Upload
trancong
View
218
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Memorandum
To: CIR Expert Panel Members and Liaisons From: Monice M. Fiume MMF Senior Scientific Analyst/Writer Bart A. Heldreth, Ph.D. BAH
Chemist Date: July 30, 2010 Subject: Draft Report on Dicarboxylic Acids (previously called Diisopropyl Sebacate) The draft report on dicarboxylic acids was last reviewed in December 2009, under the title Diisopropyl Sebacate. At that time, the report was tabled for reorganization. Also at that time, it was determined that oxalic acid would not be part of the safety assessment. The entire report has been reorganized and rewritten. It will be obvious that the Chemistry section is now prepared in a way that allows you to view the dicarboxylic acids in order of increasing chain length. Also included are charts demonstrating the relationship between molecular weight and the log octanol – water partitioning coefficient. Additionally, the report, from the General Biology section on, is now divided into two sections, as was suggested by the Panel in December. The first section addresses dicarboxylic acids and their salts, while the second part addresses esters of dicarboxylic acids. These two subsets of ingredients have different functions in cosmetics, and this will allow the Panel to view the data on each subset separately. In addition to the reorganization, the report has change greatly in the extent of data included. A complete new search of the literature has been performed, and a substantial amount of new data has been added. A great deal of the information included in this report has come from summary documents, such as HPV robust summaries, that cite unpublished sources. Whatever details were available have been included, but often the summaries were brief. Additional unpublished data received from Council, including concentration of use data, have been added. Also included are summaries of information from the 1984 Final Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate and from the 2006 Amended Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dibutyl Adipate as Used in Cosmetics. (Dioctyl adipate is now correctly named diethylhexyl adipate.) These reports have been included for your use. The diesters have been shown to metabolize. Accordingly, data on esterase metabolites have been included as support information. For your ease in use of this data, an Appendix to the report, that
CIR Panel Book Page 1
summarizes these data, immediately follows the reference section. When applicable, these data are also included in the appropriate tables. There are many aspects for discussion in this report, and we have tried to present it to you as cohesively as possible. The following are included as paper copy:
1. Final report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate; 2. Amended Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dibutyl Adipate as Used in Cosmetics; 3. Updated concentration of use data – dated February 25, 2010; 4. Unpublished data on Diethylhexyl Succinate, Diisobutyl Adipate, Diisocetyl Adipate,
Diisodecyl Adipate, Dioctyldodecyl Adipate, Diethylhexyl Sebacate and Diisopropyl Sebacate; submitted January 27, 2010. (One in French has not yet been translated, so is not included in text.);
5. Unpublished data on Diisostearyl Adipate, Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate, and Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate; submitted January 15, 2010; and
6. Unpublished data - Physical/Chemical Properties on Dibutyl Octyl Sebacate, Dihexyldecyl Sebacate, and Dioctyldodecyl Sebacate; dated February 15, 2010
CIR Panel Book Page 2
REPORT HISTORY: DICARBOXYLIC ACID AND THEIR SALTS AND ESTERS July 10, 2009: SLR was issued September 2009 Panel meeting Initial review of the draft report. The recommendation was made to add 5 additional dicarboxylic acids – oxalic, malonic, succinic, glutaric, and adipic – and their salts and esters December 2009 Panel meeting The report was tabled for reorganization into (1) acids and salts and (2) esters. It was also agreed that oxalic acid should be removed. It was also felt that more data should be available. August 2010 Panel meeting The report has been completely reorganized. A new search was done and the text was updated with much new data.
CIR Panel Book Page 4
Sebacates Search Update June 2010 Toxline NTP HPV EU/SCCP EPA IARC OTC SIDS
Sebacic Acid 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dibutyl Sebacate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dibutyloctyl Sebacate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dicapryl/Capryl Sebacate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diethyl Sebacate 0 x NR/NS 0 0 Diethylhexyl Sebacate G 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dihexyldecyl Sebacate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diisooctyl Sebacate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diisopropyl Sebacate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diisostearyl Sebacate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dioctyldodecyl Sebacate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Disodium Sebacate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Isostearyl Sebacate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Malonic Acid G 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diethyl Malonate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Succinic Acid 0 x NR/NS 0 0 Sodium Succinate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Disodium Succinate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 x Dimethyl Succinate G x NR/NS 0 0 Diethyl Succinate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diethylhexyl Succinate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Decyl Succinate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dicapryl Succinate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dicetearyl Succinate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diisobutyl Succinate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Glutaric Acid G x NR/NS 0 0 Dimethyl Glutarate G x NR/NS 0 0 Diisostearyl Glutarate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diisobutyl Glutarate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Adipic Acid G x NR/NS 0 0 x Dimethyl Adipate G x NR/NS 0 0 Diethyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diethylhexyl Adipate C,G x NR/NS x 2 0 x Dipropyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dibutyl Adipate 0 x NR/NS 0 0 x Di-C12-15 Alkyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dicapryl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dicetyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diheptylundecyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dihexyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dihexyldecyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diisobutyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diisocetyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diisodecyl Adipate 0 x NR/NS x 0 0 Diisononyl Adipate 0 x NR/NS x 0 0 Diisooctyl Adipate 0 x NR/NS x 0 0 Diisopropyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Diisostearyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dioctyldodecyl Adipate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Ditridecyl Adipate 0 x NR/NS x 0 0 Azelaic Acid 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dipotassium Azelate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Disodium Azelate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dodecanedioic Acid 0 x NR/NS 0 0 x Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate 0 0 NR/NS 0 0 Totals 2744
CIR Panel Book Page 5
Toxline - searched 6-10-10; included Medline NTP - searched 6-20-10; G - genotoxicity, C - carcinogenicity HPV - searched 6-20&21-10; x - listed in HPV database EU - searched 6-20-10; NR - no restrictions; NS - no SCCP opinion IARC - searched 6-21-10 OTC - searched 6-22-10 (April 7, 2010 update) EPA - searched 7-8-10 found updated Robust Summaries for HPV items
TOXNET Search Strategy: Sebacic 06-11-10 306 hits 111-20-6 OR 184706-97-6 OR 109-43-3 OR 110-40-7 OR 122-62-3 OR 359073-59-9 OR 10340-41-7 OR 7491-02-3 OR 69275-01-0 OR 17265-14-4 OR 478273-24-4 OR (DICAPRYL AND CAPRYL AND SEBACATE) OR (DIISOSTEARYL AND SEBACATE) Malonic-Succinic-Glutaric 06-10-10 2511 hits 141-82-2 OR 105-53-3 OR 110-15-6 OR 2922-54-5 OR 150-90-3 OR 106-65-0 OR 123-25-1 OR 2915-57-3 OR 2530-33-8 OR 14491-66-8 OR 93280-98-9 OR 925-06-4 OR 110-94-1 OR 1119-40-0 OR 71195-64-7 OR (DIISOSTEARYL AND GLUTARATE) Adipic 06-10-10 1167 hits 124-04-9 OR 627-93-0 OR 141-28-6 OR 103-23-1 OR 106-19-4 OR 105-99-7 OR 105-97-5 OR 26720-21-8 OR 155613-91-5 OR 110-33-8 OR 141-04-8 OR 57533-90-1 OR 58262-41-2 OR 59686-69-0 OR 27178-16-1 OR 33703-08-1 OR 108-63-4 OR 6938-94-9 OR 62479-36-1 OR 155613-91-5 OR 85117-94-8 OR 16958-92-2 OR (ALKYL AND ADIPATE) OR (DIHEXYLDECYL AND ADIPATE) Azelaic-Dodecanedioic 06-10-10 208 hits 123-99-9 OR 9619-43-3 OR 52457-54-2 OR 17265-13-3 OR 27825-99-6 OR 132499-85-5 OR 693-23-2 OR 131252-83-0 OR 129423-55-8 Combined files minus existing references – 2744 June 21, 2010 – 47 published papers ordered July 8, 2010 - 20 additional papers ordered July 15, 2010 – 10 additional papers ordered *Metabolite alcohols and monoesters were searched for supplemental information in TOXLINE and RTECS, via STN. CAS Registry files were used to search in each of the databases. 55 published papers were ordered. Numerous other references on metabolite alcohols were available from prior safety assessments.
CIR Panel Book Page 6
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 40
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 isononanoates and all that -- those parts. And,
2 hopefully, we can have our -- you know, at the
3 next meeting, have a good discussion on whether
4 these are long shots or not, in other words, if
5 they're lipophilic, probably really concerned and
6 so forth, because I'd hate to pull --
7 unnecessarily pull ingredients off the list when
8 there's a good reason to believe that it's not a
9 problem.
10 DR. BERGFELD: Well, thank you for that
11 clarification of who does what.
12 All right. Well, then we move on.
13 We're moving on to the second ingredient under the
14 reports advancing and that's sebacates by Dr.
15 Marks.
16 DR. MARKS: So, this is the second time
17 we've looked at the sebacates. In the September
18 2009 meeting we decided to table these ingredients
19 so that we could expand the number and I have a
20 feeling we're going to have a discussion again
21 procedurally how to go. Our team felt that we
22 should continue to table these ingredients with
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
PANEL - DEC 2009 CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 41
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 the aim of splitting the acids and salts into one
2 group -- they are used as pH adjusters -- and then
3 the esters into another group, rather than having
4 them all mixed in as is in the present document.
5 That could either be, as we discussed,
6 whether this should be two separate documents or
7 one document and just have the document organized
8 so these ingredients were split, and we felt that
9 we could proceed with one document. And then we
10 also felt that within this list, that we should
11 reopen three of the esters that have already been
12 determined to be safe by the CIR panel, and that's
13 the diethylhexyl adipate, the dibutyl adipate, and
14 the diisopropyl adipate. So, we felt some more
15 work needed to be done on the document and,
16 therefore, recommend to table it.
17 DR. BERGFELD: Is there a second to
18 table?
19 SPEAKER: Second.
20 DR. BERGFELD: Second. There's no
21 discussion on the table. Motion, all those in
22 favor of tabling, please indicate by raising your
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 42
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 hand?
2 DR. BELSITO: Any discussion?
3 DR. BERGFELD: No discussion on the
4 table. It's four against four? So, the chair has
5 to vote. I'll vote to table. So, this particular
6 ingredient has been tabled and let's go over why
7 it's being tabled again.
8 DR. MARKS: Well, the first is that we
9 felt the document could be reorganized and that
10 really by uses, so the acids and the salts are
11 used as pH adjusters and then the esters had other
12 uses. And so the document would be split to
13 discuss those two groups together, and that we, as
14 part of this document, reopened three esters which
15 had previously been determined by the CIR as all
16 are safe to be included in this new amended.
17 DR. BERGFELD: May I ask, Alan, is this
18 really editorial or is this truly -- does it truly
19 have a need for being tabled?
20 DR. ANDERSON: Yes, I would have said
21 that was an editorial change. It's just a matter
22 of reorganizing the document, whether it is split
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 43
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 into two or split into two pieces in one document.
2 We have lots of experience with both approaches.
3 It's simply a question of approach. It doesn't
4 address the question of any real additional data
5 needs. So, I'm not sure there's a benefit to
6 tabling from that standpoint.
7 DR. BERGFELD: How about the addition of
8 the other previously approved ingredients?
9 DR. ANDERSON: I think --
10 DR. BERGFELD: Does that fit with the
11 first comment?
12 DR. ANDERSON: There is -- there are
13 data that are available in the other safety
14 assessments that previously the panel has
15 completed. To the extent that you want those data
16 incorporated, tabling it to do that step is, I
17 think, a valid thing to do because clearly they're
18 not in there now.
19 DR. BERGFELD: Don? Comment?
20 DR. BELSITO: Well, I mean, we obviously
21 didn't vote to table, but some comments. First,
22 yes, I mean, I think the other three should be
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 7
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 44
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 included. Jim, I think you said dibutyl, you mean
2 dioctyl.
3 DR. MARKS: Okay. Thank you, Don.
4 DR. BELSITO: The biggest discussion we
5 had revolving around this was oxalic acid, which
6 did not -- I mean, all of the safety data on that
7 specific acid, particularly in terms of causing
8 renal calculi, was not in this document. And we
9 actually thought since we didn't see it listed as
10 having any cosmetic uses, that unless there were
11 cosmetic uses for oxalic acid or its esters that
12 it be dropped from this family because of those
13 issues with renal toxicity.
14 DR. BERGFELD: So, your recommendation
15 under the conditions that we were tabling this is
16 to reconsider the inclusion of oxalic acid?
17 DR. BELSITO: Well, to first of all
18 confirm whether, in fact, it's used -- currently
19 being used, and, if not, then our recommendation
20 would be to remove it from this family because of
21 those issues that were being countered and because
22 of the huge amount of data that we'd have to
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 45
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 review and grapple with.
2 DR. LIEBLER: If I could just elaborate
3 on that.
4 DR. BERGFELD: Don?
5 DR. LIEBLER: Yeah, I think the idea of
6 including the smaller diacids and their esters and
7 salts was mainly to expand the chemical space to
8 things that are possibly relevant. But in getting
9 down to oxalic acid, you run into some unique
10 toxicology that's very well documented, very
11 prominent, and quite problematic, and we don't
12 even know if this is used as a cosmetic
13 ingredient. So, rather than get tangled up in all
14 of that, it's worth considering deleting the
15 oxalic acid from this report.
16 DR. BERGFELD: John Bailey?
17 MR. BAILEY: Yeah, I think we didn't
18 have time in getting these additional ingredients
19 to survey -- do our usual survey of use and use
20 levels, so we can't answer definitively whether
21 that's the situation or not, so I think we need
22 some more information. I would point out that in
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 46
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 Europe, oxalic acid is on annex 3 for hair dyes,
2 so presumably, you know, that may be a use. And
3 we haven't done the research necessary to get more
4 information about how it got there and use levels
5 and so forth. So, I would say, certainly oxalic
6 acid is in the textbooks. We all know about it,
7 but there may be some additional information that
8 would be relevant that we simply, you know, didn't
9 have time to get.
10 DR. BERGFELD: So, that's a promise to
11 get?
12 MR. BAILEY: Certainly, yeah. We'll do
13 our usual survey of --
14 DR. BERGFELD: Okay. Any further
15 discussion? Don?
16 DR. BELSITO: Yeah, I guess, just to
17 follow up on Dan's point, there is such a
18 voluminous amount of literature on oxalic acid
19 that even if it's used in cosmetics, do we want to
20 get bogged down dealing with why that is going to
21 be safe in a cosmetic product and reviewing all of
22 that literature on oxalic acid? Or would it be
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 47
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 better simply to keep all the ingredients, which
2 is a large number of ingredients we have right
3 now, get rid of oxalic acid and, in fact, if it's
4 used, we can always look at oxalic acid
5 specifically rather than as a member of this
6 group? Because I just think we're going to get
7 hugely bogged down even if it's used in trying to
8 explain why it'd say brief discontinuous use on
9 the hair, no absorption, yadda, yadda, yadda. But
10 we're going to have to look at all the data
11 anyway.
12 MR. BAILEY: Yeah, I concur.
13 DR. BERGFELD: So, we might entertain a
14 motion at this time to delete oxalic acid from the
15 list.
16 DR. BELSITO: I would like to make that
17 motion.
18 DR. BERGFELD: Is there a second?
19 Second. Is there a discussion of that
20 recommendation?
21 Curt?
22 DR. KLAASSEN: No problem.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 8
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 48
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 DR. BERGFELD: Paul? Dan? Ron?
2 That's okay.
3 DR. HILL: I have no problem with that.
4 DR. BERGFELD: Okay, we'll call for the
5 vote to delete oxalic acid from the list of
6 ingredients. All those in favor? Unanimous, with
7 the intent of taking it up as a separate
8 ingredient at some time in the future when it's
9 been declared how it's used and how frequent it's
10 used.
11 MR. BAILEY: To that end, we'll include
12 that in our survey just so we'll have that
13 information.
14 DR. BERGFELD: Thank you. Ron?
15 DR. HILL: Yeah, in our discussions
16 yesterday our starting point was really a
17 suggestion that Ron Shank made to separate into
18 two documents, and then we talked about two sort
19 of separate sections of the main document because
20 in the consideration of the diacids, they're
21 pretty much -- their uses are as pH adjusters and
22 then similar like that. There are a lot of esters
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 49
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 here. You'd have to pull out that list, Ron, that
2 you had where we would seem to be depending on
3 read-across data for things like genotoxicity,
4 tumor-promoting potential, and even sensitization.
5 Am I mistaken there? We have direct data on the
6 sebacates, some of the adipates, and a number of
7 the others we don't. Isn't that correct?
8 DR. SHANK: That's correct.
9 DR. HILL: So, we're looking at a pretty
10 high number of read-across, which was another
11 reason, I think, basis, for why we had suggested
12 the tabling idea, so that we had the time to
13 really better assess those gaps.
14 DR. BERGFELD: We need to record your
15 response, Ron.
16 DR. SHANK: I agree with Dr. Hill that
17 we have some information on the esters, but the
18 esters are used quite differently from the acids
19 and salts. And that's why I had suggested that we
20 split them, either two reports or within the same
21 report, make it very clear that the acids and
22 their salts are -- can be handled one way and the
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 50
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 esters will have to be handled a different way.
2 DR. ANDERSON: Yeah, I really don't
3 think that that's a problem in terms of overall
4 strategy. It provides the opportunity to be a lot
5 clearer to the reader, that we understand the
6 fundamental difference between how these chemicals
7 are used in cosmetics. So I think we'll simply do
8 that.
9 Now, I am concerned about the suggestion
10 that read-across may be problematic. I would ask
11 the panel to reserve that, to focus on the data,
12 where the data gaps are, and what your comfort
13 level is going to be with the ability to use data
14 on one chain length ester of dicarboxylic acid to
15 inform your decision about another chain length,
16 all other things being equal. So, having all data
17 on all ingredients is not the norm. So, I think
18 there needs to be a comfort level with some degree
19 of read-across as you evaluate these data. Only
20 you folks on the panel can reach that level of
21 comfort, but I would ask you not to veto it a
22 priori.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 51
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 DR. HILL: Well, I'm relatively new,
2 but, you know, I mean, I still have the same
3 issues. There's some of the alcohols that we just
4 talked about in the pelargonate section that show
5 up again here. And if there's no reason to
6 believe that there's any significant generation of
7 those alcohols in the skin, if there's no reason
8 to believe that those alcohols would lead to
9 sensitization in the skin, then there's probably
10 -- and there's no reason to believe that either
11 the alcohols or, in fact, these esters that we
12 have no data on could promote tumor development in
13 skin, then we don't have a problem. But I'd like
14 to know, when I make a final vote, that I'm
15 comfortable whether that is valid scientifically,
16 and that's really the only concern I have is that
17 it's scientifically valid to make that conclusion.
18 DR. ANDERSON: Point well taken.
19 DR. BERGFELD: Thank you. So we're
20 going to be tabling the sebacates and we've had
21 the discussion and we're going to reorganize the
22 document, and we're going to get some more
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 9
CIR Meeting day 2 Page: 52
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 information on some of the ingredients. Is that
2 correct?
3 DR. ANDERSON: Mm-hmm.
4 DR. BERGFELD: All right.
5 DR. ANDERSON: And we're deleting oxalic
6 acid --
7 DR. BERGFELD: And we're deleting oxalic
8 acid, thank you.
9 DR. ANDERSON: Deleting oxalic acid.
10 Nobody has specifically said it, but let me say
11 it, we're also going to delete the oxalic acid
12 esters.
13 DR. BERGFELD: Correct. All right.
14 It's time to move on to the next ingredient, the
15 PEGs. Dr. Belsito.
16 DR. BELSITO: Yes. At our September
17 meeting, we reviewed results from industry
18 essentially done on tape- stripped skin as a
19 method of looking at PEG toxicity on damaged skin
20 because previously we had a conclusion that
21 restricted the use of PEGs on damaged skin. We
22 had a chance to look at what would be absorbed.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 10
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 143
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 Sebacate? Sebacate?
2 SPEAKER: You asked that last time.
3 DR. BELSITO: Sebacates. Sebaceous.
4 Okay, so we're going to go to the --
5 SPEAKER: Sebacates.
6 DR. BELSITO: Dicarboxylic Acid Salts
7 and Ester Report. That, I know how to pronounce.
8 Okay. And I guess as part of the
9 add-ins now, we've been provided with a final
10 report that we did on dioctyl and diisopropyl
11 adipate. And we're back in December. We tabled
12 this to look at a whole bunch of related
13 dicarboxylic acids that we agreed to incorporate
14 into this report. And we've gone out and got
15 information on azelaic acid as used in topical
16 drugs. And we've got some new unpublished data
17 that we saw briefly at the September meeting but
18 didn't really have time to digest. And so now
19 we've got this tentative safety assessment and all
20 of the information in it is in here, short of a
21 discussion and a conclusion, so.
22 Then we've heard a little bit from Bob
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 144
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 this morning on dermal penetration. We don't have
2 a lot of genotox and carcinogenicity here. But we
3 do for the azelaic acid, which is used as a
4 topical, have some information. So if there is a
5 concern about that, I guess we still have Bob here
6 and he can tell us what he would think about the
7 absorption of these.
8 So with that as an intro, the question
9 is do we have enough here for this group of
10 dicarboxylic acids, which now will contain azelaic
11 acid, malonic, succinic, glutaric, adipic, and
12 sebacic acid and their salts and esters that are
13 listed in the Cosmetic Dictionary to go with a
14 safe as used conclusion?
15 SPEAKER: We have, to date, not received
16 use data.
17 MS. ROBINSON: It's forthcoming. Carol
18 (inaudible) by the next --
19 SPEAKER: Mic, please.
20 MS. ROBINSON: The use information is
21 forthcoming. Carol has said that it may be here
22 by the next meeting.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 145
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 DR. BELSITO: But how can we --
2 SPEAKER: By the next meeting? April?
3 DR. ANDERSON: We don't have it.
4 DR. LIEBLER: Can I get a clarification
5 of that? Were these the data that were from the
6 American Chemistry Council?
7 MR. ANSELL: That data has been
8 included. This is the use concentration on all
9 the add-ons, which came to us in too short a time
10 to turnaround between these.
11 DR. LIEBLER: Okay, so we did -- last
12 time we did talk about the American Chemistry
13 Council data that we thought would be useful. And
14 there was a question of whether or not we joined
15 -- or CIR joined in or somehow got access to that.
16 So I see some of the data in this report. And
17 just, I'm curious, how do we get that?
18 MS. ROBINSON: Well, to date, we haven't
19 received any additional data from the last
20 meeting, from the reports. So what you see in the
21 report is essentially the same that we saw at the
22 last meeting.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 146
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 DR. BELSITO: Okay. And one comment I
2 have is are the impurities sufficient? We have
3 impurities only for dimethyl malonate and
4 diethylmalonate and diethylhexyl adipate. We
5 don't have impurities for the other compounds
6 we're reviewing.
7 So I just, you know, sort of throw that
8 out as an aside, to get the sense of chemists
9 looking at the way these are manufactured as to
10 whether they would be concerned about that.
11 DR. LIEBLER: I'd like to see data that
12 describes the impurities, at least the types of
13 compounds that would be present as impurities and
14 their approximate ranges of concentrations.
15 DR. BELSITO: And then in terms of
16 concentrations of use, I mean, we do have some
17 information here if we go to Table 4, particularly
18 for the sebacic acid groups we have. We have some
19 for the succinate. We have some for adipic acid
20 and its groups, and then we have azelaic acid. So
21 we have some concentrations of use. And we have
22 that standard, you know, asterisk boilerplate that
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 11
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 147
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 if where we're not giving a concentration of use,
2 we assume it's being used in the same
3 concentration as the other groups.
4 So I'm not sure -- I mean, it would be
5 nice to get updated information, and there are
6 lots and lots of blanks here, I agree. But I
7 think the issue that bothered me the most was the
8 lack of impurities in all these groups that we're
9 adding in.
10 And then, of course, we're relying on
11 azelaic acid and the data from the Finacea and the
12 Azelex cream to support a lot of our systemic or
13 lack thereof of systemic toxicity. So again, I
14 just throw out is there any concern here about
15 absorption of the other molecules? Because for --
16 and again, it's back to Dan whether you can. You
17 know, is the systemic toxicity going to be
18 generalizable across all these dicarboxylic acids
19 or are there any that you would be concerned
20 about?
21 DR. LIEBLER: Aside from parameters that
22 would affect absorption and distribution, I'm not
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 148
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 aware of any sort of pharmacodynamic reasons why
2 different chain length dicarboxylates would have
3 different toxicological effects.
4 DR. BELSITO: Curt?
5 DR. KLAASSEN: I agree.
6 DR. SNYDER: And the overall toxicity is
7 relatively low. Pretty high OB50s.
8 SPEAKER: Okay.
9 DR. BRONAUGH: I guess there was an
10 absorption study in guinea pig skin of the diethyl
11 -- what is it? -- the diethylhexyl sebacate, which
12 the molecular weight looks to be under 500. You
13 know, sometimes, if you have a large family of
14 ingredients, it might be useful if we could know
15 what the molecular weight is, what the logP is, so
16 you could look through and have a better sense.
17 But, you know, this data is in a
18 hairless guinea pig -- or the guinea pig, anyway,
19 that was given to us, where they said it was
20 readily absorbed. But I would imagine some of
21 these molecules are absorbed. But, you know, it's
22 really kind of hard to say without, you know, how
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 149
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 to compare them without knowing a little bit more
2 about their chemistry.
3 DR. KLAASSEN: One would think that
4 these would be extremely water soluble and not be
5 absorbed so well, right?
6 SPEAKER: (inaudible) the mic.
7 DR. KLAASSEN: Yeah.
8 SPEAKER: Sometimes I -- if it --
9 DR. KLAASSEN: You know, in regard to
10 these dicarboxylic acids, I guess it'd be my
11 impression that they'd be so water soluble that
12 they probably wouldn't be absorbed. I think it
13 would be nice to see some partition coefficients,
14 etcetera.
15 DR. BRONAUGH: It would take a little
16 extra time, but maybe it'd be worthwhile if -- I
17 mean, this data could be calculated in a family
18 like this and we'd have a better idea.
19 DR. KLAASSEN: And in your talk this
20 morning didn't you say that there was some EPA or
21 FDA website that had a lot of that data on there.
22 DR. BRONAUGH: It has the software where
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 150
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 you can calculate logP and water solubility just
2 knowing the SMILES code of any ingredient. And
3 again, the SMILES codes are available on the NIH
4 site, for many compounds.
5 So it might be useful to have that
6 sometimes.
7 DR. KLAASSEN: Yeah, I agree 100
8 percent.
9 DR. BELSITO: But if the toxicity is the
10 same, at least systemic toxicity is, that was the
11 reason I asked the question. And we have use that
12 looks like it's not going to above 10 percent in
13 cosmetics. And then we have Azelex cream, which
14 has been looked at by FDA, that's 20 percent for
15 treatment of acne. Then I think I'm okay as long
16 as I don't see cosmetic products coming out above
17 10 percent or certainly over the 20 percent in
18 terms of, you know, okay, you know, is there
19 absorption, you know, and what are slight
20 differences in absorption.
21 But I agree in principle with what Bob
22 is saying. As we create these superfamilies, it
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 12
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 151
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 would be nice if CIR would go to that website and
2 provide us with a list of molecular weights and
3 logPs. You know, particularly when it comes to
4 picking, you know, if there is an issue about
5 absorption, what ingredient do we want as the
6 model ingredient to assure the safety for the
7 entire family. Well, it would be the one that we
8 would predict from these various parameters would
9 be most likely to be absorbed. So I think it
10 would be helpful.
11 MR. ANSELL: To the discussion on
12 systemic safety, we would like to point out that
13 CIR has already conducted and found safe as used
14 three of the adipates, including diethylhexyl,
15 dibutyl, and diisopropyl. And that the
16 diethylhexyl has already gone through a complete
17 NTP screen through carcinogenicity.
18 DR. ANDERSON: I think the, excuse me,
19 Table 2 already includes many of the data you're
20 talking about. Admittedly they are buried in
21 amongst all of the other chemical and physical
22 properties. But the American Chemistry Council
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 152
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 report, in fact, did use the EPA program to
2 calculate logPs, and these are included. So for
3 dimethyl sebacate, it's 3.4 for a logP; for
4 diethylhexyl sebacate, it's 3.74 there. Just
5 outside, if you will, of the -1 to 3 range that
6 would suggest penetration, but not far enough
7 outside so that I'd be comfortable for giving them
8 a free ride. I think you'd have to presume there
9 is some absorption of these things. Then the
10 question becomes what's the toxicity, which is
11 rather low. And I wouldn't kiss them off on the
12 basis of dermal penetration.
13 SPEAKER: Yeah.
14 DR. ANDERSON: But I take your point
15 that a table that presents just molecular weight
16 and logP, if those data are available, paints an
17 interesting picture that you'd like to see.
18 DR. BRONAUGH: Yeah, I forgot about that
19 data. I don't have a copy. Linda has our copy of
20 the book. I forgot that that was done for this
21 series of compounds. And I think it was very
22 useful. There were some gaps in there that maybe
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 153
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 could have been filled in, but I think that's
2 useful.
3 SPEAKER: That's good to know.
4 DR. LIEBLER: You could represent the
5 calculated logP values in a plot, like the plot
6 for the phenyls that Bob showed during his talk,
7 in which you'd number, instead of just using round
8 dots as the points, you actually use numbers as
9 the points. And the numbers could refer back to
10 the compounds in a table. And what that would
11 allow us to do is see much better which compounds
12 are within the range or close to the range that's
13 typically associated with the potential for
14 absorption.
15 DR. ANDERSON: That raises an
16 interesting idea of what would that plot look like
17 since we have calculated logP values on one axis
18 as a function of molecular weight on another.
19 DR. KLAASSEN: Well, those are two of
20 the more important characteristics of chemicals
21 that are important to us. And, you know, a lot of
22 these that we have, you know, like boiling point,
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 154
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 vapor pressure, density even, we have all of these
2 other things. It's kind of like the important
3 data gets lost in the minutiae.
4 SPEAKER: Yep, the --
5 DR. LIEBLER: With the Henry's Law
6 constant, you're saying.
7 DR. ANDERSON: I take your point. Just,
8 we need a good chemist on staff.
9 DR. BELSITO: Now, were the data from --
10 all of the data from this dioctyl and diisopropyl
11 adipate report incorporated into this report?
12 Because it seems like they have not been.
13 And did I understand, Jay, from your
14 comment, that there is another adipate that we've
15 also previously reviewed out there?
16 MR. ANSELL: Yeah, we have three
17 adipates that were CIR reviewed, which have not
18 been included. These were diethylhexyl, dibutyl,
19 and diisopropyl adipate.
20 DR. BELSITO: Okay. So then there's the
21 diethylhexyl has also not been incorporated into
22 this at this point?
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 13
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 155
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 MS. ROBINSON: If it was from the
2 original report, it has not been incorporated.
3 But an updated search was performed, so anything
4 outside of that is in the report.
5 DR. BELSITO: Okay. So we have one
6 other report, other than this one, that needs to
7 be incorporated into this document, as well?
8 SPEAKER: (inaudible)
9 DR. BELSITO: Okay.
10 MR. ANSELL: We also -- the NTP study,
11 we don't believe has been incorporated on a whole
12 series of materials. I'm also unclear as to
13 whether the -- we did obtain from ACC robust
14 summaries that we were requested to -- and the
15 cover letter suggests they were included, but
16 Valerie's suggesting they're not. So I think
17 there's some data that needs to be included.
18 MS. ROBINSON: The robust summaries from
19 ACC were incorporated, but we haven't received any
20 additional information that we asked for prior.
21 MR. ANSELL: The data which was
22 requested of us in September, though, I think was
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 156
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 Dan's question. And we did find robust summaries,
2 and I do believe they have been incorporated.
