophilic peptides is increasingly well-described, and standardized assays have been developed for use in hazard assessment. This study employed standard and modified peptide reactivity assays to investigate the selectivity of chemical respiratory allergens for individual amino acids under competitive and non-competitive conditions. The reactivity of 20 known chemical respiratory sensitizers (including diisocyanates, anhydrides, and reactive dyes) were evaluated for reactivity towards individual peptides containing cysteine, lysine, histidine, arginine, or tyrosine. Respiratory allergens exhibited the common ability to deplete both lysine and cysteine peptides; however, reactivity for histidine, arginine, and tyrosine varied between chemicals, indicating differences in relative binding affinity toward each nucleophile. To evaluate amino acid selectivity for cysteine and lysine under competitive conditions a modified assay was used in which reaction mixtures contained different relative concentrations of the target peptides. Under these reaction conditions, the binding preferences of reference respiratory and contact allergens (dinitrochlorobenzene, dinitrofluorobenzene) were evaluated. Discrete patterns of reactivity were observed showing various levels of competitive selectivity between the two allergen classes.

A toxicologic and dermatologic review of 3-phenylpropyl isobutyrate when used as a fragrance ingredient is presented. 3-Phenylpropyl isobutyrate is a member of the fragrance structural group cinnamyl phenylpropyl compounds. The common characteristic structural element of cinnamyl phenylpropyl materials is an aryl substituted primary alcohol/aldehyde/ester. They are simple aromatic compounds with saturated propyl or unsaturated propenyl side chains containing a primary oxygenated functional group which has little toxic potential. 3-Phenyl-1-propyl derivatives participate in the same beta oxidation pathways as do their parent cinnamic acid derivatives. This review contains a detailed summary of all available toxicology and dermatology papers that are related to this individual fragrance ingredient and is not intended as a stand-alone document. Available data for 3-phenylpropyl isobutyrate was evaluated then summarized and includes physical properties, acute toxicity, skin irritation and skin sensitization. A safety assessment of all cinnamyl phenyl propyl compounds will be published simultaneously with this document. Please refer to Belsito et al. (2011) for an overall assessment of the safe use of this material and all cinnamyl phenylpropyl materials in fragrances. Belsito, D., Bickers, D., Bruze, M., Dagli, M.L., Fryer, A., Greim, H., Miyachi, Y., Saurat, J.H., Sipes, I.G., 2011. A toxicologic and dermatologic assessment of cinnamyl phenylpropyl compounds when used as fragrance ingredients.

In-vitro human skin permeation and distribution of geranyl nitrile (GN) was determined using epidermal membranes following application (5 μl/cm2) in 70% ethanol, under non-occlusive conditions, at maximum in-use concentration (1%). Permeation was measured (12 time-points over 24 h) using 6% (w/v) Oleth-20 in pH 7.4 phosphate buffered saline as receptor. Permeation of reference benzoic acid was assessed using the same skin donors. Overall recovery of GN at 24 h was low (14.1 ± 0.4%) due to evaporation. Evaporative loss of GN from polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) sheet, under the same conditions was rapid (93% over 24 h) although this overestimated loss during permeation where evaporation competed with uptake. At 24 h, 1.89 ± 0.15 μg/cm2 GN, (3.74 ± 0.30% of applied dose) (mean ± standard error, SE, n = 12), had permeated. Following rapid initial permeation, the absorption plateaued due to depletion. Levels of GN in the epidermis (plus any remaining stratum corneum after tape stripping), filter paper membrane support and receptor fluid were combined (as per SCCNFP guidelines) to produce a total absorbed dose value of 4.72 ± 0.32%. Systemic exposure resulting from the use of GN as a fragrance ingredient, under unoccluded conditions, would be low based on the currently reported use levels.

The murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) is used for the prospective identification of contact allergens. This method is not only accepted as a stand-alone test for the identification of contact allergenic hazard but also used increasingly for the measurement of the relative potency of skin-sensitizing chemicals as an integral component of the risk assessment process. During the development and validation phases of the method, a list of standard vehicles for use in the LLNA was identified, among them being the vehicle most commonly used acetone/olive oil (4:1, AOO). We have now explored the performance in the LLNA of a non-standard vehicle, ethanol:diethyl phthalate (1:3, EtOH:DEP), that is used frequently to evaluate dermal effects of fragrance materials in both human and experimental studies. Current investigations have demonstrated that EtOH:DEP induces similar levels of background proliferative responses in lymph nodes comparable with the standard vehicle AOO. Moreover, expected levels of activity are observed when EtOH:DEP is used to deliver a known contact allergen in the LLNA. The conclusion drawn is that EtOH:DEP provides a suitable vehicle for use in the LLNA and that the approach described provides a basis for future evaluation of novel vehicles.

A toxicologic and dermatologic review of butyl cinnamate when used as a fragrance ingredient is presented.

A toxicologic and dermatologic review of isoamyl cinnamate when used as a fragrance ingredient is presented.

A toxicologic and dermatologic review of methyl-beta-ionone when used as a fragrance ingredient is presented.

A toxicologic and dermatologic review of 4-(2,4,6-trimethyl-3-cyclohexen-1-yl)-3-buten-2-one when used as a fragrance ingredient is presented.

A toxicologic and dermatologic review of alpha-isodamascone when used as a fragrance ingredient is presented.

A toxicologic and dermatologic review of methyl-alpha-ionone when used as a fragrance ingredient is presented.

A toxicologic and dermatologic review of dihydro-alpha-ionone when used as a fragrance ingredient is presented.

A toxicologic and dermatologic review of isobutyl cinnamate when used as a fragrance ingredient is presented.

A toxicologic and dermatologic review of trans-beta-damascone when used as a fragrance ingredient is presented.