3 DR. LIEBLER: I couldn't tell what was
4 different. I guess I didn't have the previous
5 book, so. I saw some references to the American
6 Chemistry Council HPV summaries. Is that what
7 you're referring to, Jay?
8 MR. ANSELL: Yeah.
9 MS. ROBINSON: Yes, those are new.
10 DR. LIEBLER: Those are new.
11 MS. ROBINSON: Yes.
12 DR. LIEBLER: Since September.
13 DR. ANDERSON: That's correct. Those
14 were not in the document.
15 DR. LIEBLER: Okay.
16 DR. ANDERSON: And the only issue from
17 the panel's perspective is that now that you
18 understand dicarboxylic acids were in the American
19 Chemistry Council report, there is a couple of
20 points of overlap with this safety assessment, and
21 is that enough?
22 DR. BELSITO: Okay. Where do we get the
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 157
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 information as to what was in the American
2 Chemical report? How do we divine that from this
3 document?
4 DR. ANDERSON: Well, if you go to page
5 34, for example, for the question, really, of the
6 genotoxicity data, then there's specific mention,
7 you know: Mammalian cell gene mutation assay.
8 Two ingredients in this assessment were included
9 in the ACC report and were negative in the mouse
10 lymphoma assay.
11 DR. BELSITO: Okay, so you're talking
12 about the mutagenicity studies, in particular.
13 DR. ANDERSON: Yes.
14 DR. BELSITO: Okay.
15 DR. ANDERSON: Yeah, that was the --
16 DR. BELSITO: Wasn't clear where you
17 were.
18 DR. ANDERSON: Yeah, I'm sorry. That
19 was the major gap. Without those data, the
20 genotoxicity section was really quite bleak.
21 DR. BELSITO: Okay. So where are we
22 with this? Are we going insufficient for
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 158
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 impurities? Are we going insufficient for more
2 concentration of use? Are we going safe as used
3 when we add in the NTP summaries and the
4 information from the dioctyl, diisopropyl,
5 diethylhexyl adipate documents that were
6 previously published?
7 Paul, where are you?
8 DR. SNYDER: Sounding an awful lot like
9 insufficient. I mean, Dan's comment to the
10 impurities issue, he's not comfortable with the
11 absence of additional impurities data.
12 DR. LIEBLER: So I'd be happy with
13 representative data for some of these compounds
14 for impurities. I mean, we have a wide range of
15 things from small dicarboxylates to big,
16 long-chain esters, which are going to result from
17 different processes and are going to have
18 different impurities. We may not have impurity
19 data for every compound in the table, but I'd like
20 to see representative impurity data from compounds
21 that represent the processes that go into these
22 products.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 14
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 159
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 And I was struck, in concentrations and
2 frequency of use, that it seemed like they were
3 inversely related. The compounds with recorded
4 significant frequencies of use had almost no
5 concentration data and the compounds with bigger
6 numbers for frequency of use tended to have no
7 concentration data.
8 Talking about Table 4.
9 DR. ANDERSON: Yeah, and that's very
10 likely an artifact of the late addition of many of
11 the compounds.
12 DR. LIEBLER: Do you think the
13 information's available and we just haven't gotten
14 it into a table yet?
15 DR. ANDERSON: I think that's the case.
16 DR. BELSITO: That's what we're told,
17 that Carol --
18 DR. LIEBLER: I see, okay.
19 DR. BELSITO: So then what we're looking
20 at is Dan would like some representative impurity
21 data. Would you like to mention any specific ones
22 you'd like or just leave it open-ended back to the
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 160
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 council and industry for some representative
2 impurity data?
3 DR. LIEBLER: I'd like to see impurity
4 data on the dicarboxylates.
5 DR. BELSITO: But which ones? Any
6 specific one that you're concerned about, or?
7 DR. LIEBLER: How about sebacate.
8 DR. BELSITO: Okay.
9 DR. LIEBLER: As representative. And
10 then how about succinate as -- or malonate as
11 representative? So you get a longer one and a
12 shorter one.
13 DR. BELSITO: Okay.
14 DR. LIEBLER: And then how about the
15 impurity data on short esters of both of those and
16 long esters of both of those? I think that
17 represents the chemical space reasonably well.
18 DR. BELSITO: Okay. So then what we're
19 suggesting is that we are going insufficient for
20 impurities. And we would like to see something on
21 the sebacates or sebacic acid, and either malonic
22 or succinic acid, and then whatever two you
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 161
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 choose, some impurity data on short- and a
2 long-chain ester of each of those acids. And we
3 would appreciate getting updated concentration of
4 use, particularly for those ingredients that have
5 considerable use. And assuming that that data
6 looks clear, I am guessing that we would be going
7 safe as used for these dicarboxylic acids.
8 DR. BERGFELD: So are you going out
9 insufficient or are you tabling it?
10 DR. BELSITO: No, insufficient. I mean,
11 it's only -- it's at a pink stage.
12 MR. ANSELL: But there's so much data
13 which was not included in the report, and so many
14 added after, it would be possible for us to have
15 provided the data. We would prefer it be tabled
16 to include CIR's reports, to include the NTP
17 study, to include the actual concentrations of
18 use.
19 DR. BELSITO: But I guess, Jay, I don't
20 see how tabling it versus us telling you what we
21 find is insufficient in the current report really
22 changes things since it's at a pink stage. I
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 162
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 mean, it's not like it's going out for a final.
2 And if we were going out for a final, it was going
3 to be, you know, we're saying it's insufficient,
4 and you're going to get the data for us before the
5 next meeting. But, I mean, if anything, I mean,
6 PC has been --
7 DR. BERGFELD: Are you asking for an
8 announcement?
9 DR. BELSITO: -- after us to expedite
10 the process. Well, this expedites the process.
11 It moves it up to the next stage and it tells you
12 where we're at.
13 DR. BERGFELD: Are you going out for
14 insufficient data announcement or --
15 DR. BELSITO: Yeah.
16 DR. BERGFELD: -- insufficient final
17 announcement?
18 DR. BELSITO: No, this is not even a
19 final. This is pink, Wilma.
20 DR. BERGFELD: No, no, I know, but I'm
21 --
22 DR. BELSITO: We haven't even gotten --
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 15
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 163
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 DR. BERGFELD: I know, but we had jumped
2 over the announcement part in our new progression.
3 But you're going to input in this one
4 announcement, insufficient data announcement.
5 DR. BELSITO: Right.
6 DR. BERGFELD: It's different than a
7 final.
8 DR. BELSITO: It's not a final, it's
9 just a --
10 DR. BERGFELD: No, no, I know that. But
11 we had done away with announcements. We've done a
12 few of them, but we've done away with that process
13 a little bit. Haven't we? Alan? We were trying
14 to expediate the flow.
15 DR. ANDERSON: Yeah. I think in terms
16 of process, at the last meeting the panel agreed
17 to move forward to prepare a draft report which in
18 our judgment, given your comments, would be ready
19 to be issued as a tentative report. There were a
20 couple of oopses in that process in that a couple
21 of background reports prepared by the panel didn't
22 get captured. The other oops is that the panel
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 164
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 flagged these very long list of additions too late
2 for the council to in any way be expected to
3 respond with use concentration data. So those are
4 -- there's some serious gaps in those data.
5 But it is at a stage when you would be
6 expected to do one of two things: Issue an
7 insufficient data announcement or issue a
8 tentative report. And you flag that there are
9 clearly data that you want. In our expedited
10 process of keep it moving, this is ready for an
11 insufficient data announcement. That's,
12 processwise, that's where it is.
13 There is the issue of the couple of
14 oopses. And I wouldn't be upset if you used that
15 as a basis for saying, look, we got to fix these
16 gaps. We've got the reports from previous safety
17 assessments that weren't captured. You need to do
18 that. And arguably that would allow enough time
19 for the use data to come in. And I don't see any
20 difficulty in tabling it. I would write in the
21 post-meeting announcement that part of tabling it
22 is the expectation for the impurities data that
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 165
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 Dan has outlined.
2 The risk of that is that we get to April
3 and those data don't show up.
4 DR. BELSITO: Exactly.
5 DR. ANDERSON: And that's --
6 DR. BERGFELD: However, the document is
7 cleaned up and all of the --
8 DR. ANDERSON: Yeah, but you just
9 delayed it --
10 DR. BELSITO: But cleaning up the
11 document is not -- I mean, if all of the
12 information we needed was in the oops documents
13 that didn't get in and an update in the
14 concentration of use, then I would be very happy
15 tabling it. But I'm just concerned that if we
16 want the impurities data and, you know, Dan is the
17 man I go to to tell me if we need that, and we
18 just table it, even if Alan says, oh, by the way,
19 you know, I don't think, based upon past
20 performance of industry, we're going to get it.
21 And then we're going to be sitting at the April
22 meeting where we were at the December meeting.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 166
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 So, I mean, it's -- we go insufficient, we list
2 what we need, clean up the document, update
3 concentration of use, give us some impurities,
4 then I think it's very clear what we're looking at
5 for safety. And that's what I would -- I mean,
6 that's my argument. In the spirit of trying to
7 expedite getting these documents done, I think the
8 best way to expedite it is to be very upfront as
9 to where we are.
10 SPEAKER: Well said.
11 DR. KLAASSEN: There's one additional
12 comment I'd like to make. And that is one major
13 group of chemicals in this larger class is oxalic
14 acid and its various compounds. And the toxicity
15 of oxalic acid is well known, if it gets absorbed,
16 in that it's quite -- produces kidney injury.
17 And, in fact, that's the toxicity from ethylene
18 glycol, is that it's metabolized oxalic acid and
19 it causes severe kidney injury. And while I don't
20 think we're probably getting enough absorbed here
21 to be a problem, there's really not much data in
22 this entire document on oxalic acid. And I just
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 16
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 167
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 want to make sure people are aware of that.
2 DR. BELSITO: There's a lot of
3 literature on it.
4 DR. KLAASSEN: There's a lot of
5 literature, but it's not in here.
6 DR. BELSITO: Yeah, I know.
7 DR. KLAASSEN: And I think somehow we
8 need to at least address oxalic acid in a
9 discussion or something, if there is good reasons
10 why we haven't kind of paid special attention to
11 it. And, in fact, it's -- yes, there's a lot of
12 information out there. In fact, it's -- also, a
13 lot of plants contain oxalic acid and -- so,
14 anyhow, it needs to be somehow addressed.
15 DR. LIEBLER: I didn't see oxalic acid
16 listed in Table 4, or any of its derivatives
17 listed in Table 4. Is it used in cosmetic
18 products? Oxalic acid or oxalate esters?
19 MR. HAVERY: We don't have any reported
20 uses for oxalic acid.
21 DR. LIEBLER: So I think that -- my
22 recollection is that last time we met, in
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 168
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 September, this category was expanded at Ron
2 Shank's suggestion based on incorporating the
3 greater range of chemistries. But I think the
4 rationale was going across the chemical space as
5 opposed to the cosmetic ingredient space, and we
6 might have picked up some unnecessary compounds in
7 doing so; oxalic acid and its esters being
8 representative of that.
9 DR. BELSITO: But they're in the
10 dictionary. And we thought we could cover them in
11 this report. One of the things that we get
12 criticized for by groups such as the Environmental
13 Working Group is that there are X-number of
14 thousands of chemicals in the dictionary and we
15 have looked at only a certain small percentage of
16 them. And so that was the whole purpose for
17 grouping these. And so if oxalic acid is in the
18 dictionary and the functions are similar to the
19 other dicarboxylic acids, and we feel that the
20 safety can adequately be reviewed, you know, we do
21 it. And then there's that footnote at the end
22 saying, well, you know, oxalic acid and its esters
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 169
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 aren't being used, but if they were to be used,
2 we're assuming that they would have the same
3 function and the same concentration as everything
4 else in this report.
5 SPEAKER: (inaudible) review.
6 DR. LIEBLER: They may just -- and
7 oxalic acid may be somewhat unrepresentative of
8 this class of compounds. I mean, in the case of
9 oxalic acid in the kidney, it forms these very
10 insoluble crystals with calcium, calcium oxalate,
11 very insoluble. So it's kind of the --
12 mechanistically, it's an outlier.
13 DR. KLAASSEN: And it is at the end of
14 the chain that we're talking about. I mean, it is
15 the smallest one.
16 DR. BELSITO: Well, if mechanistically
17 it's an outlier, and if that's the issue, and then
18 if you're concerned about absorption, then we
19 could easily delete it by saying that it is an
20 outlier. You know, that we cannot group this
21 specific dicarboxylic acid with the others. On
22 the other hand, if you're not concerned about the
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 170
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 level of absorption from a cosmetic product, I
2 mean, if it's a true no-brainer, then we should
3 add it. If it's not a true no- brainer, then we
4 shouldn't. And I guess that's a point that, I
5 mean, if you want to raise tomorrow, we can
6 certainly do that.
7 DR. LIEBLER: Yeah, I just don't know
8 what the data are on absorption of oxalic acid in
9 a use that would be consistent with a cosmetic
10 product, oxalic acid or oxalic acid derived from
11 oxalate esters.
12 So if it's insignificant, yeah, then I'm
13 not worried. If it's likely to be more
14 significant, then I would worry.
15 DR. BELSITO: Well, 10 percent would the
16 highest concentration, at least from the limited
17 use data we have right now, in a cosmetic product.
18 Bob, what is your sense for absorption
19 of oxalic acid versus a shorter chain acid?
20 DR. BRONAUGH: I don't know. It's
21 really hard to say. Oh, excuse me. It's really
22 hard to say. I guess, and not being a chemist, I
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 17
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 171
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 don't automatically know solubility properties. I
2 mean, it's certainly an acid; it's going to be
3 water soluble. I don't know to the extent that it
4 would penetrate through the stratum corneum if it
5 has no lipid solubility. But it depends. I don't
6 know the pKa of oxalic acid. I'm not sure what
7 that is.
8 DR. BELSITO: Well, we have in, let's
9 see, the table, the solubility is 1 gram per 7 mls
10 of water. And --
11 SPEAKER: That's very soluble.
12 DR. BELSITO: -- that's it.
13 DR. KLAASSEN: But then you have the --
14 DR. BELSITO: We don't have a --
15 DR. KLAASSEN: That's the dibutyl
16 oxalate.
17 DR. BRONAUGH: Right. Now there you
18 would start expecting some penetration.
19 DR. KLAASSEN: Yeah.
20 DR. BRONAUGH: In lipophilicity.
21 DR. KLAASSEN: I guess the point is this
22 is not a no-brainer. I mean, there's enough doubt
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 172
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 here, or at least in my mind.
2 DR. SNYDER: I guess my question goes to
3 why didn't the scientific literature review then
4 identify some of this information regarding the
5 renal toxicity? So did you search under the term,
6 all of those terms?
7 MS. ROBINSON: Mm-hmm. Yes, I did.
8 Yes, I did the search on the terms. And a couple
9 of the studies Halyna and I took out because there
10 wasn't enough information in the published report.
11 I can actually bring those back in.
12 DR. BELSITO: Well, what I'm hearing is
13 that, at least from both Dan and Curt, is that
14 they have enough concern that, again, the add-ons
15 are supposed to be no- brainers, and we've now
16 spent at least 10 minutes discussing whether
17 oxalic acid actually fits into this report, and
18 we're not seeing any evident cosmetic use of it.
19 So the no- brainer, you know, swore it would say
20 that we should eliminate oxalic acid and its
21 esters from this report.
22 DR. KLAASSEN: I agree. And just to put
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 173
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 this in perspective, some people, like myself, and
2 maybe us around this table have a job because of
3 the toxicity of oxalic acid. So in the 1930s, to
4 get a drug on the market what you had to do was to
5 show that it was effective. But then in the
6 1930s, when the sulphonamides came out, they
7 dissolved the sulphonamides in ethylene glycol.
8 And then we had a number of people that died,
9 especially children, from kidney injury. And the
10 toxicity really was due to the ethylene glycol
11 being metabolized oxalic acid. And as a result of
12 that, the FDA, Congress changed the laws for FDA
13 to get a drug on the market. You not only had to
14 show that it was effective, but that it was not
15 toxic. So this whole business around oxalic acid
16 is kind of, like, no small story in the history of
17 toxicology, for whatever that's worth.
18 MR. ANSELL: And, you know, I certainly
19 agree with these comments. I just want to throw
20 out that I can't actually find the reference for
21 it, but apparently it's used as a pH adjuster to a
22 concentration of about 5 percent in hair products.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 174
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 So we'll follow up on that and see whether that
2 would have any bearing on that conclusion.
3 DR. BELSITO: So, to recap. We are
4 suggesting that the addition of oxalic acid to
5 this group is not a no-brainer and that we would
6 recommend that oxalic acid and the esters be
7 removed. Once that is done, if it's done, we find
8 this group to be insufficient for impurities, and
9 we would like impurities on a representative short
10 and long chain. The suggested ones were sebacate
11 and malonic or succinic acid. And then
12 subdividing those, we would like short- and long-
13 chain esters of a short- and long-chain acid,
14 impurities for those representative ones. And
15 then concentration of use. And the assumption,
16 also, is that when this document comes back to us,
17 that the NTP summary and that the information on
18 the dioctyl, diisopropyl, and diethylhexyl adipate
19 studies will be included in this report.
20 Is that where we're at?
21 SPEAKER: Mm-hmm.
22 DR. BERGFELD: Well, and use, because
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 18
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 175
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 they promised you use.
2 DR. BELSITO: I said that.
3 DR. BERGFELD: Did you say that?
4 DR. BELSITO: Yeah.
5 DR. BERGFELD: Okay.
6 DR. SNYDER: Unless we're provided data
7 on oxalic acid regarding dermal absorption
8 toxicity.
9 DR. BELSITO: Yeah, I suppose that could
10 be done. But again, the boilerplate that we've
11 had for the decision to go ahead with additions
12 has been that it be a no-brainer. And that we
13 wouldn't need that additional data; that the data
14 was already there. I don't know.
15 DR. ANDERSON: I think the option would
16 always exist for any interested party to provide
17 data.
18 DR. BELSITO: Yeah, if there was data
19 provided on lack of absorption, then I guess that
20 the no-brainer part of it is if it gets absorbed,
21 how much and what would it do to the kidney. If
22 we see information that, you know, it's used
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Cosmetic Ingredient Review Panel December 8, 2009 Page: 176
Anderson Court Reporting -- 703-519-7180 -- www.andersonreporting.net
1 at.001 percent in a hairspray and it's not going
2 to get absorbed, then, you know, we might change
3 our minds. So I guess that we're considering
4 deleting oxalic acid unless we get information on
5 absorption and concentration of use in products
6 that it would be used in. But if it's open-ended
7 and we assume that it's going to be used in all
8 the same type of products as these other
9 dicarboxylic acids in concentrations up to 10
10 percent, we don't have any information, we'll
11 probably just remove it from the report.
12 SPEAKER: Lunchtime.
13 DR. BELSITO: It is 12:10. Be back at
14 1:10.
15 (Recess)
16 DR. BELSITO: Okay, welcome back. So,
17 we're back here at the PEGS. And at the last
18 meeting, as you know, the issue here is to reopen
19 it to get rid of this damaged skin restriction in
20 the conclusion. At the last meeting we had a
21 wonderful presentation on transepidermal water
22 loss and various skin diseases, including atopic
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING 706 Duke Street, Suite 100
CIR Panel Book Page 19
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� ���� � ����������������������������������������������� �������������������������� ���������������������������������������� �� ���������� ���������������������!���������������"#��$%#&�'��()������ �������)�������������������*����������������������� ��� ��������������+������������������,��������������� ��-�������������-������������������������.������������� ���������� �/�� ���������������������������0������� ���������������� ��� �� --�����������������������������������������������1���������������2�3��������������������4��)���5��������������������-�������6 )������������ �� �� �������������������������������������()������ �����������-�����1��-�������������������������"�������)���� --��������������� ������3�������������������!����� ����������� �� ���������������� �������������������*������� �����7��������� �������� �����%��� �� ��������������,���������������� )������������������� ������������������.������������ �����7������������� ����%���# ���� ��������������0������������������������������� �������� ���������������������������������������1���������������� � ���//������)�������������� ��������������������������(�����//���������������������������������������������� �������+����� ���//��������� )��8��+����������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������1���������������������� 3����������� �������������< -��� ������� �������������������� --��� ����%������� ��� � �� �������� ��������������������� ��������� �� � ������ ������������������������������!����� �8�������������*���������������"#���B%2&'���������������������� ���������������,����������� ���������//� ��-������������� ������������������.������ ����������-����� �� ����'��(���� ��������������0��������������������� ����� ���� ����������������������������<��������� ���-� �����������B���C����� �������������1��������� �����������-� ���//�� � ������-� ��� ������������������������������-�������-� ��� �� ����� ����������������������������<�������� � ����������������%������-�������������������C����������������-����� ������//������������������!������������� ��-���//�� �������� ������������������������*������B���C�������������� ������������������������������,�������-���� ����� ������������������������.���������������"#���5%=%'���� �)������������������0���������������"#���B%2&'��A ��������������������������������������"#��B�55'��D�����-��� ��������������1���������������"#���B%2&'��()��������������������������������"#���5%=%'��������� ������������������������������� �-�����������%���������� �� ������������B����������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������C����//�����������������������������"#���B%2&'��<���� �������������������������������������"#���5%=%'��<���� ����������%������������������!�����)� ����������3��-� ��-� �� ������� ���������������*�����%�������� ���������������,���������������"#���B%2&'��� ������� ������ ���� �������������.��������� �)��������������0���������������$���#(6�2�(2'��% ����������� -�������������������������-��������� ������������� ��3� �������������1�������������������� � ��������������:�#�� ������������������������������� ������� �� ��������� ���� ����������������������� ���� ������������ ������� ��-��������������������������������"#��$%#&�'������������������� � ��������������!���������������������� ��� �������������������*���������������$���#(6�2�(2'���������� ����� ������ ��������������,���������������"#��$%#&�'��D���������������.���������������$���#(6�2�(2'��()����������������0���������������"#��$%#&�'��6����-���������-� ���������������������� � ��������������1���������������"#���B%2&'��D���������������������������������"#��6%�59D'��������� ���� �����������������������������������//������ ��� ������� �����������3��������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������/������������� �����- ���������������������������������������"#���B%2&'��<����� ��� � ���)������������������������ ��-���� ������� ����/��������������������������������!����� ����������" ������)������������������*���������������"#��6%�59D'��()����������)�������� ����������������,����� ������ ����)��� ������������//�������������.���������������"#���B%2&'��������� ���������������������������0�����6������������ ���������������������������������������������49%&9#'��2 ���������������������//�������������1����������������49%&9#'��+�����������������������������������������49%&9#'��<�������% ������������������������������������49%&9#'��%���������� ���� �������������������������������$���#(6�2�(2'���������� ��3� �������������!������������������ ���������������� �� �� ���������������������*���������������"#��6%�59D'��� �� ������ ���� � �������������,������� ���������)����������� ��������� ��������������������.������� �����%�������� ������ ����������������������������0������ ������������� ��-�����<����������-��� �������������������� -����������������� �//�������������1���������������"#��$%#&�'��+��������� ���������������������������>� ����8��"���3� �//�����������������������������$���#(6�2�(2'��"���� ��3� ������������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
CIR Panel Book Page 20
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� ���������������� �� �� �������������������������������������"#��$%#&�'��: --����� ��//��������������������������� ����-� ���� ��# ���������������!���������������"#��6%�59D'��+����� � ��-�����������������*�������� �-�� �������� 3��������)���� �����������������,���������-���8��6�����������)��������� �������������������.�����������8�������������0���������������"#���B%2&'��+���������� 3� ��� � ������������������������������������ �-����������+���������� �������������1�����//��--�� ������������ ������� �-� ������������������������������E����������������������E�� ������������������������������������������������E������ ��3� ����������������������������������E��� 3�/� �� /������/����/�����������������������!������7� ��������������������% � �����-����������������������*�����������������������6��������� �//�������������,����������������49%&9#'�����)�-��������� ������������������.�����?������� �@��������������0���������������"#���B%2&'��<��������� � ��-�����//�������������������� ����� �� 3� �������� ����� 3� ����������������1���������������$���9��92$%22'��%������� ���2<4����//���������������������������������� - �� �������������������������������"#���B%2&'��+����8����������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������!�����������������������������$���9��92$%22'��%�� ������ ����2<4�������������������� 3� ��������������������������������$���#(6�2�(2'��(3� ����������������!���������������$���9��92$%22'��4�� ��������B� � ����������������*�������� �����0�������� �������������������������,���������������"#���B%2&'��()����������������.���������������"#��6%�59D'��()������ ���������- ���������������0�������� �-�� ������� ���� �����������8�����������������������������$���9��92$%22'��D������<�������� � ��������������1�������� �-�� ������� �� ���������� ������������������������ ���������:�#���� ������������������2<4��������������������� ���� ���������� ��3� �������������������������������������"#���5%=%'���� � ������� ���8�������������!���������������"#��$%#&�'��+� �����������3�������������*���������� ���������������,���������������"#���5%=%'����-������������� ���������������������.�������� �����������������������0���������������$���9��92$%22'��+� ������� ��� ������������������������������ ������� �� �������� �-�� ��� ������ ��������������1������������������������������<�������������� ���������������������������������������)� ������������ ���� ��������������������������������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������*�����������������������������"#���B%2&'��+� ��������� � ������������������������������ � ������ ������� ��//�����������������������������"#��$%#&�'��+� �������)�����������������������!��������)����� � ��//��������� �� -��� ��� �������������*������� ������������������ ��������� ��)���������������,�����%�������-� �)��� ����������������������������.�������� ��� ������ ����� ��������������������0���������������"#���5%=%'��%���������������� ������������������������������ ������������ ���������������1���������������"#��B�55'��<������� ����� �8�����������������������������$���#(6�2�(2'�����-����� �������������������������������"#���5%=%'��>� ����������������������������������"#��$%#&�'��"���F ����:�� ��# ��//�< -��������������!�������� ��������� �� �)���������� ��� ��������������������*������������� ��-�)�������������������,���������������"#��6%�59D'��<���?������� �@��������-�������������.��������)���� ��������������� �� ����������������������������0��������� �� ������������� ������������ ���������������������������)������ �������������������� ����������������1������������� ����E���C��� ��������������- �������������������������������� �� ���������������������������������"#��$%#&�'��(��� ��������� ���� ��-������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������,������������������������������ ������ ��� ��8�����������������������������"#��6%�59D'��#��������������������������������������� ��������������� �-�� ������� ���� ����������������!�������� �-������������������� ������ -���������������������*���������������������8����-��������� �� ���� �������������,������������������� ������� �����������������������������.�������������� ������� ��������8����-�������-�������������0�����C�����������������-������ �7����� ������ � ������������������������ ������� ��:�#������� ��)� ����������������������1����������������������� ���� ���-�C�������� ����������������������)� ����������������������-����� �)������������������������������+���� �� ���������)8�����������������������������"#���5%=%'��: � ��������������� �������������!�������������������� ����� ���������B���C�����������������*����������������������� ��������������������������������,������-��� ��-��8�������������.���������������"#���B%2&'��<������� ��������������������������0�����G��������������� -������� �����������%���������������������������������� � �� �)�� �� ����-���6�����������������1������ ������������ �� � �������� �-�� ��������������������������������������49%&9#'��D���������������������������������"#���B%2&'��+������� ��)������� �����������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
CIR Panel Book Page 21
����������������������������������������������������������������������������.������������������������������� ������������ �-�)��������� �� ��������������������������6������ �� )���������� �-�� ������������������������������� ����������������� ���������� �������������!����������-���� ������ ��� ����-���%���� ����� �����������������*����� ���������������������������,���������������"#��6%�59D'��6�������)������������������.�������� ��� ���� � � ���$������������//�� ����������������������0������������� - �� ���������������������� ��������������������������� ������-���������������������1���������������"#��$%#&�'��%������� ���� ��������� �������������������� �����)��< -�����# ����� -��������������������������������� ���������� ����������������������8����������������������������� ���� �� �������������-� �)����������������!������ � ��-�)������ ��������� � ����������������������*������ ����+������ ��������� ����������������)�����������������,������� ��� ����������������� ����-��������-��������������.�������� ���������������0���������������"#��6%�59D'��6��������� � �������������������������� ��������� � ��-����� � �� ��� ����������������1�������� �������� ������ ���� ������������ ���������������������� ������������� ����������������//�����������������������������"#��$%#&�'��#��������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������0�����������������������������"#��6%�59D'��//������ ���������� ��������������������� ���� ������ ���� ��������� ��)� �������������������������������� ���� ����������� )�����6����������������������!��������)���� �����������������//�������������*���������������"#���B%2&'����C��� ���������������������������,��������� ���� ���������� �����������������������.���������������"#��B�55'��$����������������������0���������������"#��6%�59D'��+� �����-��� �-� �������������������������� ������������������������������1���������������"#���B%2&'��D�������������������������������������������������� ����<��������������B���C����������������������������� �-� �� ���� �����<��������������� -��������������������������-��� ���������� �� �����������������������!���������������"#��6%�59D'��2 ��������?������� �@�����������������*���������������"#���B%2&'��D��������������� �������������������,��������� ���� ������������)����//������)����������������.����������� �� ���������������0���������������"#��B�55'������ ����� ��� ����������������������� � � ��������������1���������������"#���B%2&'��()�����<���)�� �������������������������������$���+9�2<#%;6'�������� ��� ����������������������������������������� �������� -�� ����?������� �@8����������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������"#��B�55'��D ��� � ������������������������������������� ���� ������������������� ��� ��� ���������������������� ���������� ��������������������� ����������������������!��������� � ��������������� �� ��� � ������� �������������*�������������������������� ����� ��� ��������� ���������������,����������� ���������� ������ ������������������.���������������"#��$%#&�'��+� �� �-����� � ����������������������0��������� ����������� ��������� ��� � ����� ����������������������������������� ���� �������������������������������1�����<����������� �������� ��� � ������ �����������������������������%��������� ������ ����������� ��������������������������������� ���%������������ ������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������!������������������� ���� ���� -�� ����������������������*����� 3�� ��� ���� ����������������%���������������,���������������� ���� ������ �� �� ��� �������� �������������.������ ����)��������������0���������������"#��6%�59D'��<����)���� ��������-����������������������)�����������������1���������������"#��$%#&�'��D���������������������������������"#��6%�59D'��" �� ��)� ��� ����������������������������� ��� ���� � )8��%���:�� �//������)� �������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������1�������������������:�� �������� ������� �� ���������-������������������������ ����� �� ��� �� �������- ���//������������������������� ����������� �� ������ ����6��������������������������!������ ���� �� )����)������ ����������������*���������������"#��$%#&�'��<������� �G��� ���������������������,������ ���� ����� ���������)���� � ������������������������.���������� ���� �� ��//����� ���� �� �� ��-���������������0����� ����������� ���� ������� ���� ��-�������� ����������������������������� ���� ��-��8��%������������G��� ��������������1�������� ������� ���������������� ������ ���� ������������������������������� ��-������ � ������������ ������������������������������������ ��-������-��������� � �������������������)������� � �������������������!���������������"#��6%�59D'��������)������ �����������������*��������� �� ��������� ��� �����-� ����������������,���������������� --������� �����������������������������.��������� ����������3�������� ��)� ����������������������0������ ���������������� ���� �����-��������������������������-� ������������ �������� ��� ��- ���������������1������������� ��� --����������� ���� ��-�������� ������������������������������"#��$%#&�'��D���������//�����������������������������"#��B�55'����� � ��C����� �< -����������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
CIR Panel Book Page 22
���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �� ������������ ��G���������������������������������<����� ���� ���� ������ -� ����������������������� � ������3������ ����G���������������9����������������!������ ��������3����������� ������ ���� �-���������������*������� ���������-������� ��� ������� ��������������,������ � �����G��������������������������������������������.������ ��� �� ��� ����������%��� ���-�������������0��������)�������� �� �� ������������ � �����G��������������������������� �������� �����������������������������������������1������������������������%��� ������)���� � ���������������������������//����� ������� �� ��-������-���������������������������� � �������� ��������)/� /���)���6������ ������������������������� �� ��-���� ��� � �������������)��� ������������������!������ �� �� ������������������������*���������������"#��$%#&�'��������������-�������������������,������ ������ ����//����� ������ ��������������������������.������ ��������� �����-����)/ /���)��������������0���������������"#��B�55'��4�� �����-����)/ /���)��������������������������� ����� ����������������1���������������"#��$%#&�'��D ��������� �������������������������������������� �� �������� ������� ������������������� ��������6��������������)�����//���� �������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� ������-�//������ ������������������������������� ��������� �� ��-�����<���- ��-� ������������������������� �����������8�������������!���������������"#���B%2&'��+� ������ ��� ����-�//�������������*����������-���� ���� ��-��� ��� �//���� ���������������������,�������-���������"���B� ���� �� �����������������������.������� ���������������� -�� ����� �� �� ������������������0������ �� �� ���� ���� �� -� �3������� �������� ��������������������)������ ��������������-��� �� ����������������������1������ ��-��������������������������������"#���5%=%'��+� ����� )�����������������������������������������)���� ���������������D ��)� ������������������������������ ���� ��� ��� �� ���� ����-���� ����������������!������� � �-���<���� �� �� ����� ���� ������ ��� ��������������*�����������-� ������-���������������� � ����������������������,���������������"#��6%�59D'����� � ���3���������D ��������������.������ � �������� ����� ������������������ �������������0�������������� ������� ��)� ��������B/��C������������������������������<���� ������� ������� ����//�������������1��������/���/��������������������� � ����� -�������������������������� �� �������� ����� � ��������� ����������������������� -� �3�//������ ��)� ������������ ����� ������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� -� �3���������������)��� ��������������������� ����������������%������� ��� ��� � ��������������������������� ������ �� ���" ���� �����)8�������������!���������������"#���5%=%'��()�����+��� � ��������� �������������*������������ ���������������������,���������������"#��6%�59D'��#�����������������.���������������"#��$%#&�'��� ��� �- ����������� ��������������0����������" ����� ����� �8��# ���< -��# �8�����������������������������"#���B%2&'��+��� ������� �� ��� ����������������1����������� ���� �8��+���� ����������������������������������� �8�����������������������������"#��$%#&�'��%��� ���� ��� ������ ���������������������������������������������� ���� �� ����������������������!��������������� ��� -����������+������ �����������������*��������������������� ���� ���� ��� ��� �������������,������ ��-�����+������ ���� ������� ����� ���������������.������ ��-������ ��� ������������������������0���������������"#��6%�59D'��+������� ��� ��� ��������������������� ���� �� ��������������1���������������"#��$%#&�'��%����������� ���������������������������� � ��� ��������������������������� �������������������� ����8����������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������!�����������������������������"#���B%2&'��%���� ������� ����� �������������������������������8�����������������������������$���#(6�2�(2'��D���������������!���������������"#���B%2&'��<�����������������8�������������*���������������"#���5%=%'��<� �������� �������������������������,��������8�������������.���������������$���#(6�2�(2'��D���������������0���������������"#��$%#&�'��%��������� ��� ��������������������������������������������3� �������������������C��8�������������1�����:���� ��//��������� � ������ ��� ��������������������������-��� �� ���������������������>� ����8��+�������������������������������� �������� �� �� 8������������������������������ ��������3� �������8�������//�������������!���������������$���#(6�2�(2'��"���� ��3� ���������������������*������������������ -��������������������������,���������������"#��$%#&�'��%��������������� �� �� ��������������.������������� ��������� -�� �� �����������������0���������������"#���B%2&'��"���� ���3� 8�����������������������������"#��$%#&�'��"���� ���3� ��������������1���������������"#���B%2&'��+����������� ����� 8�����������������������������"#��$%#&�'��%�������������������� ������������������������������"#���B%2&'��"���� �������8����������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
CIR Panel Book Page 23
����������������������������������������������������������������������������*�����������������������������"#��$%#&�'��%��������<���� �������3������������������� ������%���������� �� �� ��������� ����8�����������������������������$���#(6�2�(2'��D�������� ������������������!���������������"#��$%#&�'��"�� �� �� ���+���������8�������������*�����"�� �� �� ���()�����<��������� ���%��������� �������������,����������������()����������������.���������������%�������� �8�������������0���������������"#��B�55'��%�� ������� �����������������������������������-���//� �������-���������� ����//�������������1������� ����������� ��� ��� �������� ��������-��� ��������������������� ��������%��������� ��������������//����������������������-����//�&������� ��������������8�����������������������������$���#(6�2�(2'��2 ��������������!���������������"#��B�55'��������6�� ���������������������������*������������������� ������������������,���������������$���#(6�2�(2'��<���6�� ���8�������������.���������������"#��B�55'��6�� �����6/9/�/5/�/</9/�/2��������������0���������������"#��6%�59D'��% � ���� �����-��)� ������������������������������������������1���������������"#��B�55'�������� ����� ������������������������� ������ ������������� ���������� ������ ������������������������ ������ ����6����������6������� ��-������������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������,������������������������� �-�� ����%���������� )�������� � ������������������������������//��� ����������������//�������������������������� ���� ��������� ������������ -������������������!������3��� �������%������-����������� ���� ������������������*���������������$���#(6�2�(2'��<���)�� ���������������,���������������"#��$%#&�'�����������������������������������.����� ��� ������� ��//�< -� ��# ��//��������� ����������������0������� ���������� ��8��6������������������� ��������������������� � ���������������� ����������� �)��������� ���������������1����������� ����+������ ���� ��������//���������������������������������� ������ ���������C��� ���-�)�����������������������8�����������������������������"#���B%2&'��+� ��������-� ����������������������!���������� �-� ���� 3�������������������������������������*�������� ���������� � ��� ���������������������������������,������ ����� ������ � �������� � ����� ��������������������.�������������������-� ��������������������������������������0��������8��6������ ����������������6����-������������������������ ����-�)������� �� ����� ����//���� ���������������1����������������������������� ������������������������������"#��B�55'��+� ����� � �������� ������������������������ ��� ������� ����� �������������� ��� ��������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������.������������������� �� �������������� � �����8����-����//�����������������������������"#���B%2&'��6�������)����� � ������������������������������������������������ ����������������!�����������������6�������������� �������������������*���������������"#��B�55'��%��������"���6�� �����������������������,����������)���� �������� �����G��� ������� )����������������.�������������������������<���������� ����������������������0������ �� �� ����� �� ���(������������������� ��������������������� ����� ����//��������������1���������������"#��6%�59D'��+������������� �� �8�����������������������������"#��B�55'��+� �� )�������� ��� � ������������������������ �������//�� ��� ������ ��������������������������������A������� -������������ ����<�����������)�������������!�����������������������*���������������"#��6%�59D'��+�������8�������������,���������������"#��B�55'��� ���-� )��������������������������.������ -� ������������� �� ����������%��� ���������������0������������� �����������8��*5�����*4���-� ��������������������������-������8�������������1���������������"#��6%�59D'��*5�����*4���-� ��������������������������-������8�����������������������������"#��B�55'��<������-� ��������-������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
����������������������������������������������������������������������������0�������������������6�������������G��� ����������(��������!��������������������������������� �� ����������%����������������������������� ���������������� �� ��� ��������-� ��������������!������������������ 3� �����������������������*���������������"#��6%�59D'��<����.B����� �����//�������������,���������������"#��B�55'��D������+� ������ �������������������.�����.B������ �� ��� ����������������������//�������������0������������� ��� �� ���������� �������������������������������� �����������������������%��������� ��� ��������������1�����C������������ ��������� ���������������������������������������������������� ��������������6���������������������������77 ��������������������-��������-������������������������������������G��������������������������!���������������"#��6%�59D'��+�� � )��������������������*���������������"#��B�55'��()����������������,���������������"#���B%2&'��%� ����������� �����������������.�������������A�������9�//������)�����9�� �������!�������������0�����//����������� ��3� ���������������������������������������� ��3� ��������8�������������1���������������"#��6%�59D'����)���� �� )� �)���������������������������������$���#(6�2�(2'��� �����"�������)��������������������������//����������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
CIR Panel Book Page 24
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������"#���B%2&'����������!� �������������������������������A�������9���<���� �����//������-�� �������������������������������������� ��3� ������������������������������!������������� ��3� ����������������������*���������������"#��B�55'��%������ �����������������������������,���������� �-�����G��� ������ �������� �����������������.����������� �������� ������������-��� ���-�� �)��������������0���������� ����������������� ���� �� ������������������������������� ������6����-���-�������������������1�������������� �����������G��� ��������������������������������� �������������������� ����������������������������������<������������� -���� -���� ��������������������������������� ������������������-��������������������������!����������������� ���� �)��������-��� �-�����������������*��������������������������������,���������������"#��B(+%#"'�������)����-���������������������������.���������B� �����������)� �������� �����������������������0����������� ������������� ���� ������ �7��������������������������������-�����- ����������������1���������������"#��6#9�5%+9:'��D������+������������������������������� � ��� --����� -����������� �� �F ���� � ��������������������< 3�� ����������������� ������ ������ ��� ����������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
���������������������������������������������������������������������������!1������������������� ��������� �7�����-����� ������ ������������������������������ �7�����-������������������������������������������������� �� �����2:����-�������������� �� �������������!��������)����������������-� � �������������� ���������������*����� ����� ���� ����� ������������� ��� ���������������,���������� �7������-���������������" �����-�)��//�������������.���������������"#���B%2&'��+�� �������� �����������������0�����C ���� ��� �-����������������������� ������������������������� ��� ����--�������������������� �����������������1����������� ���� ���������������������� ������������������������� ���������)�) C������������� � �� ��������������������������������+������������ ����8��%������� ���� ��������������������������-� ��� 8�������������!���������������"#��6#9�5%+9:'��+�� �)��������� �����������������*�����+��� ��� ���� ������������ ������$���� �����������������,������ ��-������� ������ ���������������������������.������������� ��� ������� ������ ����� �������������������0������-� �-�����)���� ����� ����� ������ -����������������������� ��� �������� �����-� �-������������ ��-���������������1�������� -������ �� �������������������������������"#���B%2&'��()�����<����-������������������������������������������//������������������������38����������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
���������������������������������������������������������������������������!������������������������������"#��6#9�5%+9:'��;�� ����� �����������������������������������"#���B%2&'��<��������-�8��<��������������������������� ���8�������������!���������������"#��6#9�5%+9:'��<���������� �����������������*���������������"#���5%=%'��%�������-�������������������������,�����������?������� �@�� 8�������������.���������������"#��6#9�5%+9:'��<���� ������������������0������� ������+��C����������������� ��-������������������������������������������ ���������� ����%������-����������������1������������ �� ��-� �-���� ����������� ������������������������� ��-�������������������������������� )���������������������������� ��������������� �-�� �������������������������������� ������ �)���� ����� ����� ����//����� �������������!������ ������ ����� �������� ���� ����3�- ���������������*�����- �������� � ������� �� ������� ���������������,���������������"#��$%#&�'��%��� ����� --��8��� �������������.������������ ���� ��� ����� �� ������������� ��������������0�����- ���������+������ ���� ���� --�������������������������������������� ����� ���� � ����� �������������������1�������������� ������ ��������������-�� �������������������������� ����� ���� ���� ��-���������� �� �� ����������������������� -����� �� ��-���������� ������� ��������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
���������������������������������������������������������������������������!��������������������+������ ���� ��� ������������������������������������������������ ��-������������ ���������������������������������������������93����4��� �� ���� �������'��<���������������!���������� ��3� ����������������� ����������������������������*�������� �� �� ���������������������,���������������������8��� ����� �8�������������.���������������"#���B%2&'��$-/�--��������������0���������������"#��$%#&�'��()��������������������������������"#��6%�59D'��(���������������������������������1��������� �����������-����� ����� ����<������ ��3� ������������������������ �� ��� ��)� ��������)�����//������)�� ������������������������� �������������-������ �� ����������)���������������������������� ������ ��3� �� ����6����� �� ��������������!�������� �������������� ���������� ����� �������������������*������������ �����C��� ��� �������������� ����������������,�������-���� ������� � ��;4%:� �� ������-����������������.������ ����� ����+��� ��������� ���������������������������0��������������� ��������������)������ ������������������������������������ -�����)�� �����������������������������1����� ��������������)��������� �-�)�������������������������� ���������������� ��� �������������������������������"#��B�55'��D������%�����-�� ������������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
CIR Panel Book Page 25
���������������������������������������������������������������������������!����������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������� � ������� ������� ��� ���������������������������������� � ��������� ��������������6���������������������!�����-�����C������� �� ������ ���������������������������*����������������������� ��-���������������)���������������������,������ ������������������������� ����� ����������������������.������������������������������� � � ��������������0���������������"#��6%�59D'��#������2 ������ �������������������������������������"#��B�55'��<���� �����������������������1������ �����������������������������������"#��6%�59D'��#���������������������������������"#��$%#&�'��2�3�������� ���� �� ����������������������� ���� ����� �� �����49=���������4��)�6 )�������������!���������+������� -��������� �-�� ���������������*���������������� ���� ������ �����"���-���� ���110��������������,���������� ����������������-��������������������������.������� ������� ���������������-�����������������������0�������-��� ��49=�������������-����-��������������������������������������������������� ��� ��������������� �������������1�������� ������������ ����-�����)����������� �������������������������-������ ������� �������� � ����� �������������������� -� ��� �����49=�� � �������������������������������������������������������%2"9#�(2�:(;#<�#94(#<�2=������������������������������.1,�"�)��������������11���������������������������������% �3��������>%�����!�����������������������4� ���?.1�@�*��/.�01��A�3�?.1�@�*��/.��1���������������������������������������� ���� ��������
CIR Panel Book Page 26
�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� �� ���� � �������� ������������������������������������������������� ���� �������� ������ ������������������������������������� ���������������� �������������� ����������������������� ���������������������� �������������!���������������"# �$%#&'%(")��*���� �������+��, ��+�������������-�����" �+��#��+��.��+��/�� �������������0���������������"# �12#34)��5�������6�������� ������������������������������� ���������������� �� ������������������������������7������������� �������������8���������������"# �$%#&'%(")��9: � ��2�����������������������������������+��# ���+��* �������;������� ��2������������������������������� ������������� ��� ��������� ��� �������������������<� ������ ��.� �:���� ��5�� ��� ���� �����������������������������=�����������������������>�����������������������!������������ �� ������ �������������������������������������-�����?4�� ���?����" �$������ �������������0���������������"# �$%(4�.9)��@�� ��=�����:��� �������������������������������� ��.�����������������������������:���� ��������������7������� ��=��������� ���� �������� ������ ��������������������8�������:������� �:�,*,*� ��� ����������������������������������������������������� ������� �����������������������������=��������� ����� �����������������������������������������������������25"%#495�*9<#.�#%,9#.�5&������������������������������08-�"�:��4������4������88���������������������������������2��> ��� ��A2�����������������������������,�����B08�C�!�7D0��8��' >�B08�C�!�7D0�78�
PANEL - SEPT 2009
����������������������������������������������������������������������������7������������������������ ����������� �� ������� �� ����� ��������� �������������������E������������������� ��6����������� �F�����������������������������������������E,A�������� ��� ����������� �������������������������������� ������ ��������� ����������� �� ��������������!������ � ���������E,A�������� ���� ��� ������������������������-�������������� ������������ ���������������������������0�����������>����� ��� ���������� �����������������������������"# �12#34)��=������������� ������ ����������������7������� ����� ������������� ����������������� ������������������8����� �� ��������������� ����������������������� �������������������.���� ��������� ���������������� ��>���������������������� ����������������� ��2���������� ������6���������������������� ����"��� ������������� ����������� ������������������������������������������������������ ����������������������!���������������� �������� ������ ��������������� ��������������-��������;� ������ !�������������� ���������#�,.��������������0����� ���������� �������� �������������� ������ ���������������������������� ��������F����������� �������������7���������������"# �$%#&'%(")��4����������� ����������������������8������ ���+�����������������������������"# �12#34)��@�� �����������������������������"# �$%#&'%(")��.����������������������������������������������������25"%#495�*9<#.�#%,9#.�5&������������������������������08-�"�:��4������4������88���������������������������������2��> ��� ��A2�����������������������������,�����B08�C�!�7D0��8��' >�B08�C�!�7D0�78�
����������������������������������������������������������������������������8������������������������ �� ��� ��2������������� ������� ������������������������������������>������������� ��� ��������� ��� ��.� �:���������������������� ��.����� ���� ��������������� ����������������������������������>��������� �������������!���������������* ����������������>��"������DD����������������-�����"������0��+�������������0���������������"# �25"%#4%5)��=������������� ������������������������������������������������� � ����� �������� ���������������7��������������������� ���������������� ������� �����������������8����������� ����� �����������������������������"# �$%#&'%(")��9: � �����������������������������"# �25"%#4%5)��=����������������� ���������������������� ����� ��������������:������ ������:������������������������������ ������� �������" �$������� ���" �1 :��������������!��������������������������������� ������������������������-�������������������� ������������������� ���������������0���������������� ����� �������� ��D��� �����6������ ������������������������������� � ��4����������� ������� �� ���������������7���������������������������� �������������� ����������������8����������������>� �����������>�������� ��.�������������������������������DD���� ������� �� ������� ��� � ���� ����������������������������� ����������������������� ����������������������������������25"%#495�*9<#.�#%,9#.�5&������������������������������08-�"�:��4������4������88���������������������������������2��> ��� ��A2�����������������������������,�����B08�C�!�7D0��8��' >�B08�C�!�7D0�78�
����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������"# �$%#&'%(")�����������������������������������������6�������� :����������������� ����D������������������������������ ��4����������� � ������������������������ � ������������������� ����������� �������������������� ����� �����������������!�������� �������������������� � ����������� :�� ��������������-����� �������:��� ���� ������������������� �����������������0����� ���� �� ���������������� �� ������������������������������������������ ����+�������������7���������������"# �25"%#4%5)��@�� �������������8���������������"# �$%#&'%(")��9: � �����������������������������"# �25"%#4%5)��@� ������������������ ���������������������������������������������:������ ������� ����������������������������:��� ��/���� ��������� ����������������� ��������������������� ������������������� ���:���� ��������������������!���������� ���� �������������-���������������"# �$%#&'%(")��9: � �������������0���������������"# �25"%#4%5)��4���������������>� ����������������������������� ��� ������� ������������ ��������� ��������������7������������������� ��� �������������8���������������=��� ������� � ������������������������������������������������ � � ���������� ������������ ��� ������������������������ ���������������� ���� ����� ��;� ������������������������������������25"%#495�*9<#.�#%,9#.�5&������������������������������08-�"�:��4������4������88���������������������������������2��> ��� ��A2�����������������������������,�����B08�C�!�7D0��8��' >�B08�C�!�7D0�78�
CIR Panel Book Page 27
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� � ���������������� :���� �� ���������� ��=� ������������������������ ��� � �������� ���������������������������������������������� ������� ��� � ��;��������������� ��������������������������������������:������������� ����� ��������� � ���������������������!�����?��������?��������� ����������� ����������:�����������������-�������������� �� ��������������� �����������������������������0������������������� ������������������������� ��������������������������������������������� �� ������� ���� ��������������7������������������ � � ���������� ������������������������������8���������� � ���������������������� ����� ���������� ��������������������������������� � ��������� ��, ������� ������������������������:��������� �������� �������� ��� � �� �����������������������������������������������������������:������ �������������������4���������:��� ��� � ���������������� :�������������������!����������� �� ��� ���������������������������������������������-������������� ��������� ��4��� � ������������:�������������������0�������������� ����������� ������ ����������������������������������������� ����� ���������������������� ��������������������������7������ � � �������������������� ���� �������������8���������������"# �E�(()��2�����������6����� ������������������������������������������ ���� ���������� �:� ���������������������������������� ����� ����������� �D ����� � ����������������������������������25"%#495�*9<#.�#%,9#.�5&������������������������������08-�"�:��4������4������88���������������������������������2��> ��� ��A2�����������������������������,�����B08�C�!�7D0��8��' >�B08�C�!�7D0�78�
���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������E,A�������������������������������������������D� ������������� ���>����� ��4����� ��� �� �������������������� ���� �DD�������:���� ���������� �� �����������������������������"# �$%#&'%(")��/ ������������������������������!����������� �������������� ������� ��2� ��6����� ��������������-����� �������������������� ����������������������������������0�������������� �������� ���� ��������� ��=� �������������������������������+��=� �����������>������+�������������7���������������"# �254%(()������������������������ :�������������8����� �����:����������*�#���������� �������������� �������������������������������������������� ����������� �������������������������������� ��������������� ��$� ������������ �����������������������������E,A���� �������� � ����������G������������������������������������ ��$������� �� ���������� ��������������!��������� �������������������������� �� ���� ��4�������������������-�����;������������)�E���������� ��� ��������������������������0���������������� ����������������������+��2�������������������������������:������2� ������������������������� ���������������7�������� ����� �������������8���������������"# �$%#&'%(")��.���������;����������������������������� ���������������������� :����� ��� ������������������������������ ���������������������������� ���� ��� �����������������������������������25"%#495�*9<#.�#%,9#.�5&������������������������������08-�"�:��4������4������88���������������������������������2��> ��� ��A2�����������������������������,�����B08�C�!�7D0��8��' >�B08�C�!�7D0�78�
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������:���8�8�DD� ��� ��2� ��� ������������� �� �������������������������������������������DD���������� ������ +��"������������������������� ��� ������������������������������������ ����������������������������������������+�������������!���������������"# �254%(()��=��� �����������*�#�������������-�����4��������4������*������������������� :�������������������0��������������:������ ��=��� �� ������������� ��6������������������������������:�������������� �������� ����������������������������7��������������� �������������������DD��������� ���������������8���������� ���������������������������������������������������������������������� ����������������� ��4����������������������������:����������������*�#������������ � �����������������������������"# �$%#&'%(")��9: � �����������������������������"# �254%(()����������� ���� � ������������������!���������������������� ������ ����������� :����� � �������������-�����# ��������� ������ ������������ ��� ���� ����������������0������������ ������������ �����������������������������"# �$%#&'%(")��.� �:���� ��.� �:���� �������������7���������������"# �25"%#4%5)��&��������� �������������8���������������"# �$%#&'%(")��2�����������������������������������������������������������������>�������������������������������������������������,%&���" �1 :� ����������������������������������25"%#495�*9<#.�#%,9#.�5&������������������������������08-�"�:��4������4������88���������������������������������2��> ��� ��A2�����������������������������,�����B08�C�!�7D0��8��' >�B08�C�!�7D0�78�
CIR Panel Book Page 28
TEAM MEETING MINUTES ON SEBACATES DR. BELSITO’S TEAM
7 DR. BELSITO: If you could do that, let
8 us know because then it would help. I mean, I
9 don't think we're going to reopen the report. The
10 question is how to wordsmith the discussion
11 regarding this.
12 Okay. Anything else on the bromates?
13 Okay. So we're moving to the sebacates. How do
14 you pronounce that?
15 DR. ANDERSEN: We had a short discussion
16 on the other team and nobody knew how to pronounce
17 it.
18 SPEAKERS: Sebacates.
19 DR. BELSITO: Sebacates.
20 SPEAKER: What color?
21 DR. BELSITO: Green. It's with the
22 kojic acid.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
198
1 SPEAKER: Green one.
2 DR. BELSITO: Okay. Okay, so this is a
3 first for us. A SLR, so it's in green along with
4 kojic acid.
5 And we've gotten some new data. And
6 again, this was one of the reports, like kojic
7 acid, that was sort of formulated in, hopefully,
8 the new CIR approach to doing documents, which I
9 think we already discussed with kojic acid that we
10 liked. And so now we're just looking at this data
11 and deciding what we need.
12 On Table 1 on page 42 and 43, there were
13 just a couple that I thought needed to be
14 amplified like dioctyl sebacate is an organic
15 compound. That's the definition. See Structure.
16 DR. LIEBLER: The middle of page 32
17 you're talking about?
18 DR. BELSITO: No, top.
19 MS. BECKER: Top of page.
20 DR. BELSITO: And then on page 33, the
21 same thing with dodecanedioic acid is an organic
22 compound.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
199
1 DR. ANDERSEN: Coagula extract is an
2 extract of coagulum.
3 DR. BELSITO: Right.
4 DR. ANDERSEN: This is the dictionary
5 we're talking about.
6 DR. BELSITO: Okay.
7 DR. ANDERSEN: It is what it is.
8 DR. BELSITO: So straight out of the
9 dictionary?
10 DR. ANDERSEN: Yes.
11 DR. BELSITO: Because all the others say
12 it's the diester of isostearyl alcohol and sebacic
13 acid.
14 Okay. Just questioning.
15 DR. LIEBLER: You know, the structures
16 in this table, I realize it's tough, but the
17 structures are just about unreadable. And I think
18 -- I don't exactly know how you do these, but if
19 you can perhaps paste in better quality structures
20 from something like ChemDraw or ChemOffice.
21 MS. BECKER: Yeah, these were done in
22 ChemDraw.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
200
1 DR. LIEBLER: Well, you've got the
2 world's tallest carbonyls.
3 MS. BECKER: I don't have steady hands.
4 DR. LIEBLER: There's a bug, so if you
5 did it in ChemDraw and it looked right, then
6 there's a problem with cutting and pasting or
7 something. But that just needs to be fixed
8 because they're unreadable.
9 MS. BECKER: Okay. Okay.
10 DR. ANDERSEN: All right. And this is a
11 perfect opportunity to get some feedback from you
12 on -- flip back to the kojic acid report, since
13 it's in the same document, real quick. My own
14 personal preference, which hasn't succeeding in
15 posing yet, my own personal preference is that you
16 get more out of showing the stick figures.
17 DR. SNYDER: Yes.
18 DR. ANDERSEN: A better understanding of
19 what the heck this molecule really looks like in
20 its length, especially if your eyes aren't good
21 enough to figure out if that's an 11 or a 17 in
22 the little side script in the "formula." So
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 29
201
1 that's the direction that I would like to go.
2 And frankly, since that looks hugely
3 awkward when you try to put it in tables, I'd pull
4 it out of the table.
5 DR. BELSITO: Right, as in figure 7.
6 Right.
7 DR. LIEBLER: The figure is fine and
8 these figures for the kojic acid compounds look
9 just fine.
10 SPEAKER: What page is that on?
11 DR. LIEBLER: 55.
12 MS. BECKER: 55.
13 SPEAKER: (off mike) the kojic ones.
14 DR. SEIDMAN: Alan, what are you
15 suggesting gets pulled out of the table?
16 DR. ANDERSEN: The figures.
17 SPEAKER: So all the figures.
18 DR. BELSITO: The figures. Do it as a
19 figure.
20 SPEAKER: They don't fit.
21 SPEAKER: So do it as a separate (off
22 mike)?
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
202
1 DR. BELSITO: Yes.
2 SPEAKER: Okay.
3 DR. SEIDMAN: Which, I might point out,
4 is how Valerie had it in the first place.
5 SPEAKER: (off mike) acid.
6 DR. SNYDER: What are we going to title
7 it?
8 DR. BELSITO: Basic acids and salts and
9 esters as used in cosmetic products. So basic
10 acids and other related dicarboxylic acids and
11 their salts and esters as used in cosmetic
12 products. You don't like that sound?
13 DR. SNYDER: No, I'm just curious.
14 MR. RE: If you would like to see the
15 stick figures, just turn to the HPB.
16 DR. BELSITO: Yeah. Okay. On page 3,
17 this West Germany reference. First of all,
18 there's not even a reference. It just says
19 amongst Germany that's got to be at least 20 years
20 old. So I would say that unless we have some
21 update from the EU or from the current German
22 state, we delete that.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
203
1 Page 4, the azelaic acid, 20 percent is
2 approved by the FDA. It's a topical cream for the
3 treatment of mild to moderate acne. There is also
4 a 15 percent gel for the treatment of rosacea.
5 DR. SNYDER: And along those lines,
6 that's not -- transillic acid is not listed in the
7 use table.
8 SPEAKER: I thought it was.
9 MS. ROBINSON: It is. It should be.
10 DR. SNYDER: I thought it was at the
11 very end.
12 MS. ROBINSON: Yes. It's on page 39,
13 all the way at the bottom it starts.
14 DR. SNYDER: I'm looking at the new use
15 (off mike).
16 MS. ROBINSON: Oh, it's in the actual
17 tables.
18 DR. BELSITO: Page 39.
19 MS. ROBINSON: Yeah, at the end of the
20 actual document.
21 SPEAKER: At the bottom.
22 DR. BELSITO: Azelaic acid shaving care.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
204
1 DR. SNYDER: Oh, okay. I was looking at
2 (off mike).
3 DR. BELSITO: No.
4 DR. SNYDER: Okay. Never mind.
5 DR. BELSITO: Page 7, under Acute
6 Toxicity, the dibutyl and sebacate and azelaic
7 acid. I thought that the last couple of sentences
8 in both of those paragraphs -- while dibutyl is
9 not currently used, it would unlikely cause acute
10 toxicity, and the rest of that paragraph. And
11 then these data indicate that azelaic acid is not
12 highly toxic (off mike) oral. Shouldn't those be
13 in the discussion rather than here? Or are we
14 making -- again, I guess we're changing the format
15 so this -- is it likely renal?
16 MS. ROBINSON: I can move it to the
17 discussion if it's an easier read. But what do
18 you think, Brenda?
19 DR. ANDERSEN: I think what we've been
20 doing is trying to calibrate how it is we handle
21 giving the reader a sense of the import of the
22 section.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 30
205
1 DR. BELSITO: Okay.
2 DR. ANDERSEN: This goes much further
3 than we did in the examples for kojic acid. So
4 the question is what's your level of comfort with
5 that? Kojic acid was more of an attempt simply to
6 summarize what data you'll find in the following
7 paragraphs. This says these data are gone because
8 they are. But if you want to reserve any such
9 statements for the discussion, we can do that. We
10 wanted to push the envelope a little bit and see
11 what your reaction was.
12 DR. SNYDER: I like it better in the old
13 report where it was italicized right up front
14 rather than here it's kind of --
15 DR. BELSITO: Buried.
16 DR. SNYDER: -- buried at the summary
17 statement or discussion-like statement instead of
18 being a summary-like statement there.
19 DR. SEIDMAN: May I suggest something?
20 I think revisit this in just a few minutes when
21 you get to the tables. The new tables we're
22 throwing out there as floaters or trial balloons,
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
206
1 so you might want to just consider this. Revisit
2 it in just a few minutes when you look at the
3 summary tables because you might want to think
4 about putting summary tables in the individual
5 sections instead of a summary statement or you
6 might want a combination. So you can discuss this
7 further, of course, now. But you might just want
8 to think of shelving it for just a few minutes
9 until you see the tables in 5 (off mike).
10 DR. BELSITO: Okay. We can do that.
11 Page 10.
12 DR. SNYDER: Well, in that same area, I
13 prefer to say the studies that reported NOEL are
14 less than 4,000 milligrams rather than "CIR
15 concluded." We had a couple things CIR concluded,
16 CIR determinate. I think we (off mike).
17 MS. ROBINSON: What paragraph?
18 DR. SNYDER: On page 7, (off mike). The
19 third line in the first paragraph there where it
20 says, "CIR concluded that the study supported (off
21 mike)." Say, "The study supported NOEL."
22 MS. ROBINSON: Okay.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
207
1 DR. SNYDER: And then down at the next
2 one under azelaic acid with rat and rabbit, CIR
3 determined the maximum tolerated dose. It should
4 just say, "Based on the reported endpoints of
5 animal deaths, the maximum tolerated dose (off
6 mike)."
7 DR. BELSITO: On page 10 on the Mingrone
8 Study 1083, were the ends given? There were no
9 ends.
10 DR. ANDERSEN: A perfect segue to let's
11 talk tables. What Brenda was referring to earlier
12 was that there had originally been captured Table
13 5 that summarized at least one study. And not to
14 put words in Brenda's mouth, but the idea of
15 having a full picture of which species, what dose
16 levels, how many animals, is what she would like
17 to see. So she went ahead and made tables for
18 both Smith in '53 and Mingrone in whatever year.
19 And those tables 5A and B or whatever --
20 DR. SEIDMAN: 5D and C.
21 DR. BELSITO: 5C.
22 DR. ANDERSEN: D and C show how we would
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
208
1 maybe like to communicate with you about what
2 details are actually available in these tox of
3 studies. Now, maybe the acute tox aren't the most
4 important studies on earth, but in getting ready
5 for this meeting that's what we had time to play
6 with.
7 And I think that there is a prevailing
8 sentiment that those tables have more information
9 content than any of the verbiage that we can
10 write. At a glance you can see what it is you
11 see.
12 DR. BELSITO: So we would get rid of all
13 the verbiage. These paragraphs would disappear
14 and under Acute Toxicity it would just say --
15 DR. SEIDMAN: I think that's on the
16 table. And it's on the table for different
17 endpoints. You might not want verbiage for acute,
18 but you might want it for subacute or chronic.
19 DR. BELSITO: Right.
20 DR. SEIDMAN: Because I think that's
21 going to be a case-by-case depending on the
22 endpoint.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 31
209
1 SPEAKER: But it's up for discussion.
2 DR. BELSITO: No, I mean, I think
3 certainly for the acute. I mean, we all know what
4 an acute study is. And, you know, basically we're
5 looking at, you know, the --
6 DR. SNYDER: The most important thing
7 for an acute study is the LD50.
8 DR. SEIDMAN: If it's reported. We
9 don't always get an LD50.
10 DR. SNYDER: Right, but that kind of
11 goes to (off mike).
12 DR. ANDERSEN: It's two animals. We're
13 not very interested anymore.
14 DR. SNYDER: But under the Acute section
15 we have basically, at least I can count, four or
16 five different summary statements where we could
17 have just put that all in one saying there was low
18 toxicity based upon LD50s and an oral (off mike)
19 and --
20 DR. ANDERSEN: As shown in tables.
21 DR. SNYDER: Exactly.
22 SPEAKER: Right.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
210
1 SPEAKER: (off mike)
2 DR. SEIDMAN: And (off mike) the summary
3 statement and address that in the text.
4 DR. SNYDER: Yeah, up front.
5 DR. SEIDMAN: And then up front in the
6 table.
7 MS. ROBINSON: Like the kojic acid.
8 DR. SNYDER: Yeah, like kojic acid,
9 right up front.
10 MS. ROBINSON: Okay.
11 DR. SNYDER: There's three or four (off
12 mike) around that.
13 DR. BELSITO: Then no verbiage. Just
14 your summary statement, no verbiage, and a
15 referral to the tables.
16 DR. SEIDMAN: That's what I would prefer
17 (off mike).
18 DR. ANDERSEN: Yeah, definitely.
19 SPEAKER: Really shortened this stuff.
20 And that's certainly a case for a lot of the
21 animal tox studies.
22 DR. BELSITO: Okay.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
211
1 DR. SEIDMAN: Well, there's a third
2 wrinkle on this, if I can just raise the issue,
3 because it came up in the other group (off mike)
4 has to do with editorializing a bit. So like
5 under Azelaic Acid, I put -- this was how I
6 summarized this particular study, given the low
7 toxicity for azelaic acid by the oral and (off
8 mike) routes of exposure and as (off mike) dermal
9 route of exposure in concentration used in
10 cosmetics, because azelaic acid presents a very
11 low risk of causing acute toxicity (off mike).
12 Now, in the -- when Jay brought up the
13 -- he mentioned that he'd prefer no conclusion on
14 the data, but we always are considering dose. So
15 here we -- well, we are considering dose of, you
16 know, use in cosmetics, and that's what we always
17 are comparing our data to in the literature. So
18 we're just editorializing what we put in the
19 beginning and end, you know, summarizing the data
20 and then editorializing.
21 Where does one begin and the other end?
22 MR. ANSELL: I think it was our position
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
212
1 that when they start drawing conclusions from the
2 data, that deserved to be in the discussion
3 section. They really didn't go to whether the
4 staff should be doing conclusions or not but
5 rather where they should be included, particularly
6 because if we start parsing it too finely we'll
7 end up drawing conclusions about energenicity and
8 outside of the entire scope of evidence that might
9 be relevant to a conclusion of carcinogenicity.
10 So we thought within the data section it
11 was appropriate to have summaries of the data, but
12 that when you went the further step and said so
13 I'm concluding that this presents a low risk, that
14 that should not be in the data section; that
15 should be in the discussion section.
16 DR. LIEBLER: I agree with that.
17 DR. BELSITO: Yeah.
18 DR. SNYDER: I think we should just
19 stick to summarizing the data, not interpreting
20 the data.
21 DR. BELSITO: Mm-hmm.
22 DR. SEIDMAN: In the individual
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 32
213
1 sections.
2 DR. BELSITO: In the individual
3 sections.
4 DR. SEIDMAN: Let's discuss the
5 discussion section then at the end of the
6 document. Do we consider -- in the CIR, is it
7 appropriate to consider, which I think it is,
8 concentration of use relative to the data?
9 DR. BELSITO: We always do.
10 SPEAKER: Absolutely.
11 DR. SEIDMAN: Okay, so that's fair
12 enough.
13 DR. BELSITO: Yeah.
14 DR. SEIDMAN: Just let me get a feel for
15 that. Okay.
16 DR. ANDERSEN: Yeah. And I think if I
17 can take that one step further. Even at this
18 early stage of the document -- let's say that this
19 is now December and we got this and we had this
20 discussion back in September -- that language that
21 Brenda developed in the front end relating to
22 azelaic acid, I'm not sure I would be
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
214
1 uncomfortable in preloading the discussion section
2 with that information for your consideration.
3 It's a toxicologist's review of the information.
4 It sure looks that way and then you guys get to
5 look at it.
6 DR. SNYDER: Well, when we make a
7 comment on kojic acid it makes writing the summary
8 very easy because you just basically merge all
9 those summaries (off mike) flow in a summary
10 statement.
11 DR. ANDERSEN: You bet. So I think we
12 have in the past not touched anything relating to
13 the discussion section until we have a couple of
14 panel discussions under our belt. But I'm
15 wondering whether we may not be able to just be
16 able to prime it a little bit. If you disagree,
17 you're not going to be reluctant to say so. If
18 you agree and say attaboy, then you will have
19 accomplished something. But I think, you know,
20 Jay's message -- the reinforcement to the other
21 group that to the extent that we possibly can,
22 those are discussion elements.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
215
1 SPEAKER: Message received.
2 DR. BELSITO: On page 11, the Leong
3 Study, I don't think it belongs there, but I don't
4 know really where to place it other than perhaps
5 to eliminate it completely. It says the
6 biocompatibility of bioerodible polyanhydrides and
7 the toxicology of the polymer breakdown products.
8 That certainly doesn't belong under chronic
9 toxicity, I don't think.
10 SPEAKER: We'd be comfortable removing
11 it.
12 DR. BELSITO: Yeah. I don't think it
13 adds anything to the document at all.
14 DR. SNYDER: I agree. There's lots of
15 stuff related to designating time versus
16 short-term studies in that section. And also on
17 that same page right above it, that looks like
18 aminotricity acids (off mike) that should go back
19 to the genotox section.
20 MS. ROBINSON: I'm sorry. Which page?
21 DR. SNYDER: On page 11. The (off mike)
22 toxicity and mutagenicity of the degradation
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
216
1 products were driven by a forward mutation (off
2 mike). That's not in the right place.
3 That's got to go.
4 MS. ROBINSON: That's part of the Leong
5 Study.
6 DR. BELSITO: That's part of what we're
7 deleting. We're deleting that whole thing.
8 Leong. We're deleting the whole bottom two-thirds
9 of page 11.
10 DR. SNYDER: Okay. Right.
11 DR. BELSITO: And the top part of page
12 12. And Table 6, it says summary of mammalian
13 effects.
14 And then under Genotoxicity it has
15 negative aims, so that's not mammalian. So do we
16 want to get rid of mammalian and just say summary
17 of effects?
18 DR. ANDERSEN: Very advanced salmonella.
19 (Laughter)
20 DR. BELSITO: Point well taken. Page
21 20, that's just typos.
22 SPEAKER: (off mike)
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 33
217
1 DR. BELSITO: On page 26, the third
2 paragraph up from the bottom, it says basic acid
3 did not show any teratogenic effect on fetal
4 toxicity. Is that redundant, did not show any
5 fetal toxicity?
6 DR. LIEBLER: So just remove any
7 teratogenic effect.
8 DR. BELSITO: Right. Just any fetal
9 toxicity. Did not show fetal toxicity.
10 DR. ANDERSEN: You know, I think
11 actually, Curt, checking on this I'm not sure what
12 the truth is, but those are two separate
13 endpoints. I mean, I could have either yes or no
14 for fetal toxicity and still have some increased
15 incidence in birth defects, so.
16 DR. BELSITO: So did not show
17 teratogenicity?
18 SPEAKER: (off mike) in developmental
19 studies that separate out the two.
20 DR. ANDERSEN: So what should be done
21 there is take out the word "teratogenic effects
22 in."
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
218
1 DR. BELSITO: Right. It just did not
2 show fetal toxicity, teratogenicity, and neonatal
3 toxicity in rabbit studies.
4 SPEAKER: Right.
5 DR. ANDERSEN: (off mike) did not cause
6 fetal toxicity (off mike).
7 SPEAKER: Yeah, "did not cause" would be
8 better to show --
9 DR. BELSITO: And "separate?"
10 SPEAKER: Yes.
11 DR. ANDERSEN: And that should be "or"
12 instead of "and."
13 DR. BELSITO: A question that I had
14 throughout this report is that we've already
15 looked at some other aliphatic diesters, for
16 instance, maleic acid. And did we want to bring
17 in at least a summary of any of that data into
18 this report to help us out in terms of the safety
19 assessment or --
20 DR. ANDERSEN: I forget. What's the
21 (off mike)?
22 DR. LIEBLER: Maleic acid is two carbons
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
219
1 with two carboxins with a double bond between (off
2 mike) three carbons.
3 DR. ANDERSEN: So it's about as short as
4 you can get.
5 DR. LIEBLER: Yeah.
6 DR. ANDERSEN: And these are a bit
7 longer. It's got eight carbons including the two.
8 I'm not sure --
9 DR. LIEBLER: You've got adipic acid
10 (off mike) I don't know if that's used.
11 DR. ANDERSEN: -- how instructive it is.
12 DR. BELSITO: Okay. So I'll strike that
13 question. Okay. And I guess the only new data we
14 got were 2 additional sensitization studies at 1.2
15 percent. Is that -- I'm trying to look at what we
16 sent as new. That's the only thing I picked up.
17 It was sent by e-mail or some fashion,
18 some additional studies, and I just made a note
19 that there were -- in addition to what we have
20 here in the document, there were two additional
21 sensitization studies done at 1.2 percent, which
22 doesn't really help us since it's used at a higher
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
220
1 concentration.
2 SPEAKER: (off mike) I thought it was a
3 2.2 negative (off mike).
4 DR. BELSITO: It may be already in the
5 document. I didn't see it.
6 DR. ANDERSEN: No, the new thing that
7 was sent out was September 18th. I had it dated
8 when the council provided it. It isn't in the
9 book.
10 DR. BELSITO: Right. Okay.
11 DR. SNYDER: August 18th and September
12 24th. There's a memo from John Bailey on August
13 18th that we got prior to coming to the meeting.
14 For this meeting we got one on 9-16 to 9-18.
15 DR. BELSITO: Yeah. And then we got
16 another one September 16th that I guess was handed
17 out today. Is that right?
18 MS. ROBINSON: Yes.
19 DR. BELSITO: And 18th. So the 16th is
20 7.8 percent --
21 SPEAKER: Two.
22 DR. BELSITO: 7.2 (off mike). And then
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 34
221
1 it was a human repeat in self patch testing.
2 SPEAKER: Yes.
3 DR. BELSITO: Fifty-one subjects
4 completed. And then --
5 SPEAKER: And they all take (off mike).
6 DR. BELSITO: Another study, Primary
7 Skin Irritation, and this is 100 percent diethyl
8 and 30 percent diethyl, and 8 male Japanese White
9 Strain rabbits. At that high concentration there
10 were some allergic reactions.
11 SPEAKER: (off mike) 100 percent.
12 DR. BELSITO: A hundred percent, yeah.
13 And then case reports. What is (off mike)? Oh,
14 (off mike) motion, okay.
15 DR. ANDERSEN: That chart is also
16 something we put together that basically
17 summarizes what's in the report. Again, it takes
18 a long time to read through the case literature.
19 Again, we're wondering whether a table that shows
20 it -- in this case shows that there were some
21 positive reactions in the case literature. You
22 can do what you will with it, but it's -- at a
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
222
1 glance you can see that there are positive
2 reactions. You don't have to dig for it.
3 DR. BELSITO: Yeah. Well --
4 DR. SEIDMAN: I'm going to pass out this
5 table. (off mike) I don't think you're going to
6 find it of value, but I'm going to pass it out.
7 This is case reports.
8 DR. LIEBLER: I think they've got them.
9 DR. BELSITO: We've got them, yeah.
10 DR. SEIDMAN: Okay, I'm sorry. It's
11 really not -- it's not for induction --
12 DR. BELSITO: Right.
13 DR. SEIDMAN: -- so I think this has a
14 policy and the (off mike) do not.
15 DR. BELSITO: Well, looking at what we
16 have for these and the new data that we got, we
17 don't have impurities.
18 We don't have UV absorption. But
19 looking at the structure, there are no rings.
20 They're not likely to absorb. We have a negative
21 Ames but no mammalian genotoxicity. And then do
22 we have sufficient carcinogenicity? No.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
223
1 If we have sufficient carcinogenicity
2 and you don't feel we need mammalian genotoxicity
3 and we have negative repro tox, then do we really
4 need impurities? Because presumably whatever
5 impurities were there were tested and weren't
6 giving problems, so.
7 DR. SNYDER: We only really have one
8 carcinogenicity study.
9 DR. BELSITO: Right.
10 DR. SNYDER: The other one is actually
11 renal processing (off mike).
12 DR. LIEBLER: Is the one you're talking
13 about called the BIBRA 96 reference?
14 DR. SNYDER: Yes.
15 DR. LIEBLER: Which has very little
16 information provided, right?
17 DR. SNYDER: 10 milligrams per kilogram
18 for (off mike).
19 DR. LIEBLER: And the only other one is
20 around liver phocyte tests.
21 SPEAKER: In the (off mike) in the test
22 plan, someplace in here a whole bunch of data on
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
224
1 genotoxicity.
2 SPEAKER: (off mike)
3 SPEAKER: All we have so far are (off
4 mike), but the American Chemistry Council has
5 provided us with data before. So if you wanted
6 these expanded, it's page 15 in the (off mike) HPB
7 test plan that was provided by the council in one
8 of their submissions. It's kind of like that
9 page, a quarter of an inch.
10 SPEAKER: (off mike) looks like a lot
11 that they have. There was a 13-week -- or the 90
12 days thing.
13 SPEAKER: Well, those should probably be
14 summarized.
15 SPEAKER: Yeah. Yeah, we need to bring
16 those in.
17 DR. BELSITO: Right.
18 SPEAKER: Yeah, I think the question the
19 other group had related to is this enough or do
20 you want to see the real studies? They were
21 inclined to see the real studies, but I'll leave
22 it up to you as to what your comfort level is.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 35
225
1 DR. BELSITO: Well, I think we'd
2 probably want to see the real studies, but the
3 question is I'm assuming since this is being put
4 together for HPV and REACH, that these are
5 accurate summaries or statements of what was
6 found. And assuming that's the case, is this safe
7 as used? And do we have enough information?
8 Assuming that, in fact, when we get the real
9 studies they confirm the summary.
10 DR. SEIDMAN: Are you proposing that we
11 get the real studies?
12 DR. BELSITO: I think it's always been,
13 I mean, you know, they're not studies that are my
14 area of expertise.
15 So, you know, from my standpoint, I
16 would read them, but I'd be relying on my
17 colleagues to guide me. I think it's always been
18 the policy of the panel, particularly maybe in
19 this case where we don't have impurities and we're
20 going to be assuming that these are -- we don't
21 need the impurities because whatever the
22 impurities are, they were studied. We'd want to
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
226
1 see in more detail exactly what was done in the
2 studies. I'm assuming, but let me let Curt, Paul,
3 and Dan discuss that.
4 DR. SNYDER: It's always a case-by-case
5 basis. So if we have 10 chronic studies, even
6 with low numbers of animals, you get a lot more
7 confidence than if you have one study. So if you
8 only have one study, you'd like to have pretty
9 good information to make sure the methodology and
10 the valuations and things like that were
11 appropriate. So I think on a case-by-case basis
12 it's when there is minimal data, I want to see
13 more. When there's minimal data I want to see
14 more data. And when there's lots of data, I don't
15 need to see lots of data, so to speak, of how it's
16 done.
17 DR. SEIDMAN: And so lots of data --
18 lots of data coming from one source, is that
19 right? I haven't reviewed this document.
20 MR. ANSELL: No, no, it's a consortium
21 of producers that come together.
22 DR. SEIDMAN: It's a summary from that
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
227
1 consortium and there are no original data which
2 were published or which were available to CIR?
3 MR. ANSELL: You'd have to look at the
4 data area because they tried to minimize animal
5 testing, so they uses confrontational methods,
6 they used all sorts of things. But I think if you
7 were to identify what particular effect you're
8 concerned about, we can see if we could get
9 additional data.
10 The package itself goes into, you know,
11 an entire analysis of toxicity and carcinogenicity
12 and chronic toxicity. So, I think getting the
13 full package would be --
14 DR. BELSITO: I don't think we need the
15 full package. In my assessment, what we're
16 lacking right now are impurities and
17 genotoxicity/carcinogenicity. And therefore, we
18 would be relying on, you know, if we don't get
19 impurities that's fine because we, you know, again
20 we can say in the discussion, you know, whatever
21 the impurities are they didn't result to any
22 reproductive or teratogenic effects and they
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
228
1 didn't result in mutagenic or genotoxic effects or
2 carcinogenic effects if we have that data. So
3 that the data that we're missing right now are the
4 mammalian, genotoxin, carcinogenicity. And then
5 the question becomes are these summaries adequate
6 for my colleagues or do my colleagues want to see
7 the actual studies. And I leave that up to them
8 to comment.
9 MR. RE: Just to note the actual study
10 reports that went to ZIAM and OECD programs (off
11 mike) letting your (off mike). I'm not certain
12 that we could obtain them (off mike).
13 DR. KLAASSEN: Apparently there's not a
14 whole lot of carcinogenicity studies that have
15 been done according to their document either. So,
16 I guess it would be nice to know is that one the
17 only one that's been done? And that one that has
18 been done should have more data. Definitely look
19 at that data. Did they use two mice?
20 MR. ANSELL: You know, if you look in
21 the report, you know, page 14, 15, the results
22 from (off mike) genotoxicity material, mammalian,
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 36
229
1 in vitro chromosome, in vivo chromosome, so I
2 think the question is highly relevant.
3 And let us see what data responsive to
4 that question we can get. But it's unlikely to be
5 the entire package (off mike).
6 DR. LIEBLER: We may not need the whole
7 package. In fact, the compound space -- chemical
8 space that this is describing is larger than what
9 we're considering in these ingredients any way.
10 There are a lot of shorter chain things here.
11 There's some unsaturated things that might have
12 different properties.
13 I just feel it sounds like there are
14 data out there that we're not getting. I don't
15 think it's appropriate for us to just decide that
16 we shouldn't look at any of it. So, I think we
17 need to see if we can get some of this. It sounds
18 like from looking at this Table 3, at the end of
19 the HPV report, I don't see any references for
20 anything. This looks like it's stuff that's been
21 done and not published.
22 MR. ANSELL: Yeah, I mean, those are all
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
230
1 important questions.
2 DR. LIEBLER: And if that's, you know --
3 SPEAKER: And at this stage in the
4 review, (off mike).
5 DR. LIEBLER: It may be, you know, many
6 yards of data or whatever you said, but, on the
7 other hand, it may be something that we can get
8 our hands on and look at and we should at least
9 try to do that.
10 DR. SNYDER: And when there's a NOEL or
11 a NOAEL, it's always nice to know what it was
12 based on rather than just -- because these all
13 just say there was a NOAEL, but they don't say
14 what was the basis. Was it decreased weight gain
15 or was it some, you know, toxicity endpoint that
16 might pop up that we can look at someplace else.
17 So, again, we just need a little bit more
18 information than what's in this summary.
19 DR. BELSITO: So, where are we going?
20 Are we saying insufficient for impurities,
21 genotox, carcinogenicity?
22 Are we tabling to get more information
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
231
1 from the summary reports that we see here in the
2 diester HPV test plan? Where do we want to go?
3 This is the first time we're seeing this document.
4 DR. SNYDER: I prefer tabling it and
5 asking for the additional data that we know
6 exists. We're going to get it.
7 DR. BELSITO: Okay.
8 DR. SNYDER: I think that's a more
9 logical (off mike).
10 DR. BELSITO: So we're going to table it
11 and ask for additional genotoxin carcinogenicity
12 data that appears to be from the diester HPV test
13 plan available to us. And if it's linear feet or
14 data, send it electronically and let us shift
15 through it.
16 MS. ROBINSON: Do we need impurities?
17 No? Impurities?
18 DR. BELSITO: I mean, if they have
19 impurities, that would be great, but, again, I
20 think we can handle -- I mean, we handle
21 reproductive toxicity. You know, we can handle
22 impurities by saying we didn't have impurities,
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
232
1 but whatever impurities were there didn't result
2 in problems in the genotox, carcinogenicity, and
3 reproductive studies. We've done that before.
4 SPEAKER: That's a wonderfully empirical
5 approach --
6 DR. BELSITO: Right.
7 SPEAKER: -- resolving (off mike).
8 DR. BRESLAWEC: May I ask your opinion
9 on one format matter here? If you look at page 21
10 and 22 and 23 and the top of section 24, it
11 summarizes what are called "skin treatments."
12 These are essentially efficacy studies involving
13 one or more of these components. In the past
14 we've summarized them. An alternate way of
15 dealing with these studies is presented in italics
16 in the middle of page 24 and we'd like your
17 opinion on that.
18 DR. ANDERSEN: It takes much less space.
19 (Laughter)
20 DR. BELSITO: I think when you're
21 dealing with something like azelaic acid that also
22 has a drug use, you know, you're, I think,
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 37
233
1 summarizing it as you did in the alternate skin
2 study section -- is fine. I don't think we need
3 all of the details as to whether they wanted to
4 treat acne with minocycline plus azelaic acid and
5 whether there was a difference in those two
6 treatment groups. I mean, that's not --
7 DR. BRESLAWEC: We have the same issue
8 in things like botanicals where there are
9 thousands of studies done on a variety of
10 conditions from growing hair to losing hair. And
11 we prefer not to deal with the effectiveness
12 question.
13 DR. BELSITO: Yeah. Right.
14 DR. BRESLAWEC: Great. Thanks.
15 MR. RE: Just getting back to the
16 availability for a moment, would the CIR entertain
17 the idea of joining the aliphatic esters panel?
18 Because that is the usual mechanism on which you
19 gain access to this data (off mike). So if you'd
20 like to go that way, that would be the traditional
21 way of gaining access to these data (off mike) --
22 SPEAKER: Never done it.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
234
1 MR. RE: -- (off mike) part of the (off
2 mike).
3 MR. ANSELL: You know, that's all true.
4 Let us look first and then we will come back and
5 say if there's a problem or not. You know, I
6 expect that there are robust summaries available
7 (off mike). Let us look first.
8 SPEAKER: You know, we pay for ASTM
9 standards, IOC standards (off mike), so we'll need
10 to do that.
11 DR. BELSITO: Okay. So --
12 DR. SNYDER: I have one more question.
13 On page 25, there's a chronic toxicity study in 40
14 rats and 40 rabbits. Do you see it there?
15 MS. ROBINSON: Oh, yeah.
16 DR. SNYDER: They present the results of
17 the rabbits, but there are no rats. Is it in the
18 table there?
19 SPEAKER: (off mike)? I'm sorry.
20 DR. SNYDER: The chronic toxicity was
21 investigated in 40 rats and 40 rabbits. And then
22 we go on to say that chronic toxicity (off mike)
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
235
1 no significant difference in (off mike) and
2 rabbits, but we don't get any data results for
3 rats.
4 DR. SEIDMAN: Oh.
5 SPEAKERS: Oops.
6 DR. SEIDMAN: Yeah, oops.
7 DR. SNYDER: I didn't look in the table,
8 (off mike) to the table then.
9 DR. SEIDMAN: The two tables I prepared
10 (off mike).
11 DR. BELSITO: Okay. That's what I
12 thought. Okay.
13 DR. SEIDMAN: So I didn't touch this.
14 DR. BELSITO: Okay.
15 DR. SEIDMAN: But that's kind of why I
16 think we do need tables because sometimes the
17 reviewers have a lot to do and they might not get
18 all the information. If we have a table, then
19 we're sure to get it.
20 DR. KLAASSEN: That needs to say Table 3
21 right there if it's going to be in Table 3, so you
22 don't have to guess.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
236
1 DR. SEIDMAN: If we put it in a table,
2 we'd have to say, of course, reference the table.
3 DR. KLAASSEN: Yeah, right.
4 DR. BELSITO: Any other comments? Okay.
5 Why don't we take a 10-minute break before we move
6 to PEGs, get some coffee, relieve our bladders.
7 (Recess)
CIR Panel Book Page 38
TEAM MEETING MINUTES ON SEBACATES – DR. MARKS’S TEAM
14 DR. MARKS: It will be quick, Alan. Is
15 everybody fine with that, Ron, Ron and Tom?
16 Table. Next we're to the sebacates or sebacates?
17 Which is it?
18 DR. ANDERSEN: Is there a linguist in
19 the house?
20 DR. BERGFELD: It's in the Green Book.
21 DR. MARKS: This is the first time that
22 the panel has seen this report, and obviously with
127
1 that, one of the things is do we want to group all
2 these ingredients together, should we delete some
3 of them, and then obviously move on to data needs?
4 And Ron Hill and Ron Shank also, how do you like
5 Acute Toxicity Tables 5-B, 5-C? Was that helpful?
6 We'll open it up for discussion.
7 DR. SHANK: I guess I'll start. I would
8 go as insufficient data. We need genotoxicity
9 data for microbial and mammalian. However, Table
10 3 from the American Chemistry Council report
11 indicates that there may be some data, but it's
12 not in our report other than the table. Maybe
13 it's already there. My second comment is that
14 there are five other dicarboxyl acids listed in
15 the dictionary. Why are they not included? And
16 the rest are just editorial. You did ask about
17 Tables 5-A, 5-B and 5-C. There's nothing much in
18 those tables, so I would just convert that
19 information to text and delete the tables.
20 DR. MARKS: Ron, did you feel the
21 impurities were okay in that section? Did we have
22 any needs in the impurities?
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
128
1 DR. SHANK: I don't have that marked.
2 DR. MARKS: There are no impurities, so
3 I guess would that be a need we have to move as
4 insufficient?
5 DR. BERGFELD: Ron?
6 DR. MARKS: Ron?
7 DR. SHANK: I don't have any concerns,
8 but maybe others do.
9 DR. SLAGA: I don't have any concerns
10 here, but mutagenicity in the new data in the back
11 there is some mammalian genotoxicity, so there is
12 genotoxicity, both bacterial as well as mammalian.
13 DR. SHANK: But it's not in the report,
14 so do we actually have the studies or is this just
15 a quotation from some report?
16 DR. HILL: Which specific compounds are
17 in that report?
18 DR. MARKS: We'll want to go over that
19 and make sure because Ron Shank raised the issue
20 of should there be five more ingredients listed
21 and are the ingredients that are already in the
22 report ones that we want to include. Why don't we
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
129
1 do that and we'll go over it? So far we have the
2 needs, although the table indicates mutagenicity
3 data and genotox data, that doesn't appear in the
4 report itself. Shall we assume that that's going
5 to appear in the report and not put that out as an
6 insufficient at this point?
7 DR. SLAGA: It's in the data in the
8 back.
9 DR. MARKS: So it's in the data in the
10 back.
11 DR. ANDERSEN: I'm not finding it.
12 DR. BERGFELD: It's in the additions
13 behind everything there.
14 DR. SHANK: That is a page 15, diesters.
15 There's the high production volume. There is a
16 report called "Diesters: High Production Volume
17 Test Plan" in the back of the book and on pages 14
18 and 15. It gives mutagenicity data which
19 apparently the American Chemistry Council has
20 those data. So if those data are there, can they
21 be made available to us?
22 DR. ANDERSEN: I got you now. So
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 39
130
1 there's a whole series of studies that are
2 described on pages 14 and 15, the details of
3 which, were they captured and put in the document
4 could resolve the concerns.
5 DR. MARKS: Rachel?
6 MS. WEINTRAUB: In terms of a lack of
7 data, I just wanted to make sure that we consider
8 that there's no phototoxocity data and no
9 subchronic toxicity data. So the question is do
10 you think we need that kind of data? Another
11 comment that I had is that on page 24 under the
12 Alternate Skin Study section, there are a few
13 studies mentioned, but then it says, "The safety
14 information from the studies was not provided, or
15 provided in a manner that was not conducive to
16 evaluation." Why include it if it provides
17 absolutely no information? Page 24.
18 MS. ROBINSON: The Alternate Skin
19 Studies?
20 MS. WEINTRAUB: Yes.
21 MS. ROBINSON: With these studies there
22 were limited details, so we just included it
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
131
1 anyway. But if the panel decides that it's
2 irrelevant, then we'll take it out, but there were
3 very limited details described by the authors.
4 MS. WEINTRAUB: I was wondering if there
5 was some reason to include it just to make clear
6 that we've seen them but find it inclusive.
7 DR. ANSELL: We support that comment.
8 The study goes to the drug efficacy and doesn't
9 really report on safety.
10 DR. MARKS: Correct. Actually starting
11 with page 21. Is that where you started, Rachel?
12 Eliminate everything from 21 to 24, so Skin
13 Treatments all the way to the Alternative Skin
14 Study section because it all relates to the
15 efficacy of these drugs and acne. Valerie, I'll
16 give you two printouts here, once on Azelex, the
17 package insert which isn't very helpful, but
18 there's a much better one on Finacea.
19 Interestingly, I had the same concerns about
20 phototox data, and they have a number of
21 irritations, sensitization, photosensitization and
22 phototox studies on Finacea which is the 15
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
132
1 percent azelaic acid preparation, so that I'm
2 going to give these to you. The references are in
3 there even though I think that's helpful data in
4 terms of the safety for this group. The rest of
5 these I had concern about no photo absorption, but
6 then again that would speak to the safety. What's
7 your feeling, Ron?
8 DR. SHANK: I don't think these
9 compounds would absorb in the important areas of
10 UV for skin toxicity.
11 DR. MARKS: Under the Clinical
12 Assessments, the diisopropyl sebacate is fine. I
13 had there were a number of severe case reports of
14 allergic contact dermatitis to diethyl sebacate.
15 What was reassuring was they had a RIPT of this
16 compound with a 1.5 percent concentration of
17 diethyl sebacate, and I would suggest that we put
18 a limit on that particular ingredient to that
19 concentration because of the alerts for these
20 multiple cases of severe allergic contact
21 dermatitis.
22 DR. ANDERSEN: What would a good number
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
133
1 be?
2 DR. MARKS: The 1.5 percent. That's
3 what was found in the cream which they did an RIPT
4 on, so we have that data that we know at that
5 limit that it was safe in that cream.
6 MS. SEIDMAN: The 1.5 percent?
7 DR. MARKS: Yes.
8 MS. SEIDMAN: If you look at the table
9 that I prepared, I prepared a table on the diethyl
10 sebacate allergic contact case reports. So if you
11 look down there, there is a 1 percent diethyl
12 sebacate -- positive. I think there is something
13 less than that. But just look down that table and
14 see what you think.
15 DR. MARKS: Which page?
16 MS. SEIDMAN: This is separate. It's a
17 handout.
18 DR. MARKS: The handout?
19 MS. SEIDMAN: Yes.
20 DR. MARKS: Thank you.
21 MS. SEIDMAN: You're welcome.
22 DR. SLAGA: So these are case report
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 40
134
1 individuals? Is that correct?
2 MS. SEIDMAN: Yes.
3 DR. MARKS: So your conclusion from
4 these? Take me through it. These were mostly
5 medications as I read the case reports, hence some
6 had, yes, very high concentrations which isn't
7 surprising that they would sensitize at those
8 concentrations.
9 MS. SEIDMAN: I think there was a.1.
10 DR. MARKS: Was that for patch testing
11 though? It went down. For actually patch testing
12 they went down as I recollect to.01, but that to
13 me just is a little bit different than what
14 concentration could you feel safe going
15 prospectively and not sensitize individuals, not
16 if they've already become sensitized. So that's
17 why I thought the 1.5 percent cream from the
18 maximization test, and that was probably one of
19 these added at the end.
20 MS. SEIDMAN: You're just talking about
21 induction.
22 DR. MARKS: Yes. That was from the PCPC
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
135
1 memorandum from John Bailey dated August 18 and
2 you'll see in the fourth study down, KGL 2003, a
3 cream containing 1.5 percent diethyl sebacate in
4 human skin by means of the maximization assay was
5 okay. So that's why I thought that that would be
6 safe in light of having this alert from the case
7 reports.
8 DR. ANSELL: You will also see a report
9 dated September 18 for diethyl.
10 DR. MARKS: What does that add, Jay?
11 DR. ANSELL: Just that it was induced at
12 higher percents than that.
13 DR. MARKS: This was with?
14 DR. ANSELL: Diethyl.
15 DR. MARKS: Diethyl. Then I guess you
16 have the contradiction of which limit level are
17 you going to use.
18 DR. ANSELL: Yes.
19 DR. MARKS: I think I'd like to err to
20 that lower concentration. Are there any other
21 comments? Ron Shank, going back to the original,
22 do you think if we have all this data included in
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
136
1 the body and not just in the tables that we could
2 move forward without insufficient data conclusion?
3 DR. SHANK: Yes. I assume you have
4 those data, it's just not a quote from a review or
5 something, but if the mutagenicity data are
6 available, then they should be included into the
7 report.
8 DR. ANDERSEN: The American Chemistry
9 Council has provided the data whenever we've asked
10 for it in the past, so I don't anticipate that
11 that's a glitch. In a sense, I'm thinking that
12 tabling this to allow those data to be gathered
13 makes sense. I'm also concerned about the idea
14 that there are four other dicarboxyl acids that we
15 didn't capture, I think potentially do that
16 homework as well if this were tabled.
17 DR. SHANK: The dictionary lists five,
18 phthalic acid, malonic acid, succinic acid,
19 glutaric acid and adipic acid.
20 DR. ANDERSEN: I see what you're saying.
21 DR. SHANK: It's just you take the alkyl
22 group, and we start with butyl dicarbonyl where
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
137
1 there are four CH2 groups, or I think we start
2 with five. So if you look at the alkyl with four
3 and three, two, one and zero, all of those are
4 listed in the dictionary as pH adjusters and
5 fragrance. So if we're including all of the
6 larger ones, is there a reason that we're not
7 including those smaller ones? And I couldn't find
8 that they had been reviewed before.
9 DR. HILL: Could I respond to that
10 briefly? The major issue in my mind with lumping
11 these compounds as a class, the salts to me were
12 no-brainer additions, but these's a fair amount of
13 read-across data or by analogy data that I think
14 makes the implicit assumptions that the starting
15 point in all of the biological handling of these
16 compounds if they're absorbed is ester hydrolysis,
17 actually twice, and so at least in terms of the
18 ones that were already there and these others that
19 are not added, for example, oxalic acid, there are
20 no carbons between the carbonyls, and maleic acid
21 ones, I don't think that's on your list but that's
22 in the table here, there are just two carbons in
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 41
138
1 between. So the ester hydrolysis could go very
2 differently there, and I haven't had a chance to
3 digest it because even in the HPV report there's
4 quite a bit of listed read-across data and I'm not
5 sure how read across that data actually is until I
6 have a matter since to map, and since we just got
7 this a short time ago, I didn't have access to
8 that information because if there's penetration of
9 the diester or even monoesters into dermal layers
10 where there are potentially precancerous cells,
11 then that changes everything in my mind in terms
12 of what you can lump together as a class so that
13 then you need information about the biological
14 handling of that to know.
15 DR. BERGFELD: May I get a point of
16 clarification? Alan, you're urging tabling for
17 all the needs that we're assessing and these are
18 needs for further staff work as I see it. Is that
19 official that we would table or we would just hold
20 this to the next time to clarify those? Do we
21 have to officially table this? I mean, we can.
22 DR. HILL: No, you don't have to
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
139
1 officially table it.
2 DR. BERGFELD: Can just hold it for that
3 information. I'm not sure there's a difference,
4 but when we table things they've been a little bit
5 more worrisome or waiting for a piece of industry
6 rather than in-house sort of clarifications.
7 DR. HILL: We have our marching orders,
8 so I know what it is we're going to do and I guess
9 from that standpoint it doesn't matter what we
10 call it, just postponing further discussion until
11 these data and the question of the further
12 expansion can be resolved is what we're going to
13 do, whether it's tabled or not. Just in terms of
14 the expansion, simply that there may be a place
15 where the line has to be drawn in terms how far
16 apart the dicarboxylic acids groups are on these,
17 and there may be a reason why these are there and
18 the others are not.
19 DR. ANDERSEN: I think that's the answer
20 to the question, but without getting down and
21 dirty and having all of the staff talk that
22 through, I didn't want to commit to that.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
140
1 DR. HILL: Then furthermore, if that is
2 the case and there is significant absorption in
3 the toxicology of the resultant alcoholics that
4 come from the ester hydrolysis in some cases come
5 into play and there's data for some of these
6 compounds that are pretty comfortable for not for
7 all if the class is expanded the way it's given,
8 but then again my digestion of the HPV information
9 is still limited. I haven't had enough time with
10 it.
11 DR. MARKS: So I think if I understand
12 where we're going with this, it is the idea to
13 table it or postpone it or however you want to
14 talk about this first look at these cosmetic
15 ingredients, and I guess are we still going to use
16 sebacic acid as our lead ingredient on this, then
17 as it was put in the memo related dicarboxylic
18 acids and their salts and simple esters? We need
19 a genotox carcinogenicity, the primary references,
20 and get that into the document itself, and then
21 the second big issue is to firm up which
22 ingredients we're really going to include in this
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
141
1 going to include in this report. Are those the
2 two things? And then Valerie, just capture also
3 in there the concerns I had about the sensitivity
4 and potentially having a maximum with a diethyl
5 sebacate concentration of 2.5 percent.
6 DR. HILL: From my perception, this is a
7 fairly complex class as expanded even without
8 adding the others, and just to make sure that
9 Valerie gets the support she needs to wade her way
10 through all of those complexities.
11 DR. ANDERSEN: In looking at the, if you
12 will, parent compound and focusing on the fact
13 that there was an 8 carbon chain between the two
14 carboxylic acid groups, I think part of the logic
15 was that would give us a certain family depending
16 on whether people are comfortable with the esters
17 that are on the list. It begged the question how
18 different is azelaic acid? It's 7, not that
19 different from 8. We would have included one with
20 9 except that's not a cosmetic ingredient, and
21 then we upped it to 10 on the high side. We can
22 certainly examine the question of can we go a
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 42
142
1 little lower and can we go a little bit higher
2 with that trepidation of how distance is going to
3 start to matter depending on what you're doing.
4 DR. HILL: And I would also remind you
5 that the biologic handling of even-chain and
6 odd-chain carboxylic acids and I think also
7 dicarboxylic acids ends up quite differently, and
8 actually there are steps that are different, so
9 that probably also needs to be recognized and
10 accounted for.
11 DR. ANDERSEN: So 7 may be more
12 different from 8.
13 DR. HILL: Than 6 is or 10 is.
14 MS. SEIDMAN: Excuse me, handling in
15 what respect?
16 DR. HILL: If you look at the biological
17 handling of fatty acids, and I think the analogy
18 here of carboxylic acids, even chain and odd chain
19 are handled very differently by biologically and
20 double bonds also have some nuances of handling.
21 MS. SEIDMAN: You're talking about
22 metabolism?
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
143
1 DR. HILL: I'm talking about
2 chain-shortening metabolism, yes. So there's the
3 parent dicaroxylic acid and then assuming the
4 esters are hydrolyzed which there's a lot of
5 implicit assumption that that is the case, where
6 does that happen and when? Does it happen in skin
7 so that nothing systemic leaves other than
8 dicarboxylic acid in each case? Or we have
9 monoesters? Or we have diesters making it into
10 other tissues? Then if you liberate the alcohols,
11 and that happens immediately and fast wherever the
12 compound is dosed, then the toxicology of the
13 alcohols comes into play depending on how much
14 dermal penetration if it's dermal.
15 DR. MARKS: I think, Valerie, when the
16 nuances start as we decide on what ingredients
17 that we include in this report, we're going to
18 have to catch those nuances that Dr. Hill
19 mentioned. Ron Shank, going back, and one of the
20 questions was Table 5 and Table 5-B and 5-C. I
21 don't think you found them particularly helpful.
22 Could you help clarify that so they could be
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
144
1 improved in the future?
2 DR. SHANK: There's not enough
3 information in my opinion in those three tables to
4 warrant the space of the tables, so I would just
5 include that information in the text.
6 MS. SEIDMAN: I tried to do a table here
7 just because I personally am frustrated as a
8 toxicologist in going through text because I
9 cannot compare doses, I cannot compare species, I
10 can't get a quick read on the data. So personally
11 I felt it was really useful to put things in
12 tables. This table might not have a lot, so you
13 might say for acute maybe we can just do text.
14 Still, for me I find it useful because I can see
15 the doses readily and the species readily and the
16 numbers of animals used. It's all right there.
17 But think about it maybe more for the longer- term
18 studies if you're not happy with it for acute. I
19 think most toxicologists find it very useful to
20 put things in tables.
21 DR. HILL: I would echo the benefits of
22 tables for me for the same exact reasons you said,
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
145
1 unless there's just really not much data at all.
2 Even if there are two data lines, still you can
3 compare numbers of animals, doses, route of
4 administration, all those things you mentioned.
5 MS. SEIDMAN: We think alike.
6 DR. MARKS: Ron Shank, what more would
7 you liked to have seen?
8 DR. SHANK: I don't put that much
9 importance on acute toxicity tests when we're
10 talking about cosmetics products. We never have a
11 problem with acute toxicity. So to put that
12 information in a table, yes, it makes it easier to
13 read. It's good to have, but I don't use it in my
14 safety evaluation for a cosmetic product because
15 we never get to acute toxicity problems.
16 MS. SEIDMAN: So the relevance of the
17 acute for cosmetic products is not important.
18 That I can accept. But think about other end
19 points as you go through this. This is just a
20 trial balloon, so for other end points that might
21 be more relevant to cosmetic products.
22 DR. SHANK: Absolutely, yes.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
CIR Panel Book Page 43
146
1 DR. MARKS: I think the conclusion is
2 that we will recommend tabling this. Actually
3 it's the Belsito team which will report first, but
4 we will recommend tabling it to get the genotox
5 and carcinogenicity data in the text and also to
6 firm up what ingredients are actually going to
7 appear in this report. Are there any other
8 comments?
9 DR. ANDERSEN: I think in terms of some
10 of the lessons for this, I want to make sure it
11 gets captured in terms of the data that had been
12 in the back of the report on all of the clinical
13 testing, the skin treatments. You're reaffirming
14 that those, to the extent that they describe the
15 clinical effectiveness, have no place in a safety
16 assessment and if there were safety data such as
17 may be gleaned from what you've provided, Valerie,
18 those will stand on their own.
19 DR. MARKS: Correct.
20 DR. ANDERSEN: So we can really shorten
21 that section down to almost zero.
22 DR. MARKS: Yes. I have it deleted.
ANDERSON COURT REPORTING
706 Duke Street, Suite 100
Alexandria, VA 22314
Phone (703) 519-7180 Fax (703) 519-7190
147
1 Correct.
2 DR. ANDERSEN: Thank you. Halyna will
3 be pleased.
4 DR. MARKS: Shall we take a break for
5 lunch? Do you think we'll be able to do kojic
6 acid in 5 minutes?
7 DR. BERGFELD: No.
8 DR. ANDERSEN: The audience is on their
9 own for lunch. The panel will be going downstairs
10 to the lobby, make a left, go past the desk, down
11 to the end to the Carleton Room for lunch.
12 (Recess)
CIR Panel Book Page 44
Draft Report
Dicarboxylic Acids and Their Salts as Used in Cosmetics Esters of Dicarboxylic Acids as Used in Cosmetics
August 30, 2010 The 2010 Cosmetic Ingredient Review Expert Panel members are: Chairman, Wilma F. Bergfeld, M.D., F.A.C.P.; Donald V. Belsito, M.D.; Curtis D. Klaassen, Ph.D.; Daniel C. Liebler, Ph.D.; Ronald A Hill, Ph.D. James G. Marks, Jr., M.D.; Ronald C. Shank, Ph.D.; Thomas J. Slaga, Ph.D.; and Paul W. Snyder, D.V.M., Ph.D. The CIR Director is F. Alan Andersen, Ph.D. This report was prepared by Monice M. Fiume, Scientific Analyst/Writer, and Bart A. Heldreth, Ph.D., Chemist.
© Cosmetic Ingredient Review 1101 17th Street, NW, Suite 412 " Washington, DC 20036-4702 " ph 202.331.0651 " fax 202.331.0088 "
CIR Panel Book Page 45
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................................. 1
Chemistry ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Definition, Structure and Manufacture .................................................................................................................................... 1
Physical and Chemical Properties ........................................................................................................................................... 2
Analytical Methods ................................................................................................................................................................. 3
Impurities ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3
Ultraviolet Absorption ............................................................................................................................................................ 4
Use ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Cosmetic ................................................................................................................................................................................. 4
Non-Cosmetic ......................................................................................................................................................................... 5
DICARBOXYLIC ACIDS AND THEIR SALTS ....................................................................................................................... 6
General Biology ........................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion ............................................................................................................ 6
Percutaneous Absorption ...................................................................................................................................................... 10
Peroxisome Proliferation....................................................................................................................................................... 11
Cellular Effects ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Animal Toxicology .................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Acute Toxicity ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Short-Term Oral Toxicity ..................................................................................................................................................... 12
Short-Term Inhalation Toxicity ............................................................................................................................................ 12
Subchronic Oral Toxicity ...................................................................................................................................................... 13
Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity ............................................................................................................................................. 13
Chronic Oral Toxicity ........................................................................................................................................................... 14
Ocular Irritation .................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Dermal Irritation/Sensitization .............................................................................................................................................. 15
Mucosal Irritation.................................................................................................................................................................. 16
Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity ................................................................................................................................ 16
Genotoxicity............................................................................................................................................................................... 18
In Vitro .................................................................................................................................................................................. 18
In Vivo .................................................................................................................................................................................. 19
Carcinogenicity .......................................................................................................................................................................... 19
Tumor Promotion .................................................................................................................................................................. 19
Clinical Assessment of Safety .................................................................................................................................................... 20
Dermal Irritation ................................................................................................................................................................... 20
Case Reports ......................................................................................................................................................................... 21
ESTERS OF DICARBOXYLIC ACIDS ................................................................................................................................... 22
General Biology ......................................................................................................................................................................... 22
Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion .......................................................................................................... 22
Penetration Enhancement ...................................................................................................................................................... 26
Peroxisome Proliferation....................................................................................................................................................... 26
Mechanism ....................................................................................................................................................................... 27
DNA Binding/DNA Synthesis .............................................................................................................................................. 29
Hepatic Lipid Metabolism .................................................................................................................................................... 30
Cellular Effects ..................................................................................................................................................................... 30
Animal Toxicology .................................................................................................................................................................... 30
Acute Toxicity ...................................................................................................................................................................... 30
Short-Term Oral Toxicity ..................................................................................................................................................... 31
Short-Term Dermal Toxicity ................................................................................................................................................. 32
Subchronic Oral Toxicity ...................................................................................................................................................... 33
Subchronic Dermal Toxicity ................................................................................................................................................. 34
Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity ............................................................................................................................................. 34
Chronic Oral Toxicity ........................................................................................................................................................... 34
Inhalation Toxicity ................................................................................................................................................................ 35
Ocular Irritation .................................................................................................................................................................... 35
Dermal Irritation ................................................................................................................................................................... 36
Dermal Sensitization ............................................................................................................................................................. 38
CIR Panel Book Page 46
iii
Phototoxicity ......................................................................................................................................................................... 38
Mucous Membrane Irritation ................................................................................................................................................ 38
Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity ................................................................................................................................ 39
Endocrine Disruption ............................................................................................................................................................ 44
Genotoxicity............................................................................................................................................................................... 44
Carcinogenicity .......................................................................................................................................................................... 46
Tumor Promotion .................................................................................................................................................................. 47
Clinical Assessment of Safety .................................................................................................................................................... 47
Human Exposure ................................................................................................................................................................... 47
Dermal Irritation and Sensitization ....................................................................................................................................... 47
Phototoxicity and Photosensitization .................................................................................................................................... 49
Ocular Irritation .................................................................................................................................................................... 49
Comedogenicity .................................................................................................................................................................... 50
Case Reports ......................................................................................................................................................................... 50
Risk Assessment .................................................................................................................................................................... 50
Summary .................................................................................................................................................................................... 51
Discussion .................................................................................................................................................................................. 56
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................................. 56
References .................................................................................................................................................................................. 57
CIR Panel Book Page 47
1
INTRODUCTION
This safety assessment includes sebacic acid and other alkyl α,ω-dicarboxylic acids, salts, monoesters and diesters.
The dicarboxylic acids are terminally functionalized straight alkyl chains characterized by a separation between the acid
functional groups of one to 10 carbons (1 carbon = malonic acid; 2 carbons = succinic acid; 3 carbons = glutaric acid; 4
carbons = adipic acid; 5-6 carbons = no representative cosmetic ingredients; 7 carbons = azelaic acid; 8 carbons = sebacic
acid; 9 carbons = no representative cosmetic ingredients; and 10 carbons = dodecanedioic acid). The simple alkyl di-esters
are the result of the condensation of alkyl dicarboxylic acids and two equivalents of alkyl alcohols. These ingredients can be
metabolized via hydrolysis back to the parent alcohol, the mono-ester, and the parent dicarboxylic acid (Figure 1). The
simple alkyl esters (mono- and di-) of these dicarboxylic acids have straight or branched side chains ranging in length from
one to 18 carbons. Throughout this report, the data are presented by order of acid chain length (i.e., beginning with malonic
acid and ending with dodecanedioic acid; beginning with dimethyl malate and ending with diisocetyl dodecanedioate).
Accordingly, this draft report presents available information pertinent to the safety of 56 cosmetic ingredients in two
groups, first, the 12 alkyl dicarboxylic acids/salts and, second, the 44 corresponding esters (mono- and di-). The alkyl dicar-
boxylic acids and salts include:
malonic acid
succinic acid
sodium succinate
disodium succinate
glutaric acid
adipic acid
azelaic acid
dipotassium azelate
disodium azelate
sebacic acid
disodium sebacate
dodecanedioic acid.
The esters include:
diethyl malonate
decyl succinate
dimethyl succinate
diethyl succinate
dicapryl succinate
dicetearyl succinate
diisobutyl succinate
diethylhexyl succinate
dimethyl glutarate
dibutyl glutarate
diisostearyl glutarate
dimethyl adipate
diethyl adipate
dipropyl adipate
dibutyl adipate
dihexyl adipate
dicapryl adipate
di-C12-15 alkyl adipate
ditridecyl adipate
dicetyl adipate
diisopropyl adipate
diisobutyl adipate
diethylhexyl adipate
diisooctyl adipate
diisononyl adipate
diisodecyl adipate
dihexyldecyl adipate
diheptylundecyl adipate
dioctyldodecyl adipate
diisocetyl adipate
diisostearyl adipate
isostearyl sebacate
diethyl sebacate
dibutyl sebacate
dicaprylyl/capryl sebacate
diisopropyl sebacate
diethylhexyl sebacate
dibutyloctyl sebacate
diisooctyl sebacate
dihexyldecyl sebacate
dioctyldodecyl sebacate
isostearyl sebacate
dioctyldodecyl dodecanedioate
diisocetyl dodecanedioate
CIR Panel Book Page 48
1
The structures and functions of these ingredients are presented in Table 1.
A safety assessment of diethylhexyl adipate (often inaccurately named dioctyl adipate)1 and diisopropyl adipate was
published in 1984 with the conclusion that these ingredients are safe as used in cosmetics.2 The safety of these ingredients
was reviewed and confirmed in 20053 and 2006.4 Additionally, dibutyl adipate was previously reviewed in 1996 and the
available data were found insufficient to support the safety of dibutyl adipate in cosmetic formulations. When re-reviewed in
2006, additional data were made available to address the needs identified by the CIR Expert Panel, and an amended
conclusion was issued stating that dibutyl adipate is safe for use in cosmetic formulations.5
The ingredients in this report function in cosmetics as pH-adjusters, fragrance ingredients, plasticizers, skin-
conditioning agents and/or solvents and corrosion inhibitors.
CHEMISTRY
Definition, Structure and Manufacture
The CAS numbers, definitions, structures and functions for the alkyl dicarboxylic acid, salt and ester ingredients
included in this report are given in Table 1.
Alkyl Dicarboxylic Acids
While many of the alkyl dicarboxylic acids are natural products, commercial production of these acids has historical-
ly occurred via alkali pyrolysis of lipids.6 For example, when castor oil (a lipid which is comprised of approximately 84%
ricinoleic acid-sidechain bearing triglycerides) is pyrolyzed with sodium hydroxide, some of the major products are sebacic
acid and 2-octanol (Figure 2).6 Sodium and potassium salts of the alkyl dicarboxylic acids are readily prepared via addition to
the appropriate stoichiometric equivalent(s) of sodium hydroxide or potassium hydroxide, respectively.
Malonic Acid (C3)
Malonic acid, first prepared by malic acid oxidation, is commonly manufactured by more recent methods including
the ozonolysis of cyclopentadiene or the air oxidation of 1,3-propanediol.7
Succinic Acid (C4)
Succinic acid is an intermediate of the citric acid cycle and is found in almost all plant and animals cells, although at
very low concentrations.8 Succinic acid is commonly produced synthetically by catalytic (e.g., nickel or palladium catalyst)
hydrogenation of maleic anhydride.
Glutaric (C5) and Adipic(C6) Acids
Although glutaric acid is often encountered in nature, adipic acid is not commonly encountered in nature. Glutaric
and adipic acids were first synthesized by oxidation of castor oil with nitric acid. However, adipic acid is now more common-
ly manufactured by oxidation of cyclohexane, cyclohexanol, or cyclohexanone, and glutaric acid may be manufactured by
ozonolysis of cyclopentene.9
Azelaic Acid (C9)
Azelaic acid, first detected in rancid fats, was originally produced via nitric acid oxidation of oleic acid. 10 Azelaic
acid is a naturally-occurring dicarboxylic acid that can be found in dietary sources, such as whole grains.11 Azelaic acid is
commonly manufactured by oxidative cleavage of oleic acid (obtained from grease or tallow) with chromic acid, nitric acid or
by ozonolysis.10,7
Sebacic Acid (C10)
Sebacic acid was originally isolated from distillation products of beef tallow. More recently, however, sebacic acid
has been manufactured via alkali pyrolysis of castor oil, as mentioned above and drawn in Figure 2, or by alkali pyrolysis of
CIR Panel Book Page 49
2
ricinoleic acid.12,7
Dodecanedioic Acid (C12)
Dodecanedioic acid can be manufactured by fermentation of long-chain alkanes with a specific strain of Candida
tropicalis.13 Another method of manufacture involves the nitric acid oxidation of a mixture of cyclododecanone and
cyclododecanol.7
Alkyl Dicarboxylic Acid Esters
The alkyl dicarboxylic acids are easily esterified with the appropriate alcohol, with our without acid or metal catalyst
(Fischer esterification).9 For example, diethylhexyl adipate can be manufactured from adipic acid and ethylhexanol with an
acid catalyst (Figure 3).
Diethyl Malonate
Malonic acid esters can be produced either by cobalt-catalyzed alkoxycarbonylation of chloroacetates with carbon
monoxide in the presence of the appropriate alcohol, or by hydrolysis of cyanoacetic acid followed by esterification with the
respective alcohol.14 Diethyl malonate is prepared from chloroacetic acid and sodium cyanide followed by esterification with
ethanol and sulfuric acid.15
Diisopropyl Adipate
Diisopropyl adipate is produced by esterification of adipic acid with an excess of isopropanol. The excess alcohol is removed by vacuum stripping and the ester is then alkali-refined and filtered. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Dibutyl Adipate
Adipic acid is esterified with butyl alcohol by a continuous distillation process.16
Diethylhexyl Adipate
Diethylhexyl adipate can be prepared by the reaction of adipic acid and 2-ethylhexanol in the presence of an esterifi-
cation catalyst such as sulfuric acid or para-toluenesulfonic acid (Figure 3).17 Purification of the reaction product includes
removal of the catalyst, alkali refining, and stripping.2
Alkyl Succinates
Succinic anhydride reacts readily with alcohols to give monoesters of succinic acid (e.g., decyl succinate from
decanol), which are readily further esterified to the diesters by Fischer methods.7 Dimethyl succinate can be produced from
methanol and succinic anhydride or succinic acid, or by hydrogenation of dimethyl maleate. Diethyl succinate can be
prepared by the same methods (from ethanol or diethyl maleate).
Physical and Chemical Properties
Tables 2a lists physical and chemical properties of the dicarboxylic acids and salts and Table 2b lists the properties
of the esters. Charts 1a, 1b, and 2 demonstrate the relationship between molecular weight and the log octanol – water
partioning coefficient.
Dicarboxylic Acids - General
The alkyl dicarboxylic acids vary considerably in their physical properties. The shorter chain (malonic, succinic, and
glutaric) members are crystalline solids, very water-soluble and have limited solubility in organic solvents. As the chain
length increases through adipic to dodecanedioic, water solubility decreases sharply (although still soluble in hot water). In
other words, the water solubility of these acids is inversely proportional to their chain length. There is a marked alternation in
melting point with changes in carbon number from even to odd.7 Odd members (e.g., malonic acid and glutaric acid) exhibit
CIR Panel Book Page 50
3
lower melting points and higher solubility than even carbon number alkyl dicarboxylic acids (e.g., succinic acid and adipic
acid). These alternating effects are believed to be the result of the inability of odd carbon number compounds to assume an
in-plane orientation of both carboxyl groups with respect to the hydrocarbon chain.
Dicarboxylic acids react with Brønsted-Lowry bases (e.g., sodium hydroxide) to form carboxylate salts (e.g., sodium
succinate or disodium succinate). Dicarboxylic acids also react with alcohols to give mono- and di-esters, such as those in
this report.
Esters
The diesters, in contrast, are much more lipid soluble and more difficult to dissolve in water. The mono-esters, by
definition, are hybrids of the acids and diesters, but their physical properties are much more closely related to the diesters.
The short-chain alkyl (i.e., methyl, isopropyl, and butyl) mono- and diesters are more soluble in water, less lipo-
philic, and relatively more volatile than the corresponding longer-chain alkyl (i.e., C8-C13 alcohol) esters.18 Most esters with
molecular weights greater than 340 have boiling points greater than 300°C and are relatively non-volatile and lipophilic (log
Kow >7).
Analytical Methods
Succinic Acid
Methods used to analyze succinic acid include acidimetric titration for acidity; comparison with Pt-Co standard
calibrated solutions for color; oxidation with potassium permanganate for detection of unsaturated compounds; atomic
absorption or plasma spectroscopy for metals; and titration with silver nitrate or barium chloride for chloride or sulfate
detection, respectively.7 Small concentrations of succinic acid can be detected by common instrumentation such as gas/liquid
chromatography and polarography.
Adipic Acid
Adipic acid can be extracted from a water sample and analyzed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry.17
Sebacic Acid
Gas chromatography can be used to identify sebacic acid in air.19
Diisopropyl Adipate and Diethylhexyl Adipate
Diisopropyl adipate and diethylhexyl adipate can be identified through standard infrared (IR) spectroscopy. Gas-liquid chromatography (GLC), liquid-liquid extraction, mass spectrometry, and high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) are also methods of analysis for the adipates. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Impurities
Diethyl Malonate
Diethyl malonate is a colorless organic liquid with an ester like odor.14 The purity is typically > 99 %. Impurities
from the production process include ethanol (ca. 0.1 % w/w), ethyl acetate (ca. 0.05 % w/w), and ethyl methyl malonate (ca.
0.05 % w/w).
Dibutyl Adipate
Impurities are generally not found due to the manufacturing process, but available data demonstrate that arsenic
levels are below a detection limit of 1 ppm, heavy metals (as lead) are below a detection limit of 10 ppm, and sulfated ash is
below a detection limit of 0.1%.16
Diisopropyl Adipate and Diethylhexyl Adipate
Diisopropyl adipate and diethylhexyl adipate are considered stable; however, hydrolysis of the ester groupings may occur in the presence of aqueous acids or bases. No known impurities occur in either
CIR Panel Book Page 51
4
diisopropyl adipate or diethylhexyl adipate, although the acid values imply the presence of adipic acid or of the monoester in both. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2 Diethylhexyl adipate is commercially available with the following specifications: purity – 99 to 99.9%; acidity – 0.25
µg/100g max; moisture – 0.05 to 0.10% max.17
Diisopropyl Sebacate
A supplier reported that the expected impurities in diisopropyl sebacate are the starting material sebacic acid, <0.3%,
and isopropyl alcohol, <0.2%.20
Ultraviolet Absorption
Absorption of ultraviolet (UV) radiation was not detected in the 280 - 500 nm range.21
USE
Cosmetic
The ingredients included in this safety assessment have a variety of functions in cosmetics.22 The majority of the
dicarboxylic acids function in cosmetics as pH adjusters and fragrance ingredients. The functions of most of the salts are not
reported, but it is stated that sodium succinate functions as a buffering agent and pH adjuster. For the esters, some of the
common functions include skin conditioning agents, fragrance ingredients, plasticizers, solvents, and emollients. The
functions of all ingredients are listed in Table 1.
Six of the 12 dicarboxylic acids and their salts and 24 of the 44 esters included in this safety assessment are reported
to be used in cosmetic formulations. The frequency of use of the acids and salts, as supplied to the Food and Drug Admini-
stration (FDA) by industry as part of the Voluntary Cosmetic Registration Program (VCRP),23 and the concentration of use, as
supplied by industry in response to a Personal Care Products Council (Council) survey, are found in Table 3a. The frequency
and concentration of use of the esters, with the exception of dibutyl, diisopropyl, and diethylhexyl adipate, which have
previously been reviewed, are found in Table 3b. The current and historical use data for the 3 previously reviewed esters are
found in Table 3c. The 6 acids and salts and 20 esters not currently reported to be used are listed in Table 3d.
For the dicarboxylic acids and their salts, disodium succinate has the greatest number of reported uses, with a total
of 45. The acid with the greatest concentration of use is succinic acid, 26%; use at this concentration is in rinse-off products.
The greatest leave-on concentration is 0.4%, disodium succinate, with dermal contact exposure.
For the esters, diisopropyl adipate has the greatest number of uses, with 70 reported. The concentration of use is
greatest for dimethyl glutarate, 15% in a dermal rinse-off product. The ingredients with the greatest leave-on use concentra-
tions, which are all dermal contact exposures, are diethylhexyl adipate, 14%, diisostearyl adipate, 10%, and diisopropyl
sebacate, 10%.
A few of the ingredients are applied around the eye, can possibly be ingested, or involve mucous membrane expo-
sure, and some are used in underarm deodorant. None are reported to be used in baby products.
Dicapryl and diethylhexyl succinate, dibutyl, dicapryl, diisopropyl, diisobutyl, and diethylhexyl adipate, diisopropyl,
diethylhexyl, and dioctyldodecyl sebacate, and dioctyldodecyl and diisocetyl dodecanedioate are used in hair sprays, and
effects on the lungs that may be induced by aerosolized products containing this ingredient, are of concern.
The aerosol properties that determine deposition in the respiratory system are particle size and density. The para-
meter most closely associated with deposition is the aerodynamic diameter, da, defined as the diameter of a sphere of unit
density possessing the same terminal settling velocity as the particle in question. In humans, particles with an aerodynamic
diameter of ≤ 10µm are respirable. Particles with a da from 0.1 - 10µm settle in the upper respiratory tract and particles with a
CIR Panel Book Page 52
5
da < 0.1 µm settle in the lower respiratory tract 24,25
Particle diameters of 60-80 µm and ≥80 µm have been reported for anhydrous hair sprays and pump hairsprays,
respectively.26 In practice, aerosols should have at least 99% of their particle diameters in the 10 – 110 µm range and the
mean particle diameter in a typical aerosol spray has been reported as ~38 µm.27 Therefore, most aerosol particles are
deposited in the nasopharyngeal region and are not respirable.
With the exception of dipotassium azelate, disodium sebacate, and di-C12-15 alkyl adipate, the dicarboxylic acids
and their salts and esters are listed for use by the European Union (EU) without restriction.28 Adipic acid is on the EU
Dangerous Substances List; it is classified as Xi (irritant) and R36 (irritating to eyes).
Non-Cosmetic
Many of the dicarboxylic, their salts, and their esters are used in many foods as direct or indirect food additives. The
alkyl dicarboxylic acids are unusually versatile because of their two carboxyl groups.9 This enables many additional types of
useful reactions, particularly the manufacture of polymers (e.g., nylon). The most common uses include functions as plastici-
zers, lubricants and building blocks in the manufacture of polyesters, polyamides and other plastics. The alkyl dicarboxylic
acid salts are used to synthesize cyclic ketones, including commercially used macrocyclic musk compounds.29 The diesters
have widespread use as lubricants, plasticizers, and solvents.30
Malonic Acid
Malonic acid is a useful intermediate in the manufacture of barbiturates.31
Succinic Acid
Succinic acid is listed by the FDA as a food additive that is Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS).32 Succinic acid
is also utilized in detergents, pigments, toners, cement additives, soldering fluxes and as an intermediate in the synthesis of a
number of pharmaceutical products.7
Adipic Acid
Adipic acid is listed as a GRAS food additives by the FDA.33 Adipic acid has several industrial uses in the
production of adhesives, plasticizers, gelatinizing agents, hydraulic fluids, lubricants, emollients, polyurethane foams, leather
tanning, and urethane.7 However, the bulk of the industrial production of adipic acid is driven by its usefulness in the
manufacture of nylon-6,6 (in combination with 1,6-hexanediamine).
Azelaic Acid
FDA has approved azelaic acid for use in treating acne and rosacea. A skin cream containing 20% (w/w) azelaic
acid, is indicated for the topical treatment of mild-to-moderate inflammatory acne vulgaris,34 and a gel containing 15% azelaic
acid is approved for treating rosacea.35 These drugs are available by prescription only.
Azelaic acid is used in the manufacture of plasticizers, lubricants, and greases. Azelaic acid was identified as a
molecule that accumulated at elevated levels in some parts of plants and was shown to be able to enhance the resistance of
plants to infections.36
Sebacic Acid
Sebacic acid was widely used in the U.S. as an aromatic in food before 1973.37
Sebacic acid is used in resorbable polymer systems that deliver chemotherapeutic agents (e.g. cisplatin, carboplatin)
that are implanted at the site of tumors to provide for sustained release of the drugs.38 Sebacic acid and its derivatives have a
variety of industrial uses as plasticizers, lubricants, diffusion pump oils, candles and as intermediates in the synthesis of
polyamides and various alkyd resins.7
CIR Panel Book Page 53
6
Dodecanedioic Acid
Dodecanedioic acid is used in the production of nylon (nylon-6,12), polyamides, coatings, adhesives, greases,
polyesters, dyestuffs, detergents, flame retardants, and fragrances.
Diethyl Malonate
Diethyl malonate finds great utility as the starting material in Malonic Ester Synthesis, a classic organic chemistry
reaction wherein a very wide variety of esters can be synthesized.29
Diisobutyl Adipate
The FDA has included diisobutyl adipate in Part 181 of Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) – Prior-
Sanctioned Food Ingredients, Subpart B--Specific Prior-Sanctioned Food Ingredients includes Sec. 181.27, Plasticizers. In
this section, “substances classified as plasticizers, when migrating from food-packaging material shall include...diisobutyl
adipate...” (21 CFR § 181.27).
Diethylhexyl Adipate
Diethylhexyl adipate is used as a plasticizer for polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastics.39
Diethyl Sebacate
Diethyl sebacate was widely used in the U.S. as an aromatic in food before 1973.37
Dibutyl Sebacate
Dibutyl sebacate is a component of PVC.40
DICARBOXYLIC ACIDS AND THEIR SALTS
Much of the information on the dicarboxylic acids was obtained from summary documents that mostly contained
unpublished data. The summary documents are therefore listed as the citation, and, when there are numerous studies
described, will only be cited at the beginning of that section.
GENERAL BIOLOGY
Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion
Dicarboxylic acids are natural metabolic products of the ω-oxidation of monocarboxylic acids when the β-oxidation
of free fatty acids is impaired.41 Under normal physiological conditions, dicarboxylic acids are rapidly β-oxidized, resulting
in very low cellular concentrations and practically non-detectable concentrations in the plasma.42 Medium-chain dicarboxylic
acids (up to 12 carbon atoms) are β-oxidized in mitochondria and peroxisomes. Oxidation of odd- and even-numbered chains
proceeds to different end points. Odd-chain dicarboxylic acids are β-oxidized, giving acetyl Co-A and malonic acid (C3).
Oxidation can then go no further, and malonic acid is the starter of fatty acid synthesis. Even-chain carboxylic acids are com-
pletely oxidized and produce succynil-CoA, a gluconeogenic substrate, as an intermediate metabolite.
Dicarboxylic acids are more polar than their esters, therefore they will diffuse less readily through normal cell
membranes.43
Malonic Acid
Malonic acid can be activated to malonyl-CoA and undergoes decarboxylation to acetyl-CoA by various mammalian
tissues.14
Adipic Acid
In animals, after oral dosing with adipic acid, 70% of the dose was exhaled as carbon dioxide. Adipic acid and a number of metabolites was recovered in the urine, while very little radioactivity was found in the tissues. After oral dosing in conjunction with i.p. sodium malonate, the presence of radioactive adipic and succinic acid was an indication of β-oxidation. Oral studies have reported recovering 53-67% unchanged adipic acid in the urine,
CIR Panel Book Page 54
7
while 59-71% was recovered in the urine following i.v. dosing and 61% was recovered following s.c. dosing, with an increase in urinary oxalic acid. In humans, 6.76-61% of the dose was recovered unchanged following oral dosing with adipic acid.
A summary document on adipic acid contained a number of excretion and metabolism studies that were performed
between 1918-1960.44 These studies are described below.
Animal Adipic acid metabolism was studied using fasted male albino rats. In one study, in which the rats were dosed orally,
by gavage, with 50 mg radioactive adipic acid (labeled on C1 or C2), 70% of the dosed was exhaled as carbon dioxide.
Adipic acid and the metabolites urea, glutamic acid, lactic acid, β-ketoadipic acid, and citric acid, were recovered in the urine.
Very little radioactivity was found in the tissues. Fasted male rats were also given a solution containing 50 mg radioactive
adipic acid (labeled on C1), by gavage, in conjunction with 2 ml of 0.5 M sodium malonate, given by intraperitoneal (i.p.)
injection. Both radioactive adipic acid and succinic acid were found in the urine, an indication that adipic acid underwent
β-oxidation. By feeding rats 25 mg radioactive adipic acid (labeled on C1) and 100 mg γ-phenyl-α-aminobutyric acid, it was
determined that acetate is a metabolite of adipic acid. Finally, rats were given radioactive sodium bicarbonate with non-
radioactive adipic acid. Radioactive citric acid was formed, which suggested that carbon dioxide interacted with a metabolite
of adipic acid.
Two rats were dosed orally by gavage with 2.43 g/kg partially neutralized adipic acid for 28 days. In the urine, 67%
of the dose was recovered unchanged. There was no change in excretion pattern over time during the study.
Rabbits were dosed orally by gavage (n=4) or by intravenous (i.v.) administration (n=2) with 2.43 g/kg partially
neutralized adipic acid for 2 days. Following oral administration, 53-61% of the dose was recovered unchanged in the urine.
With i.v. administration, 59-71% was recovered unchanged in the urine. In another study using rabbits, animals were given a
subcutaneous (s.c.) dose of 2000 mg adipic acid; 3 rabbits were given a single dose, one was dosed on days 1 and 5, and one
was dosed on days 1, 5, 9, 13, and 15. On average, 61% of the dose was recovered unchanged in the urine. There was an
increase in urinary oxalic acid concentrations.
A female dog was fed either 150 mg/kg adipic acid (in 2 feedings) for 5 days or 750 mg/kg (in 2 feedings) for 7
days. In the urine, 18% and 63.6% of the low and high doses were recovered unchanged.
Rabbits (number not stated) were given up to 4 s.c. injections of ≤2000 mg sodium adipate.45 An average of 61% of
the dose was recovered unchanged in the urine. Oxalic acid was increased in the urine.
Human In a study in which one subject was given 33 mg/kg sodium adipate, orally, for 5 days (10 g total), 6.76% of the
dose was recovered in the urine. In another study in which one person was given 100 mg/kg adipic acid for 10 days (70 g
total), 61% of the dose was recovered in the urine. Administration of 19.0 g adipic acid over 5 days or 23.4 g over 6 or 9
days (1 subject per dose) resulted in 53% of the administered dose recovered in the urine.
C9 to C12 Dicarboxylic Acids
For rats dosed orally with azelaic, sebacic, undecanedioic, and dodecanedioic acid, 2.5, 2.1, 1.8, and 1.6% of the respective acid was found in the urine unchanged. In humans the amount recovered decreased with increasing chain length. After oral dosing, 60, 17, 5, and 0.1% of azelaic, sebacic, decanedioic, and undecanedioic acids, respectively, were recovered unchanged in the urine. In the plasma of both animals and humans, dicarboxylic acid catabolites that were 2-, 4-, or 6- carbons shorter than the corresponding dicarboxylic acid were found.
Animal Groups of 30 male Wistar rats were dosed orally, by gavage, with azelaic (C9), sebacic (C10), undecanedioic (C11),
CIR Panel Book Page 55
8
or dodecanedioic (C12) acid.46 Ten rats in each group were dosed with 20, 50, or 100 mg of the respective acid. Blood,
urine, and feces from the treated rats were analyzed and compared to the blank control obtained from untreated rats. (None of
the C9-C12 acids were found in the blank controls.) In urine, approximately 2.5% of azelaic, 2.1% of sebacic, 1.8% of unde-
canedioic, and 1.6% of dodecanedioic acid was recovered after 5 days; the amount recovered was not affected by dosage.
The dicarboxylic acids were not excreted in conjugated form. None of the C9-C12 dicarboxylic acids were recovered in the
feces. In the plasma, dicarboxylic acid catabolites that were 2-, 4-, or 6-carbons shorter than the corresponding dicarboxylic
acid were detected.
Human Groups of 3 male and 2 female subjects were also dosed with C9-C12 acids orally, in gelatin capsules, once a wk for
5 wks.46 The dose administered increased each week, from 0.5 g at wk 1 to 5.0 g at wk 5. None of the C9-C12 acids were
found in the blank control samples of blood, urine, and feces obtained from non-treated humans. In urine, approximately 60%
of azelaic, 17% of sebacic, 5% of undecanedioic, and 0.1% of dodecanedioic acid was recovered after 12 h; the amount re-
covered was not affected by dosage. At 24 h, the amounts recovered were not much increased. Initially, undecanedioic and
dodecanedioic acid administration raised the urinary pH to a value of 7.4-8.5; the pH returned to normal with 3-6 h. The
di-carboxylic acids were not excreted in conjugated form. None of the C9-C12 dicarboxylic acids were recovered in the
feces. In the plasma, dicarboxylic acid catabolites that were 2-, 4-, or 6-carbons shorter than the corresponding dicarboxylic
acid were detected. Plasma levels of azelaic acid peaked at 2 h, while the levels of the other three acids peaked at 3 h.
Recovery in the plasma was greatest for azelaic acid, 74.6 µg/ml with the 5 g dose, and the amount detected decreased with
increasing chain length.
Azelaic Acid
In animals, after oral dosing with azelaic acid, 40% of the radioactivity was recovered in the urine over 5 days, and 14.5% was found in expired carbon dioxide at 48 h. Mostly dicarboxylic acid metabolites were found in the blood for up to 72 h after dosing. Radioactivity was found in all tissues, with the greatest levels in the liver, lungs, and kidneys; levels then decreased in all organs, except the adipose tissue for which an increase continued. In humans, the dermal and oral administration of a 20% azelaic acid cream was compared. A total of 2.2% of the dose was recovered in the urine after dermal administration, as compared to 61.2% following oral administration. The calculated percutaneous absorption was determined to be 3.6%.
Azelaic acid is a dietary constituent found in whole grain cereals and animal products.47 It can be formed
endogenously from longer-chain dicarboxylic acids, metabolism of oleic acid, and ψ-oxidation of monocarboxylic acids.48
Endogenous plasma concentration and daily urinary excretion of azelaic acid are highly dependent on dietary intake. Azelaic
acid crosses the blood-brain barrier.49
Animal A group of 25 male Wistar rats were dosed orally, by gavage, with 100 µCi of [1,9-14C]azelaic acid, and the animals
were killed at various intervals 1-96 h after dosing.46 After 12 and 48 h, 13 and 14.5% of the radioactivity was found in
expired carbon dioxide, respectively. Approximately 40% of the radioactivity was recovered in the urine over 5 days. The
C7 and C5 dicarboxylic acid metabolites were found in the urine up to 72 h after dosing. Very little was recovered in the
feces. Labeled dicarboxylic acids were present in the blood for up to 72 h, and consisted mainly of dicarboxylic acid
metabolites. Radioactivity was found in all tissues, with the highest levels present in the liver, lungs, and kidneys after 12 h.
Tissue radioactivity levels then decreased slowly in all organs except adipose tissue, in which case increasing levels were still
seen at 96 h. Approximately 90% of the radioactivity found in the tissues was present in the lipids, and it was essentially
localized in the fatty acid portion of the triglycerides and of the phospholipids. Traces of C9, C5, and C7 dicarboxylic acids
were detected in the first 24 h.
CIR Panel Book Page 56
9
Human The percutaneous absorption of azelaic acid was determined using 6 male subjects. A total of 5 g of a cream
containing 20% azelaic acid was applied to the face (1 g), chest (2 g) and upper back (2 g) of each subject, giving an area
dose of approx 5 mg cream/cm2 skin. The test areas were covered 1 h after dosing with cotton tissues, and washed 24 h after
dosing. After 1 wk, 100 ml of an aq. microcrystalline suspension containing 1 g azelaic acid was given orally to each subject
Urinary excretion of unchanged azelaic acid was measured after each dose. Following dermal application, 1.29% of the dose
was recovered unchanged in the urine in 24 h, and a total of 2.2% was recovered by day 3. Following oral administration,
61.2% of the dose was recovered within 4 h; excretion was complete at this point. Assuming similar rates and pathways in
biotransformation following both routes of exposure, percutaneous absorption of azelaic acid was determined to be 3.6% of
the dermally applied dose.50
Sebacic Acid
Sebacic acid is oxidized to water and carbon dioxide, passing through acetyl-CoA and succinyl-CoA formation.51
Disodium Sebacate
In rat, following i.v. administration of disodium sebacate, 34.6% of the dose of the dose was recovered in the urine as sebacate and 5% was recovered as suberic acid. A total of 25% of the sebacate was recovered in expired carbon dioxide. No appreciable radioactivity was found in the body. Following i.p. administration, sebacate renal clearance was a concentration-independent function. With oral administration, the relative bioavailability was 69%. In humans given a steady infusion of disodium sebacate, less than 15% of the dose was recovered in the urine. The percent oxidation of sebacate was 6.14%
Animal Disodium sebacate, 80 and 160 mg with 25 µCi of (1,10)14C sebacic acid tracer, was administered by i.v. injection
to 14 male Wistar rats, and blood samples were obtained at various intervals 5-320 min after dosing.51 The plasma half-life of
radioactive disodium sebacate was 37.86 and 39.82 min for the 80 and 160 mg dose groups, respectively. The apparent
volume of distribution was 2.65 ml/100 g body wt.
In a second experiment, a group of 4 male Wistar rats were given 160 mg disodium sebacate with 25 µCi sebacic
acid tracer by i.v. injection, and expired carbon dioxide, urine, and feces were collected. The carbon dioxide half-life for
radioactive sebacate was 93.64 min; 25% of the administered dose was expired in carbon dioxide. A total of 34.6% of
sebacate was recovered in the urine in 24 h, while 5.08% suberic acid (C8) was recovered in the same time frame. Most of
the excretion occurred in the first 24 h. Radioactivity was not found in the feces.
In the third experiment, groups of 10 male Wistar rats were also given 160 mg disodium sebacate with 25 µCi
sebacic acid tracer by i.v. injection, and the animals were sacrificed at various intervals from 30-360 min after dosing and the
amount of radioactivity in various organs was analyzed. No appreciable radioactivity was found in the body. Sebacate
appeared to be in an absorption phase in fat 1 h after dosing, but no radioactivity was found in the body after 24 h.
The pharmacokinetics of disodium sebacate was studied in male and female Wistar rats.52 Sebacate was admini-
stered either i.p., 6 doses o f 10-320 mg, or orally, 2 doses of 80 or 60 mg. Plasma concentrations of sebacate and urinary
concentrations of sebacate and its products of β-oxidation (suberic and adipic acids) were measured using GLC/mass
spectrometry. Both renal and non-renal elimination parameters were obtained. The sebacate half-life was 31.5 min. The tissue
elimination rate was 0.0122 min-1, and the overall volume of distribution was 26.817 ml/100 g. The renal clearance was
0.291 ml/min/100 g, which was much less than the value of the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of approximately 1
ml/min/100g reported elsewhere, suggesting the presence of sebacate reabsorption from the ultrafiltrate. Sebacate renal
clearance was found to be a concentration-independent function, suggesting the presence of a passive back-diffusion. The
relative bioavailability of the oral route compared to the i.p. route was 69.09%, showing an extensive absorption of the
CIR Panel Book Page 57
10
compound.
Human The metabolism and excretion of disodium sebacate was studied in 7 fasting male subjects that were given a
continuous steady infusion of 20 g unlabeled disodium sebacate over 480 min.53 At 240 min into the infusion,
(1,10)[C14]-sebacic acid was infused simultaneously as a tracer (sp. act. 0.416 µCi/min). The was a gradual increase in the
amount of sebacate expired in carbon dioxide for the first 300 min; the value remained elevated for an additional 120 min
before declining. At 24 h, 11.38 mmol sebacate was recovered in the urine, as well as 2.04 mmol suberic acid and 1.11 mmol
adipic acid, which was less than 15% of the dose administered. The serum concentration of unlabeled sebacate reached a
plateau after 270 min of infusion. Ten to 15% of serum radioactivity was found in the aq. fraction of serum extracts. The
renal clearance rate was 5.67 ml/min. The overall tissue uptake of unlabeled sebacate was 180 µmol/min, and the apparent
distribution volume was 12.46 l. The percent oxidation of sebacate was 6.14%.
The pharmacokinetic profile of disodium sebacate during a short-time infusion (5 h at 10 g/h) was also studied in 7
male subjects .54 Sebacate in serum and urine was measured by HPLC. The apparent volume of distribution of sebacate was
8.39 l, and the plasma fractional removal rate constant was 0.0086 min-1.
Six male subjects were given a single i.v. bolus of 1 g disodium sebacate, while another 6 received 10 g of sebacate
in 500 ml of distilled water, i.v., at a rate of 3.33 g/h over 3 h.55 For the group given a bolus dose, the distribution phase had
a short half-life, 0.34 h, and a rapid elimination, 2.045 h-1. For the group given the 3 h infusion, 12% of the dose was excreted
as sebacic acid in 24 h; suberic acid (C8) and adipic acid were also present in the urine.
Dodecanedioic Acid
Approximately 50% of an oral dose of dodecanedioic acid was recovered in the urine of rats, and the C10, C8, and C6 metabolites were found up to 72 h after dosing. Labeled dicarboxylic acid was found in the blood for up to 72 h after dosing, mainly as the dicarboxylic acid metabolites. Radioactivity was found in all tissues, with the highest levels in the liver, lungs, and kidneys; after 24 h, the levels declined in all tissues except adipose.
A group of 25 male Wistar rats were dosed orally, by gavage, with 100 µCi of [10,11-3H]dodecanedioic acid, and
the animals were killed at various intervals 1-96 h after dosing.46 Approximately 50% of the radioactivity was recovered in
the urine over 5 days. The C10, C8, and C6 dicarboxylic acid metabolites were found up to 72 h after dosing. Only 2% of
the radioactivity was recovered in the feces. Labeled dicarboxylic acids were present in the blood for up to 72 h, and
consisted mainly of dicarboxylic acid metabolites. Radioactivity was found in all tissues, with the highest levels present in the
liver, lungs, and kidneys after 24 h. Tissue radioactivity levels then decreased slowly in all organs except adipose tissue, in
which case an increase in radioactivity was still seen at 96 h. Radioactivity levels were 20-40% lower in the lipid extracts of
the tissues than in the residual matter. 3H was distributed in the whole molecule, not only the fatty acid portion, of the
phospholipid and triglyceride fractions. Traces of C12, C10, C8,and C6 dicarboxylic acids were detected in the first 24 h.
Male Wistar rats were given an i.v. bolus of 800 µmol/kg disodium dodecanedioic acid.56 The apparent volume of
distribution was 0.248 l/kg, and the plasma half-life was 12.47 min. The renal clearance was 0.00051 l/kg/min, while
systemic clearance was 0.0138 l/kg/min. Only 3-5% of the dose was recovered in the urine.
Percutaneous Absorption
Azelaic Acid
Vehicle affects the absorption of azelaic acid.43 After a 12 h period, absorption from a 15% azelaic gel was 8%,
while absorption from a water-soluble polyethylene glycol ointment base was only 3%. (Species and details not given.)
The in vitro percutaneous absorption of a 15% azelaic acid gel, prior to or after the application of three different
moisturizer formulations, was determined.57 All doses were applied as 5 µl/cm2. The second dose was applied 15 min after
CIR Panel Book Page 58
11
the first. [14C]Azelaic acid had a finite dose absorption profile, with a rise to peak penetration followed by a slow but steady
decline. In vitro, 70% of the azelaic acid diffused into the reservoir solution. The application of a moisturizer, and whether it
was applied prior to or following azelaic acid administration, did not have a statistically significant effect on the penetration
of azelaic acid. However, there was a trend toward greater percutaneous penetration and mass distribution with the
application of a moisturizer lotion prior to the azelaic acid gel.
Peroxisome Proliferation
Adipic Acid
The effect of adipic acid on hepatic peroxisome proliferation was evaluated in an in vivo study in which 4 male F344
rats were fed chow containing 2% adipic acid dissolved in alcohol.58 After 3 wks of dosing, the animals were killed. Adipic
acid did not induce peroxisome proliferation and did not affect relative liver weight.
Cellular Effects
Dicarboxylic acids have a cytotoxic effect on the abnormally hyperactive and malignant epidermal melanocyte.
Dicarboxylic acids, C8to C13, have been shown to inhibit mitochondrial oxidoreductases,59 and they have been show to
reversibly inhibit microsomal NADPH and cytochrome P450 reductase.60 Medium chain length dicarboxylic acids are also
competitive inhibitors of tyrosinase in vitro.
Adipic Acid
The effect of adipic acid on primary keratinocyte cultures was evaluated using epidermal cells from neonatal NMRI
mice.61 Concentrations of ≤30 mM did not inhibit 3H-thymidine incorporation or affect DNA synthesis, while 40 and 50 mM
inhibited both of these parameters. No effect on labeling indices was observed with 1-30 mM adipic acid.
Azelaic Acid
Azelaic acid, a naturally occurring competitive inhibitor of tyrosinase, has a cytotoxic effect on malignant
melanocytes .62 Azelaic acid is also a competitive inhibitor of a number of oxidoreductive enzymes, enzymes involved in
DNA synthesis, and of oxidoreductases of the respiratory chain.63 In vitro, azelaic acid is a scavenger of toxic oxygen
species, inhibits oxyradical activity in cell cultures, and inhibits generation of reactive oxygen species by neutrophils. It has
been reported that, in vitro, azelaic acid has time- and dose-dependent, reversible, and anti-proliferative and cytotoxic effects
on a number of tumoral cell lines. Azelaic acid had no effect on normal cell lines.
Disodium Azelate
Disodium azelate inhibited cell proliferation and affected viability of Cloudman and Harding-Passey murine
melanomata at concentrations ≥10-2 M when incubated over a 3 day period.59 The mitochondria were the prime target of
action.
The effect of disodium azelate on primary keratinocyte cultures was evaluated using epidermal cells from neonatal
NMRI mice.61 A dose-dependent inhibition of 3H-thymidine incorporation into DNA, ranging from 50% inhibition with
20mM to 90% inhibition with 50mM disodium azelate, was observed following a 12 h incubation period. Concentrations of 1
and 10 mM did not affect DNA synthesis, but a marked reduction was seen with 20-50 mM. The effects on DNA synthesis
were time-dependent, with the maximum inhibitory effect observed at 4 h; this effect was reversible. RNA and protein
synthesis were also inhibited during the first 4 h of incubation with 50 mM disodium azelate. Cellular structure was altered
upon incubation with disodium azelate, primarily affecting mitochondria, and the rough endoplasmic reticulum. These effects
were also reversible.
Dodecanedioic Acid
The disodium salt of dodecanedioic acid inhibited cell proliferation and affected viability of Cloudman and Harding-
CIR Panel Book Page 59
12
Passey murine melanomata at concentrations ≥10-2 M when incubated over a 3 day period.59 The mitochondria was the prime
target of action.
ANIMAL TOXICOLOGY
Acute Toxicity
The oral LD50 values of the dicarboxylic acids for rats ranged from 0.94 g/kg adipic acid to ≥4 g/kg azelaic acid (although most reported values were >5 g/kg). The reported dermal LD50 values ranged from >6 g/kg dodecanedioic acid to >10 g/kg glutaric acid.
The acute oral, dermal, inhalation, and parenteral toxicity of the dicarboxylic acids and some of the salts are
summarized in Table 4.44,64-69
Short-Term Oral Toxicity
In short-term oral toxicity studies, ≤3000 mg/kg/day adipic acid did not produce significant toxicological effects in rats. Signs of toxicity were seen at >3600 mg/kg/day. No toxicity was observed with guinea pigs fed 400-600 mg/day azelaic acid.
Adipic Acid
Groups of 6 male Sprague-Dawley rats were dosed orally (method not specified) with 3600-5600 mg/kg adipic acid
as an 18.6-24.9% solution in saline for 14 days.44 Three animals of the 3600 mg/kg group, 5 of the 4000 mg/kg group, and all
of the 4500-5600 mg/kg groups died prior to study termination. Signs of toxicity included depressed activity, labored
respiration, ataxia, and convulsions. No gross findings were noted at necropsy at study termination.
Groups of 5 rats were dosed with 0 or 3000 mg/kg of a neutralized 20% adipic acid solution orally, by gavage, for 4
wks. A non-significant decrease in body weight gain was observed. In a 4 wk study in which a group of 3 rats was dosed
orally, by gavage, with 2400 mg/kg adipic acid, no significant toxicological effects were noted.
In a 4-wk dietary study in which groups of 17-20 female rats were fed 0-40 mg/day (0-435 mg/kg/day) adipic acid,
no effects were reported. The no-observable adverse effect level (NOAEL) was >435 mg/kg/day. In a 5-wk dietary study in
which groups of 15-18 male rats were fed 0-800 mg/day (0-13,333 mg/kg/day) decreased body weight gains, an unkempt
appearance, and diarrhea were observed for the animals fed 800 mg/day the first 3 wks. In another 5-wk dietary study in
which groups of 4 rats, gender not specified, were fed 100 or 200 mg/day (310-922 mg/kg/day) of a 20% adipic acid solution
in ethanol, 5 days/wk, no signs of toxicity were observed.
Ten rats were dosed orally, method not specified, with 199 mg/day (638-1332 mg/kg/day) sodium adipate, 5 days/wk
for 9 wks. No toxicological effects were observed.
A group of 5 guinea pigs, gender not specified, were dosed orally using capsules with 400 mg/day (682-942
mg/kg/day) adipic acid for 5 days, followed by dosing with 600 mg/day (1032-1739 mg/kg/day), 5 days/wk for 5 wks. No
signs of toxicity were observed.
No toxicity was observed in a study in which pigs were fed 1% adipic acid in the diet for 7 days.
Short-Term Inhalation Toxicity
Short-term inhalation exposure to 126 mg/m3 adipic acid to rats did not produce signs of toxicity, but exposure of mice to 460 mg/m3 did.
CIR Panel Book Page 60
13
Adipic Acid
Mice, gender and number per group not specified, were exposed to 460 mg/m3 adipic acid for 1.5 mos.44 (Details of
exposure were not specified.) Decreased weight gain, altered oxidase activity, and upper respiratory tract, liver, kidney, and
central nervous system effects were observed. (Details were not given.)
Two male and 2 female rats were exposed to 126 mg/m3 adipic acid for 15 days, 6 h/day. No signs of toxicity were
observed, and no gross or microscopic findings were noted at necropsy.
Subchronic Oral Toxicity
In a subchronic oral study, 10 male and 10 female rats exposed to 10% sodium succinate in the drinking water died, but no compound-related lesions were found. Body weights were decreased in rats given ≥2.5% sodium succinate for 13 wks, but toxicological treatment-related changes were not observed. Glutaric acid ad a low degree of toxicity to rats (at 2%) and dogs (concentration not specified) when given in the drinking water. Dietary administration of ≤3400 mg/kg/day adipic acid for 19 wks produced slight effects in the liver of male rats; the NOAEL was 3333 mg/kg. A mixture of adipic, glutaric, and succinic acids had a low degree of toxicity in rats when tested at 3% for 90-days.
Sodium Succinate
The oral toxicity of sodium succinate was evaluated using F344 rats.68 Groups of 10 males and 10 females were
given 0, 0.3, 0.6, 1.25, 2.5, 5 or 10% sodium succinate in the drinking water for 13 wks. All animals were killed at the
termination of dosing. Body weight gains of animals of the 10% group were significantly decreased, and all animals of this
group died by wk 4. These animals were extremely emaciated; however, no compound-related microscopic lesions were
found. Body weight gains were decreased in animals given ≥2.5% sodium succinate, as compared to controls. No toxicologi-
cal treatment-related effects were observed.
Glutaric Acid
The oral toxicity of 1-2% glutaric acid was evaluated in a 90-day study using rats.65 Glutaric acid had a low degree
of toxicity at ≤2%; decreased weight gains were seen with higher concentrations. No specific target organs were identified.
(Additional details, including the method of oral administration, were not given.) A low degree of toxicity was also reported
in a 90-day oral toxicity study using dogs. (Details were not provided.)
Adipic Acid
Groups of 8-10 male rats were given 0, 420, 840, 1700, or 3400 mg/kg/day sodium adipate for 19 wks in a protein
deficient diet.67 Animals were killed after either 7 wks or at study termination. For unexplained reasons, only 5-7
animals/group survived until study termination. Rats of the 3400 mg/kg/day group had decreased body weight gains and
decreased body weights. (Statistical significance not stated.) Slight effects were seen in the liver, and the NOAEL was 3333
mg/kg.
Adipic/Glutaric/Succinic Acid Mixture
The oral toxicity of a mixture of adipic, glutaric, and succinic acids, tested at 3%, was evaluated in a 90-day study.65
The mixture had a low degree of toxicity at this dose. Higher concentrations caused decreased weight gain. No specific
target organs were identified. (Additional details, including the method of oral administration and percentage of acids in the
mixture, were not given.)
Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity
Signs of toxicity were reported in a subchronic inhalation study in which mice were exposed to 13 or 120 mg/m3 adipic acid.
CIR Panel Book Page 61
14
Adipic Acid
Mice, gender and number per group not specified, were exposed to 13 or 120 mg/m3 adipic acid for 4 mos.44
(Details of exposure were not specified.) Decreased weight gain, altered oxidase activity, and upper respiratory tract, liver,
kidney, and central nervous system effects were observed.
Chronic Oral Toxicity
A low degree of toxicity to sodium succinate was observed in a 2 yr oral study using rats. Slight effects were seen in the livers of rats fed ≤3200 mg/kg/day adipic acid for 33 wks, and the NOAEL for rats fed a diet containing adipic acid for 2 yrs was 1%; no significant toxicological effects were seen at concentrations of ≤5%. No significant toxicological effects were observed for mice fed ≤280 mg/kg or rabbits fed ≤400 mg/kg azelaic acid for 180 days. Disodium sebacate was not toxic to rats or rabbits fed up to 1000 mg/kg for 6 mos.
Sodium Succinate
The oral toxicity of 1% sodium succinate was evaluated in rats in a 2-year study.65 A low degree of toxicity was
observed with this dose. Higher concentrations caused decreased weight gain. No specific target organs were identified.
(Additional details, including the method of oral administration, were not given.)
Adipic Acid
Groups of 13-15 male and female rats were fed a diet containing 0, 1600, or 3200 mg/kg/day adipic acid for 33
wks.44 Rats were killed at various intervals throughout the study. Ten of 14 rats fed 3200 mg/kg/day died during wks 0-4;
surviving rats had decreased weight gains during this time. However, at study termination, body weights were for surviving
animals of this group were similar to controls. Slight effects were seen in the liver. (Statistical significance not stated.)
In a 2-yr study, groups of 20 male rats were fed a diet containing 0, 0.1, 1, 3, and 5% adipic acid (equiv. to 0, 75,
750, 2250, and 3750 mg/kg/day), and a groups of 10 and 19 females were fed 0 and 1% adipic acid, respectively. Weight
gains of male rats fed 3 and 5% adipic acid were significantly less than controls. There were no significant toxicological
findings upon gross or microscopic observation. The NOAEL was 1% adipic acid for male and female rats.
Azelaic Acid
Groups of 15 male and 15 female Wistar rats were fed a diet containing 140 or 280 mg/kg azelaic acid for 180 days,
and a control group of 10 males and 10 females was given untreated feed.69 No significant toxicological effects were
observed. Growth was similar between test and control groups, as were the microscopic examinations and clinical chemistry
parameters. The researchers found similar, negative, results when groups of 10 male and 10 female New Zealand rabbits
were fed diets containing 0, 200, or 400 mg/kg azelaic acid for 180 days.
Disodium Sebacate
Groups of 10 male and 10 female Wistar rats were fed a diet containing 0, 500, or 1000 mg/kg disodium sebacate
for 6 mos, after which time they were killed and necropsied.64 Growth was similar between test and control groups, as were
the microscopic examinations and clinical chemistry parameters. The researchers found similar, negative, results when
groups of 10 male and 10 female New Zealand rabbits were fed diets containing 0, 750, or 1000 mg/kg disodium sebacate for
6 mos.
Ocular Irritation
For the dicarboxylic acids, the severity of ocular irritation seems to decrease with increasing carbon number. Succinic acid was a severe ocular irritant, glutaric acid was moderately irritating, and dodecanedioic acid was a slight irritant. Ocular irritation produced by adipic acid was dose-dependent.
CIR Panel Book Page 62
15
Succinic Acid
Succinic acid was severely irritating in an ocular irritation study.65 Details were not provided.
Glutaric Acid
Glutaric acid was a moderate ocular irritant.65 Details were not provided.
Adipic Acid
The ocular irritation of adipic acid was evaluated using groups of 2 albino rabbits.65 Ten or 57.1 mg of adipic acid
was placed in the eye of each rabbit, and the eye of 1 animal in each group was rinsed. Using 10 mg, no irritation was seen in
the rinsed eye, and the test article was minimally irritating to the unrinsed eye. With 57.1 mg adipic acid, mild to moderate
irritation was seen in both the rinsed and unrinsed eyes. Severe irritation was seen upon instillation of 0.1 ml, 100 mg, and 50
mg into the eyes of 6, 3, and 2 rabbits, respectively.44 The irritation had not cleared after 8 days.
Dodecanedioic Acid
In studies using rabbits that evaluated the ocular irritation of dodecanedioic acid, slight irritation was reported in one
study, with a primary irritation index (PII) of 11.96/110, and small areas of corneal opacity and mild conjunctival irritation
were seen in the other.66 Details were not provided.
Ocular irritation studies are summarized in Table 5.
Dermal Irritation/Sensitization
Slight to mild dermal irritation was observed for succinic, glutaric, and adipic acid. Adipic acid, dodecanedioic acid, and a mixture of succinic, glutaric, and adipic acids are not sensitizers.
Succinic Acid
Succinic acid was a slight to mild irritant to rabbit skin.65 Details were not provided.
Glutaric Acid
Glutaric acid was a slight irritant to rabbit skin.65 Details were not provided.
Adipic Acid
A dermal irritation study was performed in which 500 mg of 50% aq. adipic acid was applied under an occlusive
patch to a 5 cm x 5 cm area of intact and abraded skin of 6 rabbits for 24 h.44 With intact skin, an erythema score of 2-3/4
was reported, with clearing by day 3. With abraded skin, mild to severe erythema and edema were reported, which cleared by
day 7.
Adipic acid, undiluted or as an 80% aq. paste, was applied occlusively to the backs or ears of rabbits for 24 h. Two
rabbits were used per group. No irritation was observed on the backs of animals. Erythema was observed on the ear, with
clearing by 72 h. In another study in which adipic acid was applied occlusively for 24 h, irritation was not observed. Details
were not provided.
A semi-occlusive application of 500 mg of a paste of 50% adipic acid in propylene glycol to 6 rabbits produced
slight to mild irritation in 3 of the rabbits. A semi-occlusive application of undiluted adipic acid was not corrosive. Using 10
guinea pigs, 50% adipic acid in propylene glycol was not irritating.
The sensitization potential of adipic acid was evaluated using groups of 10 guinea pigs. For induction, 0.1 ml of 1%
aq. adipic acid was given as a sacral intradermal injection, once a week for 4 wks. After a 2-wk non-treatment period, the
dermal challenge was performed with 0.05 ml of 50 and 25% adipic acid in propylene glycol. Adipic acid produced very
mild or no irritation, and it was not a sensitizer.
CIR Panel Book Page 63
16
Succinic/Glutaric/Adipic Acids Mixture
A mixture of succinic, glutaric, and adipic acid (percentages not specified) was evaluated for irritation and for sensi-
tization using guinea pigs.67 The mixture produced mild or no irritation, and it was not a sensitizer. Details were not
provided.
Dodecanedioic Acid
Dodecanedioic acid was not a sensitizer in a 4-h exposure study or upon application of 0.5 g.66 In a maximization
study using female guinea pigs, 0.5% dodecanedioic acid was injected intracutaneously at induction and 25 and 50% was used
for the dermal challenge. Dodecanedioic acid was not a sensitizer.
Dermal irritation and sensitization studies are summarized in Table 6.
Mucosal Irritation
Succinic Acid
Succinic acid has been considered to be an exacerbating factor in ulcerative colitis, therefore its influence on rat co-
lonic mucosa in terms of mucosal blood flow and superoxide generation was investigated.70 The left side of the colon of 5
male and 5 female rats was exposed, and 0.9-5% succinic acid in physiological saline was instilled into the colonic lumen. A
segment of the colon was then ligated as to not include the mesenteric blood vessel. Mucosal blood flow decreased with all
dose levels. Microscopically, the higher the concentration of succinic acid, the greater was the erosion formation in the colon-
ic mucosa. Significant polymorphonuclear cell infiltration superoxide generation from colon tissue was observed with 0.01%
succinic acid, as compared to higher or lower concentrations. Succinic acid, at fecal concentrations found in active stage
ulcerative colitis, appears to be implicated in mucosal injury, mediated by a decrease in colonic mucosal blood flow and infil-
tration of superoxide-generating polymorphonuclear cells into the mucosa.70
REPRODUCTIVE AND DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY
Reproductive and developmental effects were not seen upon oral dosing with the dicarboxylic acids or disodium sebacate. Malonic acid has a spermicidal effect on human spermatozoa. Glutaric acid was tested at doses of ≤1300 mg/kg in rats and 500 mg/kg in rabbits, adipic acid at doses of ≤263 mg/kg in mice, 288 mg/kg in rats, 205 mg/kg in hamsters, or 250 mg/kg in rabbits, azelaic acid at doses of ≤140 mg/kg in rats and 200 mg/kg in rabbits, disodium sebacate at 500 mg/kg in rats and 1000 mg/kg in rabbits, and dodecanedioic acid was tested at ≤1000 mg/kg using rats. Embryotoxic effects were reported for in a reproductive study of 2500 mg/kg/day azelaic acid using rats and in reproductive studies with ≤500 mg/kg/day azelaic acid using rabbits and monkey. Sodium salts of some dicarboxylic acid had a specific inhibitory effect on the uterine horn, and this effect progressively increased with chain length.
Malonic Acid
Malonic acid, 0.1%, reduced the pH of sperm suspensions to 4.-5.5 and rendered human spermatozoa immotile
within 30 min.71 A concentration of 1.0% reduced the pH to 1.5-3.0 and was almost instantaneously spermicidal.
Succinic Acid
Subcutaneous injections of 31 mg/kg/day succinic acid for 3 wks did not change the typical diestrous vaginal smears
in 2 mos old ovariectomized rats.72
Glutaric Acid
The reproductive toxicity of glutaric acid was evaluated. Rats were dosed with 125, 400, or 1300 mg/kg and rabbits
with 40, 160, or 500 mg/kg. No reproductive, embryotoxic or teratogenic effects were observed. No other details were
provided.73
Adipic Acid
Groups of 20-24 gravid albino CD-1 mice were dosed orally, by gavage, with 0, 2.6, 12, 56, or 263 mg/kg adipic
CIR Panel Book Page 64
17
acid on days 6-15 of gestation.44 All animals were killed on day 17 of gestation. No reproductive, developmental, or
maternal effects were observed, and the NOAEL for maternal and developmental toxicity was 263 mg/kg. Similar results
were obtained in a study in which gravid Wistar rats were dosed orally, by gavage, with 0, 2.9, 13, 62, or 288 mg/kg adipic
acid on days 6-15 of gestation. The NOAEL for maternal and developmental toxicity was 288 mg/kg.
Groups of 21-24 gravid hamsters were dosed orally, by gavage, with 0, 2.9, 5, 44, or 205 mg/kg adipic acid on days
6-10 of gestation. A significant increase in resorption per implant site was observed with 205 mg/kg adipic acid, resulting in a
decreased number of live fetuses. (This decrease was not evaluated statistically.) No other effects were reported.
Groups of 10-14 gravid Dutch-belted rabbits were dosed by oral intubation with 0, 2.5, 12, 54, or 250 mg/kg adipic
acid on days 6-18 of gestation. No reproductive, developmental, or maternal effects were observed. The NOAEL for mater-
nal toxicity was ≥250 mg/kg and for developmental toxicity was 250 mg/kg.
Azelaic Acid
Reproductive and teratogenic effects of azelaic acid were evaluated using Wistar rats and New Zealand rabbits.69 A
group of 20 gravid rats was fed a diet containing 140 mg/kg/day azelaic acid, and a control group of 10 gravid rats was given
untreated feed. Half of each group was killed and necropsied on day 19 of gestation, and the remaining animals continued
dosing for 3 mos. The day of gestation that dosing started is not clear. No gross or microscopic lesions were observed for the
uteri, placentas, or ovaries. There were no differences in reproductive, teratogenic, or developmental effects between treated
and control groups, nor were there any differences in fetal weights of the live fetuses. Similar results were seen using groups
of 20 gravid rabbits fed 200 mg/kg/day azelaic acid; 10 untreated gravid rabbits were used as a negative control group.
Embryotoxic effects were observed in oral studies with rats receiving 2500 mg/kg/day of azelaic acid.48 Similar
effects were observed in studies in rabbits given 150 to 500 mg/kg/day and in monkeys given 500 mg/kg/day. The doses at
which these effects were noted were all within toxic dose ranges for the dams. No teratogenic effects were observed. (Details
were not provided.)
Disodium Sebacate
Reproductive, teratogenic, and developmental effects of disodium sebacate were evaluated using Wistar rats and
New Zealand rabbits.69 Groups of 20 gravid rats were fed a diet containing 0 or 500 mg/kg/day disodium sebacate, and
groups of 20 gravid rabbits were fed 0 or 1000 mg/kg. Half of each group was killed and necropsied on day 19 of gestation,
and the remaining animals continued dosing for 3 mos. The day of gestation that dosing started is not clear. No gross or
microscopic lesions were observed for the uteri, placentas, or ovaries. There were no differences in reproductive or
developmental effects between treated and control groups, nor were there any differences in fetal weights of the live fetuses.
Dodecanedioic Acid
The reproductive toxicity of 0-1000 mg/kg dodecanedioic acid was evaluated using male and female Crl:CD:BR
rats.66 The no-observable effect level (NOEL) for reproductive and developmental toxicity was 1000 mg/kg. The NOELs for
toxicity of male and female rats were 100 and 500 mg/kg, respectively. The NOAEL for both male and female rats was 1000
mg/kg. (No other details were provided.)
Sodium Salt of Adipic, Azelaic, Sebacic, and Dodecanedioic Acids
The influence of the sodium salt of some dicarboxylic acids (adipic acid, azelaic acid, sebacic acid, dodecanedioic
acid) on both spontaneous and evoked muscle activity of the uterine horns of 35 female Wistar rats (250-300g) has been
studied in vitro.74 Spontaneous activity of uterine muscle was inhibited by dicarboxylic salts causing the total abolition of
mechanical events at concentrations of 24,, 32, 40, and 64 x 10-3 M. Dicarboxylic salts antagonized the maximal isometric
contraction of the uterine horn induced by administration of acetylcholine, oxytocin or prostaglandins (PGF2-α). The amount
CIR Panel Book Page 65
18
of antagonism was dependent upon the concentration of dicarboxylic salt used. Dicarboxylic salts had an specific inhibitory
effect on the uterine horn which progressively increased with their chain length. The results suggested that the inhibitory
effects of dicarboxylic salts on smooth muscle could be due to a cellular membrane hyperpolarization.
GENOTOXICITY
The dicarboxylic acids are not genotoxic, and consistently were not mutagenic in Ames tests. Positive results were seen in a transformation assay on glutaric acid using Balb/c-3T3 cells, both with and without metabolic activation. The results of a mouse lymphoma assay, with and without metabolic activation, on glutaric acid was pH-dependent. Equivocal results were obtained in an in vitro chromosomal aberration assay of ≤15 mg/mg disodium succinate using Chinese hamster fibroblast cells. The dicarboxylic acids were not genotoxic in in vivo assays.
In Vitro
Malonic Acid
Malonic acid, 3333 µg/plate, was not mutagenic in a National Toxicology Program (NTP) preincubation assay, with
or without metabolic activation.75
Succinic Acid
The genotoxic potential of succinic acid was evaluated in an Ames test and in a chromosomal aberration study using
a Chinese hamster fibroblast cell line.76 Succinic acid, at a concentration of ≤5.0 mg/plate in phosphate buffer, was not muta-
genic in the Ames test. (Whether metabolic activation was used is not stated.) Concentrations of ≤1.0 mg/ml in saline were
not genotoxic in the chromosomal aberration assay. Sodium succinate, ≤10 /plate, was negative in an Ames test, with and
without metabolic activation.77
Disodium Succinate
The genotoxic potential of disodium succinate was evaluated in an Ames test and in a chromosomal aberration study
using a Chinese hamster fibroblast cell line.76 In the Ames test, disodium succinate was not mutagenic at concentration up to
5.0 mg/plate in phosphate buffer. (Whether metabolic activation was used is not stated.) Equivocal genotoxic results were
obtained in the chromosome aberration assay using concentrations of ≤15.0 mg/ml disodium succinate in saline.
Glutaric Acid
Glutaric acid was evaluated in vitro in a standard Ames assay, the L5178Y/TK ± mouse lymphoma assay with and
without metabolic activation, and the mammalian in vitro Balb/c-3T3 cell transformation assay with and without metabolic
activation.73 The Ames tests were negative. However, the cell transformation assay was positive both in the presence and
absence of metabolic activation and the results in the mouse lymphoma assay were dependent upon pH of the culture medium.
The researchers stated that the variable response in the mouse lymphoma assay and the positive effect in the cell transforma-
tion assay may have been an indirect effect of other factors (such as the pH or osmolarity of the media in which the cells were
exposed), rather than a direct effect of glutaric acid.
Adipic Acid
Adipic acid was evaluated in a number of Ames assays using Salmonella typhimurium and Escherichia coli; results
were negative, with or without metabolic activation, at concentrations as high as 10,000 mg/plate.44,78,79 Negative results were
also obtained in an Ames test with 0-200 mg/l adipic acid using S. typhimurium TA1530 and G-46 without metabolic activa-
tion44. Results were negative in a yeast gene mutation assay using Saccharomyces cerevisiae without metabolic activation at
concentrations ≤200 mg/l. A mouse lymphoma assay using L5178Y/TK ± cells was negative with and without metabolic acti-
vation at concentrations of ≤2000 µg/plate,79 as was a cytogenetic assay using human embryonic lung fibroblast cells with
≤200 mg/l adipic acid.44 In a viral enhanced cell transformation assay using Syrian hamster embryo cells at dosed of 62-1000
CIR Panel Book Page 66
19
µg/ml adipic acid, results were negative.
Azelaic Acid
Azelaic acid, 20%, was not mutagenic or genotoxic in an Ames assay, HGPRT test in Chinese hamster ovary cells,
or human lymphocyte test.48 Details were not provided.
Dodecanedioic Acid
Dodecanedioic acid was not mutagenic in an Ames assay at concentrations of ≤5000 µg/plate, with and without
metabolic activation.66 Toxicity occurred at ≥500 µg/plate.
In Vivo
Glutaric Acid
Glutaric acid was evaluated in a mammalian micronucleus cytogenetic assay in mice.73 Glutaric acid was not
genotoxic in this assay. (Details not specified.)
Adipic Acid
Adipic acid was not genotoxic in in vivo cytogenetic assays using chromosomes from rats dosed orally, by gavage,
with a single dose of 5000 mg/kg or daily for 5 days with 2500 mg/kg.44 Adipic acid was also not genotoxic in dominant
lethal studies with doses up to 5000 mg/kg..
Azelaic Acid
Azelaic acid was not genotoxic in a dominant lethal assay in mice.48 (Details not specified.)
Dodecanedioic Acid
Dodecanedioic acid, at concentrations of ≤5000 mg/kg, was not mutagenic in a micronucleus assay using mice.66
Available details for the genotoxicity studies are summarized in Table 7.
CARCINOGENICITY
Carcinogenic results were not seen in rats given up to 2% sodium succinate in the drinking water or 5% adipic acid in feed for 2 yrs. An increase in the incidence of C-cell adenoma/carcinoma of the thyroid in females given 2% sodium succinate, and a positive trend in the occurrence of this tumor, was considered a function of experimental variability and not related to dosing.
Sodium Succinate
Groups of 50 male and 50 female F344 rats were given drinking water containing 0, 1, or 2% sodium succinate for 2
yrs, and the carcinogenic potential was determined.68 Dosing was discontinued after 104 wks, and, after a 9-wk recovery
period, the rats were killed at wk 113. Body weights of the high dose animals were decreased by 10% as compared to con-
trols. There were no statistically significant differences in overall tumor incidence or mean survival time between treated and
control animals. An increase in the incidence of C-cell adenoma/carcinoma of the thyroid in females of the 2% group, and a
positive trend in the occurrence of this tumor, was considered a function of experimental variability and not related to dosing.
Sodium succinate was not toxic or carcinogenic to male or female F344 rats when given in the drinking water for 2 yrs.
Adipic Acid
Adipic acid was not carcinogenic in the 2-yr chronic oral toxicity study (described previously) in which groups of 20
male rats were fed diets containing 0, 0.1, 1, 3, and 5% adipic acid, and groups of 10 and 19 females were fed 0 and 1%
adipic acid, respectively.67
Tumor Promotion
Succinic Acid, Sodium Succinate, Disodium Succinate
The promotion of urinary bladder carcinogenesis by sodium succinate was evaluated using male F344 rats.80 Groups
CIR Panel Book Page 67
20
of 16 male F344 rats were given 5% succinic acid, sodium succinate, or disodium succinate with 0.05% N-butyl-N- (4-
hydroxybutyl)nitrosamine (BBN) in the drinking water for 4 wks, followed by dietary administration of 5% of the respective
test article without BBN for 32 wks. Negative controls were given water with BBN only and untreated feed. Groups of 8
male F344 rats followed the same protocol without the addition of BBN to the drinking water, as did a group of non-BBN-
treated negative controls. The animals were killed at wk 37.
In the BBN-pretreated groups, many rats given sodium or disodium succinate developed hematuria towards the end
of the study. There were no statistically significant differences in body or organ weights between the control and test groups.
(Information on organ and body weights was not provided for the non-BBN groups.) Large tumors were found on the urinary
bladders of the BBN-pretreated animals given sodium and disodium succinate; tiny lesions were found in the control or
succinic acid BBN-pretreated animals. The incidence and number of urinary bladder carcinomas and papillomas and of papil-
lary or nodular hyperplasia (preneoplastic lesions) were statistically significantly increased in the sodium and disodium
succinate BBN-pretreated groups as compared to the succinic acid and control BBN-pretreated groups. The incidence and
numbers observed in the sodium and disodium succinate groups were not statistically significantly different from each other.
An association between tumor area and sodium intake was noted. Urinary bladder lesions were not observed in any of the
animals that were not pretreated with BBN. Urinary pH and electrolyte concentrations were affected by dosing with sodium
or disodium succinate with BBN, as compared to the control and succinic acid groups, and statistically significant differences
between these two groups were observed as well.
The researchers also evaluated cell proliferation and DNA synthesis in the urinary bladder epithelium. Groups of 20
male F344 rats were given 5% succinic acid, sodium succinate, or disodium succinate in the feed, without BBN pretreatment
for 8 wks. Negative controls were given basal diet. Five rats per group were given an i.p. injection of 50 mg/kg 5-bromo-2’-
deoxyuridine (BrdU) 1 h prior to being killed. Compared to control values, BrdU uptake was statistically significantly
increased by increased disodium succinate and was increased, but not in a statistically significant manner, by sodium
succinate. Succinic acid did not have any effect on DNA synthesis. Microscopically, simple hyperplasia was observed in the
urinary bladders of animals given sodium and disodium succinate. The appearance of the urinary bladder epithelial surface
was altered by sodium and disodium succinate. Spermidine/spermine N1-acetyltransferase activity in the urinary bladder epi-
thelium was increased for disodium succinate, but not sodium succinate, when compared to controls. Urinary pH and
electrolyte concentrations were affected as described previously.
CLINICAL ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY
In a cumulative irritancy test, the cumulative irritation of a 15% azelaic acid gel increased with successive patching. It is not known if the vehicle played a role in the irritation scores. Daily application of a 20% azelaic cream causes erythema and irritation.
Dermal Irritation
Azelaic Acid
The cumulative irritation potential of a 15% azelaic acid gel (prescription formulation; vehicle not identified) was
determined in a study using 31 female and 2 male subjects.81 (During the study, 1 subject withdrew for personal reasons.)
White petrolatum was used as a negative control. Azelaic acid and petrolatum, 0.2 g of each, were applied under occlusion to
2 cm x 2 cm sites on the back of each subject 3 times per week for 3 wks. Weekday patches were removed after 24 h, while
the patches applied on Fridays were removed after 72 h. The test sites were evaluated 15-30 min after removal of the patch,
and then a new patch was applied. Application was discontinued if severe irritation, which was designated by a maximum
erythema score of 3, was observed. A 15% azelaic acid gel was statistically significantly more irritating than the negative
CIR Panel Book Page 68
21
control, with a mean cumulative irritancy index of 1.05/3. Individual reaction scores for the test article ranged from 0 to 3,
and 5 subjects discontinued patching with azelaic acid due to an irritation score ≥3. Cumulative irritancy increased with suc-
cessive patching. The researchers noted that since the vehicle used for azelaic acid was not tested, there was uncertainty as to
whether the vehicle components affected the irritation scores.
Twice daily application of a cream containing 20% azelaic acid has been reported to cause erythema, irritation,
pruritus, dryness, scaling, and burning.82
Case Reports
Adipic Acid
In two case reports with industrial exposure to adipic acid, positive sensitization reactions were reported with follow-
up testing.44
CIR Panel Book Page 69
22
ESTERS OF DICARBOXYLIC ACIDS
Much of the information on the esters of dicarboxylic acids was obtained from summary documents that mostly
contained unpublished data. The summary documents are therefore listed as the citation, and, when there are numerous
studies described, will only be cited at the beginning of that section. Data on esterase metabolites other than the parent
dicarboxylic acid (i.e. parent alcohol and monoester) are summarized in Appendix I, immediately following the reference
section. It is important to note that this is merely for support and not for review as ingredients themselves.
GENERAL BIOLOGY
Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion
Metabolism of diesters in animals is expected to occur, initially, via enzymatic hydrolysis, leading to the correspond-
ing dicarboxylic acids and the corresponding linear or branched alcohol.83 These dicarboxylic acids and alcohols can be fur-
ther metabolized or conjugated to polar products that are excreted in urine. However, other studies have shown that enzy-
matic hydrolysis of at least some diesters may be incomplete and result, instead, in the production of monoesters.84
Diethyl Malonate
In in vitro absorption studies using pig skin, 8.8 and 3% of undiluted diethyl malonate was found in the skin and receptor fluid, respectively. Absorption was enhances when diethyl malonate was diluted with ethanol and reduced when diluted in acetone Using human skin, 16% of the applied diethyl malonate penetrated. In vivo, absorption of diethyl malonate, estimated from urinary and fecal recovery, was 15% in nude mice, 4 % in human skin grafted to nude mice, 6% in pig skin grafted to nude mice, 2.5% in pigs, and 4% in dogs.
Diethyl malonate is hydrolyzed via a two-step reaction to malonic acid and the corresponding alcohol, ethanol.14
Dimethyl malonate, which is not listed in the International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary, has similar physico-
chemical properties and hydrolyzes in the same manner to malonic acid and methanol. Because of this similarity, data on
dimethyl malonate will be included in this safety assessment to provide read-across data.
Distribution of diethyl malonate (and dimethyl malonate) is likely to occur in the water compartments, and
accumulation in fat is unlikely based on physical and chemical properties. Both esters are likely to be metabolized by
unspecific (serine-) esterases of different tissues, in particular, in the liver to the mono- esters and then to malonic acid and
ethanol (or methanol). The hydrolysis product is likely to be metabolized via physiological pathways, such as the tricarboxylic
acid cycle, as they are part of the normal intermediate metabolism. Both are assumed to readily absorb via mucous
membranes.
In Vitro - Animal The percutaneous absorption of radiolabeled diethyl malonate was determined in vitro using skin from Yorkshire
pigs. [2-14C]Diethyl malonate was applied either undiluted (100 µg/cm2) or diluted in ethanol at 12.5 mg/ml with an applied
dose of 100 µg/cm2 or as 0.5 mg/ml with an applied dose of 4 µg/cm2. At 50 h, with undiluted diethyl malonate, 8.8% of the
radioactivity was found in the skin and 3% was in the receptor fluid. With 100 µg in ethanol, 13% of the radioactivity was
found in the skin and 6% in the receptor fluid and with 4 µg in ethanol, 30% was found in the skin and 10% in the receptor
fluid. Absorption appeared to be enhanced with ethanol.
The percutaneous absorption of 1 mg/cm2 [2-14C]diethyl malonate in 10 µl acetone was determined in vitro also
using skin from Yorkshire pigs. At 24 h, 0.2-1.6% of the diethyl malonate was found in the receptor fluid, 0.2-0.9% was
found in the skin, and 0.6-0.7% was found on the skin surface. Skin mediated hydrolysis amounted to 15-35% of the applied
dose. In the receptor fluid, 20-21% of the applied dose was present as hydrolysis products. In the skin and on the skin
surface, 3-5% and 2-4%, respectively, of the applied dose was present as hydrolysis products.
CIR Panel Book Page 70
23
In Vivo - Animal The percutaneous penetration of radiolabeled diethyl malonate was studied in vivo in the following animal models:
athymic nude mouse, human, and pig skin grafted to athymic nude mice, in weanling pigs, and in hairless dogs. [2-14C]Diethyl
malonate was applied at a dose of 0.1 mg/cm2 for 24 h to a 1.27 cm2 area of mouse skin or for 48 h to a 25 cm2 area of pigs
and hairless dogs using non-occluded applications. Absorption, estimated using urinary and fecal recovery after s.c.
administration, was 15% in nude mice, 4 % in human skin grafted to nude mice, 6% in pig skin grafted to nude mice, 2.5% in
pigs, and 4% in dogs.
In Vitro - Human An in vitro skin absorption study was performed using diethyl malonate, no vehicle given. Human cadaver split
thickness skin was used in flow through cells. Diethyl malonate (4 µl) was applied to the skin samples. After 24 h, 16% of
the applied dose had penetrated through the skin. The maximum flux rate was reached after 5 h and amounted to 280 µg/h
(350 µg/cm2/h); the mean penetration rate was 99 µg/h (120 µg/cm2/h). Much of the test substance, 45 to 50%, evaporated
from the skin, and 34 to 39% remained on the skin.
Ditridecyl Adipate
Approximately 11% of ditridecyl adipate was absorbed through the skin of rats; 5.5-7.4% of the applied dose was found in the tissues, 3.5-4.7%was found in the urine, and 0.4-0.7% was found in the feces. Prior dosing with ditridecyl adipate did not significantly affect absorption.
The percutaneous absorption of [14C]ditridecyl adipate was determined using groups of 10 male and 10 female
Sprague-Dawley rats that were untreated or that had previously been exposed to unoccluded dermal applications of 0 or 2000
mg/kg ditridecyl adipate, 5 days/wk for 13 wks.85 (This study is described in the section on ‘Subchronic Dermal Toxicity’.)
A single 58 µl dose of 2000 mg/kg [14C]ditridecyl adipate was applied topically (size of test site not specified), and urine and
feces were collected for 4 days. In the previously untreated rats, a total of 11.6 and 10.6% of the [14C] solution was absorbed
by male and female rats, respectively, over 4 days. Approximately 63 and 52% of the absorbed dose (7.4 and 5.5% of the
applied dose, respectively) was found in the tissues of males and females, respectively. A total of 3.5-4.7% of the applied
dose was recovered in the urine and 0.4-0.7% in the feces of previously untreated rats. The values for the animals previously
dosed with 2000 mg/kg ditridecyl adipate were not statistically significantly different from the controls. In the previously
dosed animals, a total of 10.8 and 9.1% of the dose was absorbed by males and females, respectively, over the 4 days, with
approximately 87 and 81% of the absorbed dose (9.4 and 7.4% of the applied dose, respectively) found in the tissues of the
male and female rats, respectively. A total of 0.7-1.3% of the [14C] was recovered in the urine and 0.4-0.6% in the feces.
Based on the radioactivity recovered in the urine, the bioavailability of ditridecyl adipate was 2-6%, and previous dosing did
not significantly affect absorption.
Diethylhexyl Adipate
In vitro, diethylhexyl adipate was readily hydrolyzed to MEHA or adipic acid in rat liver, pancreas, and small intestine tissue preparations. In animals, diethylhexyl adipate is hydrolyzed to adipic acid and 2-ethylhexanol or MEHA. 2-Ethylhexanol is converted to 2-ethylhexanoic acid, which may form a glucuronide conjugate or may be subjected to ω- and (ω-1)-oxidation and further metabolism. In rats, carbonyl-labeled diethylhexyl adipate rapidly hydrolyzed to adipic acid and MEHA. More than 98% of orally administered diethylhexyl adipate was excreted in 48 h; 21-45% of the radioactivity was expired in carbon dioxide and 34-52% was excreted in the urine. Metabolism studies have shown that excretion in the urine is not as unchanged diethylhexyl adipate; mostly adipic acid is found. In body tissues, the highest levels of radioactivity were found in the liver, kidneys, blood, muscle, and adipose tissue; elimination from the tissues was rapid, with no affinity for a specific organ. In the tissues, diethylhexyl adipate, adipic acid, and/or MEHA were found. When comparing distribution with labeling on the acid versus the alcohol, radioactivity was observed in the ovaries of gravid mice and some fetal tissues following dosing with [carbonyl-14C]diethylhexyl adipate, but none was detected in the ovaries of gravid mice after dosing with [2-ethylhexyl-1-14C]diethylhexyl adipate, and very little
CIR Panel Book Page 71
24
radioactivity was seen in fetal tissues. Vehicle affects absorption, but not urinary excretion. In humans dosed orally with diethylhexyl adipate labeled on the ethyl side chains, unconjugated 2-ethylhexanoic acid was the only measurable compound in plasma, and the rate of elimination was rapid. In urine, 2-ethylhexanoic acid was again the principal metabolite, and was probably eliminated in the conjugated form. Peak urinary elimination of all metabolites occurred within 8 h of dosing.
In Vitro The in vitro hydrolysis of diethylhexyl adipate (and mono-(2-ethylheyxl) adipate [MEHA]) using tissue preparations
from the liver, pancreas, and small intestine of 2 rats was examined, as were the effects of diethylhexyl adipate on serum and
hepatic enzymatic activities in vitro.86 Diethylhexyl adipate was readily hydrolyzed to MEHA or adipic acid by each tissue
preparation. The formation of adipic acid was rapid and approximately the same for all three tissues, while the formation of
MEHA was rapid only in pancreatic tissue and was negligible in the intestine. The rate of hydrolysis from MEHA to adipic
acid was greater that than from diethylhexyl adipate and the highest activity was found in intestinal tissue. In examining the
effects on serum and hepatic enzymes, only N-demethylase activity was considerably inhibited by diethylhexyl adipate.
In Vivo - Animal The elimination, distribution, and metabolism of diethylhexyl adipate was investigated using male Wistar rats.86 In
these studies, diethylhexyl adipate was labeled at the carbonyl carbon. In elimination studies, 2 rats were dosed by gavage
with 500 mg/kg [14C]diethylhexyl adipate (1.26 µCi/rat) as a saturated solution in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), and respired
carbon dioxide, urine, and feces were collected for 2 days. At 24 h after dosing, 86% of the administered dose was excreted,
and at 48 h, more than 98% of the dose was excreted. In one animal, 44.8% of the dose was excreted in expired carbon
dioxide and 33.9% in the urine at the 48 h measurement, while in the other rat, 21.1% and of the dose was excreted in expired
carbon dioxide and 52.2% in the urine. Little (1.4 or 5% of the dose) was excreted in the feces.
In the distribution study, 3 rats per group were given a single dose as described above. The animals were killed at
various intervals, and blood, organ, and tissue samples were collected. Not taking into account the stomach and intestines, the
greatest levels of radioactivity, as a percent of dose administered, were found in the liver, kidney, blood, muscle, and adipose
tissue. These values ranged from 0.34-8.21% at 6 h, with the greatest percentage found in the adipose tissue, and from 0.54-
3.44% at 12 h, with the greatest percentage found in the muscle. In most tissues, the amount of residual radioactivity reached
a peak by 6 h, except for the liver, kidneys, testicles, and muscle, which reached a peak at 12 h. The researchers stated that
the elimination of radioactivity from the tissues and organs was very rapid, and there was no specific organ affinity.
The metabolism of diethylhexyl adipate was examined in rats dosed orally, by gavage, with 100 mg of non-labeled
diethylhexyl adipate as a 5% solution in DMSO. A control group was dosed with vehicle only. The rats were killed 1, 3, or 6
h after dosing. The metabolites were determined using GLC. Diethylhexyl adipate was rapidly hydrolyzed to adipic acid, the
main intermediate metabolite, and MEHA. In the urine, adipic acid was detected at 1 h, and excretion as adipic acid in the
urine reached 20-30% at 6 h. Diethylhexyl adipate and MEHA were not detected in the urine. Adipic acid only also was de-
tected in the blood and the liver, with constant excretion of 0.5-0.7% of the dose in the blood and excretion in the liver in-
creasing with time, with 2-3.3% excreted in the liver at 6 h. In the stomach, diethylhexyl adipate, adipic acid, and MEHA
were found. The concentrations of diethylhexyl adipate declined rapidly, while the levels of adipic acid (9-10%) and MEHA
(6-11.5%) peaked at 3 h. Adipic acid, but not MEHA, was found in the intestine and increased with time, reaching 19% at 6
h.
The absorption, distribution, and elimination of diethylhexyl adipate was examined using radioactive labeling on the
acid [carbonyl-14C] (specific activity 39.5 mCi/mmol) or the alcohol [2-ethylhexyl-1-14C] (44.1 mCi/mmol).39 The research-
ers used both DMSO and commercial corn oil as vehicles for all tests. (DMSO is an active penetrant and carrier of other
CIR Panel Book Page 72
25
substances through tissue membranes; a fat-soluble substance, such as diethylhexyl adipate, is more realistically studied dis-
solved in corn oil.) The following groups of animals were dosed with 84.3 µg (9 µCi) [carbonyl 14C]diethylhexyl adipate or
84.3 µg (10 µCi) [2-ethylhexyl-1-14C]diethylhexyl adipate in both vehicles: 12 male NMRI mice were dosed i.v. and killed at
intervals from 5 min to 4 days after dosing; 10 male NMRI mice were dosed intragastrically (i.g.) and killed at intervals from
20 min to 4 days after dosing; 12 gravid NMRI mice were dosed i.v. or i.g. on day 17 of gestation and killed at intervals from
20 min to 24 h. Six male rats were dosed i.g. with 843 µg (90 µCi) [carbonyl 14C]diethylhexyl adipate or 843 µg (100 µCi)
[2-ethylhexyl-1-14C]diethylhexyl adipate and killed at intervals from 20 min to 4 h. Whole body autoradiography was used to
determine tissue distribution.
Following dosing with [carbonyl-14C]diethylhexyl adipate, distribution was similar in male mice, male rats, and
gravid mice. The amount of radioactivity in the tissues peaked at a later time following i.g. dosing as compared to i.v. dosing.
The presence of radioactivity in the gastrointestinal tract following i.v dosing indicated biliary excretion. Four h following
both i.v. and i.g. dosing, the greatest uptake of radioactivity was found in the liver, bone marrow, brown fat, adrenal cortex,
kidneys, and a few other tissues. At 24 h after i.g. dosing, significant levels of radioactivity remained in several tissues,
including the liver, of both rats and mice. In gravid mice, a “remarkable strong uptake” of radioactivity in the corpora lutea of
the ovary was observed at all time intervals with both i.v. and i.g. dosing, and some radioactivity was found in the fetal
intestine, liver, and bone marrow.
Similar distribution patterns were seen following dosing with [2-ethylhexyl-1-14C]diethylhexyl adipate as were seen
with [carbonyl-14C]diethylhexyl adipate. Following i.g. dosing, the appearance of radioactivity was lessened and not as great
as it was with i.v. dosing. Very high radioactivity levels were seen in the liver and kidney at 5 min-1 h after i.v. dosing and at
20 min-4 h after i.g. dosing. The radioactivity in the liver was still high at 24 h after i.g. dosing in mice and rats.
Radioactivity was also seen in the intestinal contents at 1-4 h after i.v. dosing, again indicating biliary excretion. At longer
intervals after i.v. injection, 4 h-4 days, radioactivity was detected in the bronchi of mice. While radioactivity was observed
in the ovaries of gravid mice and some fetal tissues following dosing with [carbonyl-14C]diethylhexyl adipate, none was
detected in the ovaries of gravid mice after dosing with [2-ethylhexyl-1-14C]diethylhexyl adipate, and very little radioactivity
was seen in some fetal tissues.
The effect of vehicle on the absorption and biliary and urinary excretion of diethylhexyl adipate was also examined
using rats in a gavage study with [14C]diethylhexyl adipate. Radioactivity was measured every 30 min for 7.5 h. The times
and extent of absorption were different for all four preparations of [14C]diethylhexyl adipate. Radioactivity levels in the blood
increased faster and were greater with DMSO as the vehicle, as compared to corn oil. The highest blood radioactivity levels
were found with [carbonyl-14C]diethylhexyl adipate in DMSO. Biliary excretion of [14C]diethylhexyl adipate was greatly
affected by vehicle; with DMSO, 41% of the dose was detected in the bile, while only 10% of the dose was found with the
corn oil vehicle. This difference was not seen with [carbonyl-14C]diethylhexyl adipate. Finally, vehicle did not have much
influence on urinary excretion. However, unlike the results reported by the previous researchers, little radioactivity was
excreted in the urine. The researchers hypothesized that since the study duration was only 7.5 h, urinary excretion may not
have been complete.
The metabolism of diethylhexyl adipate was examined in vivo using male Wistar rats and compared to in vitro
metabolism using hepatocytes.87 In vivo, rats were dosed with 0.665 or 1.5 g/kg diethylhexyl adipate in corn oil by gavage for
5 days, and the controls were given vehicle only. Urine was collected daily. Diethylhexyl adipate was not recovered in the
urine after 24 h. Adipic acid was the main metabolite of diethylhexyl adipate. In vitro, the first hydrolysis of diethylhexyl
CIR Panel Book Page 73
26
adipate appears to be a rate-limiting step. In vivo, it was thought that this hydrolysis probably occurs in the gastrointestinal
tract. Metabolic pathways (ω and ω-1oxidations, glucuronidation) seemed to prove that transformations of diethylhexyl
adipate are localized mainly in the liver.
Oral administration of diethylhexyl adipate to cynomolgus monkeys results in rapid elimination, with 47-57% of the
dose excreted in the urine.17 Unchanged diethylhexyl adipate is absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract, and the glucuronide
of MEHA and traces of unchanged diethylhexyl adipate were found in the urine. (Details were not provided.)
In Vivo - Human The pharmacokinetics of [2H10]diethylhexyl adipate, labeled on the ethyl side-chains, were examined using 6 male
subjects.88 A dose of 46 mg [2H10]diethylhexyl adipate in corn oil, for a total volume of 0.5 cm3, was administered orally in a
gelatin capsule. Blood samples were taken for up to 31 h after dosing, and urine samples were taken at intervals for up to 96
h after dosing. In the plasma, unconjugated [2H5]2-ethylhexanoic acid was the only measurable diethylhexyl adipate-related
compound. This compound appeared rapidly in the plasma, and the peak concentrations (1.6 ±0.5 µg/cm3) occurred between
1 and 2 h. [2H5]2-Ethylhexanol was detected, but it was below the limit of quantification. The rate of formation was calcu-
lated, since there was no evidence of diethylhexyl adipate absorption, as 1.63 ± 1.19 hr-1. The rate of elimination from the
plasma was also rapid and estimated to be 0.42 ± 0.15 h-1., which corresponded to an elimination half-life of 1.65 h.
Although there were inter-individual differences in the rate and extent of [2H5]2-ethylhexanoic acid formation, it was below
the limit of detection in all subjects by 31 h.
In the urine, [2H5]2-ethylhexanoic acid was again the principal metabolite, and it was probably eliminated as a
conjugated product. This conjugated form, most likely the glucuronide, accounted for up to 99% of the total [2H5]2-ethyl-
hexanoic acid measured. Conjugation of the other urinary metabolites was minimal. Peak urinary elimination of the
measured metabolites occurred within 8 h of dosing, and no metabolites were detected in the urine after 36 h. The rates of
elimination were similar for all metabolites, with a mean elimination half-life of 1.5 h. The measured urinary metabolites
accounted for 12.1% of the dose, with the majority being eliminated in 24 h. Fecal analysis determined that a minor portion
of the dose was present as diethylhexyl adipate (0.43%) and [2H5]MEHA (0.27%). The researchers noted that recovery of the
administered dose was incomplete and hypothesized that it was most probably due to further systemic metabolism.
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
Diethylhexyl sebacate is not readily absorbed through the skin of guinea pigs (no further details were provided).1 It
was noted that the metabolism of diethylhexyl sebacate in rodents and humans may follow partially common pathways,.
Penetration Enhancement
Diethyl Sebacate
The addition of diethyl sebacate to an antifungal agent (ME1401) increased its in vivo antifungal activity and its
penetration.89
Peroxisome Proliferation
Peroxisome proliferation causes an increase in liver weights and can induce hepatocarcinogenicity in rats and mice. Diethylhexyl adipate is a peroxisome proliferator requiring extensive phase I metabolism to produce the proximate peroxisome proliferator, which in both mice and rats appears to be 2-ethylhexanoic acid. Studies conducted to explain the species difference in liver tumors seen in mice, but not rats, in the NTP carcinogenicity study on diethylhexyl adipate, suggested that diethylhexyl adipate-induced cell replication, rather than hepatic peroxisome proliferation, provided a better correlation with tumor formation. Diethylhexyl adipate is not as potent a proliferator as diethylhexyl phthalate. Peroxisome proliferation is not believed to pose the risk of inducing hepatocarcinogenesis in humans.
CIR Panel Book Page 74
27
Mechanism
Peroxisomes, single membrane-limited cytoplasmic organelles present in cells, have several important functions in
intermediary metabolism.90 Peroxisome proliferators can induce hepatocarcinogenicity in mice and rats, and may also pro-
duce tumors in other organs, such as the testes and pancreas, of these species. Some compounds require extensive phase I
metabolism to produce the proximate peroxisome proliferator.
Rat liver peroxisomes contain both catalase, which destroys hydrogen peroxide, and a number of hydrogen peroxide-
generating oxidase enzymes. Liver peroxisomes contain a complete fatty acid β-oxidation cycle. The stimulation of micro-
somal fatty acid-oxidizing enzymes is caused by the induction of cytochrome P450 isoenzymes in the CYP4A subfamily.
Good correlations have been reported for rat livers between the induction of peroxisomal fatty acid β-oxidation and organelle
proliferation, as well as between the induction of peroxisomal and microsomal fatty acid-oxidizing activities.
Peroxisome proliferators can stimulate DNA synthesis in rat hepatocytes, but do not bind covalently to DNA and are
not considered to be genotoxic carcinogens. Proposed mechanisms of liver tumor formation include induction of sustained
oxidative stress, a role for enhanced cell replication, and the promotion of spontaneous preneoplastic lesions. Sustained oxi-
dative stress does not appear to be solely responsible for peroxisome proliferator-induced hepatocarcinogenesis. In general,
there is a poor quantitative correlation between markers of oxidative stress and compound potency to produce tumors.
The administration of peroxisome proliferators in rodents results in marked increases in liver weights, which is
associated with both morphological and biochemical changes. Liver enlargement is due to both hepatocyte hyperplasia and
hypertrophy. Morphologically, the size and the number of peroxisomes increase. Although potent peroxisome proliferators
are more likely to produce tumors, the magnitude of proliferation does not always correlate with tumor formation. Peroxi-
some proliferators that produce a sustained stimulation of cell replication produce tumors more rapidly than other agents that
produce a similar magnitude of proliferation but do not produce sustained stimulation of cell replication.
Transformation of hepatocytes, by either oxidative stress or alternative mechanisms, may cause initiated cells to be
promoted and progress to tumors by enhanced cell replication. Both peroxisome proliferation and cell replication are impor-
tant biomarkers of peroxisome proliferator-induced tumor formation in rodent livers.
A species difference in response to peroxisome proliferators exists. Humans do not react to peroxisome proliferators
in the manner that rodents do, and peroxisome proliferators do not appear to pose any serious hazard for humans. There
seems to be a lack of effect on organelle proliferation and induction of peroxisomal and microsomal fatty acid-oxidizing
enzymes in species other than rats and mice, and it is suggested that other species are not susceptible to peroxisome prolifera-
tor-induced liver tumor formations.
Diethylhexyl Adipate
In male rats fed 2% diethylhexyl adipate in the feed for 3 wks, hepatic peroxisome proliferation, an increase in liver size, and an increase in two hepatic activities of peroxisome-associated enzymes, catalase and carnitine acetyl transferase, were observed. It was postulated that a metabolite, 2-ethylhexyl alcohol, may be responsible for the induction of hepatic peroxisome proliferation. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2 Cultured hepatocytes from male Swiss mice and Wistar rats were used to identify the proximate peroxisome prolif-
erator derived from diethylhexyl adipate.91 Diethylhexyl adipate did not induce peroxisome proliferation in mouse or rat
hepatocyte cultures. However, the primary metabolites of diethylhexyl adipate, MEHA and 2-ethylhexanol, produced similar
results in both mouse and rat hepatocyte cultures, with a 5-fold induction of peroxisomal β-oxidation (measured as cyanide-
insensitive palmitoyl CoA oxidase [PCO] activity) in mouse hepatocytes and a 4-5-fold increase in rat hepatocytes at concen-
trations of 0.5 mM. The most potent peroxisome proliferation occurred in cultured mouse hepatocytes with the secondary
CIR Panel Book Page 75
28
metabolite of diethylhexyl adipate, 2-ethylhexanoic acid, which resulted in a 25-fold induction at a concentration of 1 mM. In
cultured rat hepatocytes, 2-ethylhexanoic acid again induced the greatest stimulation of PCO, but only a 9-fold increase was
observed with a concentration of 1 mM. 2-Ethyl-5-hydroxyhexan-1-oic acid, at a concentration of 2mM, stimulated PCO
approximately 5-fold. (Higher concentrations of these agents were cytotoxic.) In both mice and rats, 2-ethylhexanoic acid
was the proximate peroxisome proliferator, but mouse hepatocytes were approximately twice as sensitive as rat hepatocytes.
The effects of diethylhexyl adipate and its metabolites on cultured guinea pig and marmoset hepatocytes were also
examined. Unlike mouse and rat hepatocytes cultures, neither diethylhexyl adipate nor it metabolites, at concentrations up to
2 mM, stimulated PCO.
In another study investigating the effect of diethylhexyl adipate on PCO induction, 2-ethylhexanoic acid was again
found to be the proximate peroxisome proliferator.92 In this in vivo study, male and female Wistar rats and male and female
Swiss mice, 5 per gender per group, were dosed orally by gavage with 0-2.5 g/kg (0-6.74 mmol/kg) diethylhexyl adipate, 0-
1.75 g/kg (0-13.49 mmol/kg) 2-ethylhexanol, or 0-1.0 g/kg (0-13.49 mmol/kg) 2-ethylhexanoic acid in corn oil for 14 days.
The animals were killed 24 h after the final dose and the livers excised. Relative liver weights were increased in a dose-
dependent manner for rats and mice. On a molar basis, diethylhexyl adipate was approximately twice as potent as 2-ethylhex-
anol or 2-ethylhexanoic acid. Diethylhexyl adipate, 2-ethylhexanol, and 2-ethylhexanoic acid induced peroxisomal β-oxida-
tion in a linear dose-response manner in F344 rats and Swiss mice. PCO was stimulated to the greatest extent in male mice.
In an attempt to explain the species difference in an NTP study93 that used these strains of rat and mouse, the peroxi-
some proliferation induced by diethylhexyl adipate was examined, with the same dosing scheme, using male and female F344
rats and male and female B6C3F1 mice 92 (The NTP study found that diethylhexyl adipate induced hepatocellular tumors, and
was carcinogenic, in mice but not rats.) In contrast to the expected results, it was found that PCO activity was increased to the
greatest extent, up to 15-fold, in male F344 rats. However, catalase activity was statistically significantly increased in male
and female mice at all doses, but this was not seen in rats at any dose. Using electron microscopy, a dose-related peroxisome
proliferation was observed for rats and mice. This increase was statistically significant at all dose levels for male rats, and all
but the lowest dose level for female rats and male and female mice. Relative liver weights were increased in a dose-dependent
manner for rats and mice.
Another in vivo study was performed in which the species difference on the hepatic effects of diethylhexyl adipate
was evaluated using female F344 rats and female B6C3F1 mice.94 Groups of 5-8 rats were fed diets containing 0-4.0% di-
ethylhexyl adipate for 1, 4, or 13 wks, and 5-8 mice were fed diets containing 0-2.5% for the same time periods. Marked
dose-dependent increases in relative liver weights were reported for rats given 1.2-4.0% and mice given 0.6-2.5% diethyl-
hexyl adipate for 1 and 4 wks and for rats given 0.6-4.0% and mice given 1.2 and 2.5% diethylhexyl adipate for 13 wks. Di-
ethylhexyl adipate markedly increased PCO induction in rats and mice at all 3 time periods, and microsomal lauric acid 11-
and 12-hydroxylase activities were also increased. Diethylhexyl adipate had little effect on microsomal cytochrome activity
in the rat, but significant increases were observed in mice given 1.2 and 2.5% diethylhexyl adipate for 1 and 4 wks and those
given 0.6-2.5% for 13 wks. Replicative DNA synthesis was determined using 5-bromo-2’-deoxyuridine. Diethylhexyl
adipate produced a sustained stimulation of replicative DNA synthesis in mice given 1.2 and 2.5%, but this effect was not
seen in rats. The researchers suggested that diethylhexyl adipate-induced cell replication, rather than hepatic peroxisome
proliferation, provided a better correlation with tumor formation (in the NTP study). Toxic effects are described in “Short-
Term Oral Toxicity” for the 1 and 4 wk studies and “Subchronic Oral Toxicity” for the 13 wk study.
The effect of diethylhexyl adipate on in vitro steady-state levels of hydrogen peroxide was also evaluated as an
CIR Panel Book Page 76
29
attempt to explain the species diference.95 Groups of 5 male F344 rats and female B6C3F1 mice were dosed with 5 ml/kg of 0
or 2 g/kg diethylhexyl adipate daily for 14 days. (Route of dosing not specified.) Statistically significant increases in PCO
and catalase activity, but not glutathione peroxidase activity, were observed for both rats and mice. As compared to controls,
a 5-fold increase was seen in PCO activity with rats, and a 4-fold increase with mice. Catalase activity, as compared to
controls, was 2-times greater in both rats and mice. Steady-state hydrogen peroxide concentrations, determined by measuring
rates of hydrogen peroxide production from palmitoyl CoA oxidation, was also increased 2-fold for male rats and female
mice. However, absolute values for steady-state hydrogen peroxide concentrations were greater in the livers of treated mice,
compared to rats. The researchers stated the difference in the absolute concentration may be important and possibly a
contributing factor to the species difference.
The extent of peroxisome proliferation induced by diethylhexyl adipate was compared to the proliferative effects of
diethylhexyl phthalate and ciprofibrate, a very effective peroxisome proliferator.96 Groups of 3-4 male F344 rats were fed a
diet containing 0.25-2% diethylhexyl adipate, 0.25-2% diethylhexyl phthalate, or 0.001-0.02% ciprofibrate for 30 days. With
diethylhexyl adipate, a statistically significant increase in liver weight was seen at the 2% dose level, but not at lower dose
levels. Dose-dependent increases in liver weight were seen at all dose levels with the other two test compounds, and the
hepatomegalic potencies of diethylhexyl phthalate and ciprofibrate were approximately 200 and 1000-fold greater than di-
ethylhexyl adipate, respectively. The researchers found a close relationship between hepatomegalic and peroxisome prolifera-
tive effects. Diethylhexyl adipate induced a moderate degree of peroxisome proliferation at the 2% concentration, but not at
lower dose levels, where as a greater induction in peroxisome proliferation was observed with diethylhexyl phthalate, and a
much greater induction with ciprofibrate. The researchers also stated that the degree of peroxisome proliferation also
corresponded with hepatocarcinogenic potential in rodents.
Peroxisome induction by diethylhexyl adipate was again determined and compared to a number of phthalate esters,
including diethylhexyl phthalate.97 When groups of 2 male and female rats were fed a diet containing ≤2.5% diethylhexyl
adipate for 21 days, a marked increase in peroxisome proliferation was observed for males and a moderate increase for
females of the 2.5% group. Overall, however, diethylhexyl adipate consistently showed weak activity. The peroxisome
proliferation was analyzed using multivariate analysis.98 Diethylhexyl adipate ranked lower than diethylhexyl phthalate,
di(isodecyl)phthalate, di(isononyl)- phthalate, and di(n-butyl)phthalate, but greater than di(undecyl)phthalate, butyl benzyl
phthalate, di(heptyl, nonyl, undecyl) phthalate, and di(n-hexyl, n-octyl, n-decyl) phthalate. However, in terms of 99.9%
statistically predicted dose, diethylhexyl adipate was the least potent, presumably due to a threshold effect. Histological
findings of reduced basophilia or increased eosinophilia were highly correlated with peroxisome proliferation.
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
The effect of diethylhexyl sebacate on hepatic peroxisome proliferation was evaluated in an in vivo study in which 4
male F344 rats were fed chow containing 2% diethylhexyl adipate.58 After 3 wks of dosing, the animals were killed. Hepatic
peroxisome proliferation was found, as evidenced by an increase in liver size, hepatic activities of peroxisome-associated
enzymes, and hypolipidemia. Relative liver weights were statistically significantly increased in test animals compared to con-
trols. (The conclusion regarding the involvement of 2-ethylhexyl alcohol is described earlier under ‘Diethylhexyl Adipate’.)
DNA Binding/DNA Synthesis
Diethylhexyl adipate did not bind covalently to hepatic DNA in mice. It did stimulate DNA synthesis in livers of rats. In another study, a significant increase in 8-OH-dG was seen in rat liver, but not kidney DNA. The IARC remarked that the weight of evidence for diethylhexyl adipate demonstrated that rodent, peroxisome proliferators do not act as direct DNA-damaging agents.
CIR Panel Book Page 77
30
Diethylhexyl Adipate
The potential of diethylhexyl adipate to bind to liver DNA of female NMRI mice was evaluated by administering a
solution of 119 mg diethylhexyl adipate/ml with 3.85 mCi/ml of [14C]diethylhexyl adipate (labeled at C1 of the alcohol
moiety) and 27.7 mCi/ml of [3H]diethylhexyl adipate (tritiated at positions 2 and 3 of the alcohol moiety) in olive oil.99 The
animals were dosed by gavage, and the livers were excised 16 h after dosing. Some animals were pretreated with 10 g/kg of
unlabeled dietary diethylhexyl adipate for 4 wks. Diethylhexyl adipate did not covalently bind to hepatic DNA in mice. Pre-
treatment with diethylhexyl adipate caused an increase in liver weight, but no increase in DNA binding. The researchers
stated that tumorigenicity of diethylhexyl adipate must be due to an activity other than DNA binding.
The ability of diethylhexyl adipate to stimulate liver DNA synthesis in male F344 rats was investigated using radio-
labeled thymidine.100 Contrary to expected results, diethylhexyl adipate did stimulate DNA synthesis. The stimulation factor,
which is indicated by the ratio of the thymidine incorporation in treated animals compared to controls, was 10.5 and the
doubling dose, which is the dose that produced a doubling of the control level DNA synthesis, was 0.7 mmol/kg.
The effect of dosing with diethylhexyl adipate on 8-hydroxydeoxyguanosine (8-OH-dG) in liver and kidney DNA of
rats was examined.101 Groups of 10 male F344 rats were fed a diet containing 0 or 2.5 diethylhexyl adipate. Five animals per
group were killed after 1 wk, and the other 5 after 2 wks of dosing. Relative liver weights were statistically significantly
increased after 1 and 2 weeks of dosing, and the relative kidney weights were statistically significantly increased only after 2
wks. A statistically significant increase in 8-OH-dG was increased in the liver DNA, but not the kidney DNA, at wk 1 and 2.
The IARC remarked that the weight of evidence for diethylhexyl adipate, and other rodent peroxisome proliferators
in general, demonstrated that rodent peroxisome proliferators do not act as direct DNA-damaging agents.17
Hepatic Lipid Metabolism
Diethylhexyl Adipate
Dietary administration of diethylhexyl adipate affects hepatic lipid metabolism.17 Hepatic fatty acid-binding protein
and microsomal stearoyl-CoA desaturation were increased in Wistar rats fed 2% diethylhexyl adipate for 7 days.102,103 When
fed to rats for 14 days, an increase in hepatic phospholipid levels and a decrease in phosphatidylcholine:phosphatidylethanol-
amine ratio was reported.104 In male NZB mice fed 2% diethylhexyl adipate for 5 days, an induction of fatty acid translocase,
fatty acid transporter protein, and fatty acid binding protein in the liver was reported.105
Cellular Effects
Dibutyl Adipate
Dibutyl adipate was tested for cytotoxicity in the metabolic inhibition test. A dilution series of dibutyl adipate was suspended in HeLa cells. Dibutyl adipate had no acute toxicity to the cells, which was attributed to its insolubility in water. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5
Dibutyl Sebacate
The toxic effects of dibutyl sebacate on cultures of human KB cells, monkey Vero cells, and dog MDKC cells was
examined.40 Dibutyl sebacate, in ethyl alcohol and diluted in Eagle’s minimum essential medium, caused a dose-dependent
inhibition of growth in all three cell types.
ANIMAL TOXICOLOGY
Acute Toxicity
The oral and dermal LD50 values are greater than 2 g/kg. Mostly, acute exposure via inhalation to diethyl malonate, dibutyl adipate, and diethylhexyl sebacate did not result in death of rats.
Acute toxicity data on esters of dicarboxylic acids are presented in Table 8.1,14,40,85,106-117 Data from the original
CIR Panel Book Page 78
31
safety assessments on dibutyl, diisopropyl and diethylhexyl adipate are included in italics.2,5 The acute toxicity of esterase
metabolites are also summarized in this table.118,119
Short-Term Oral Toxicity
Oral administration of ≤1000 mg/kg dibutyl adipate for 28 days was not toxic effects in rats. In short-term oral dosing with diethylhexyl adipate, decreased weight gain was reported for rats and mice. The NOELs for rats and mice were 2 and 0.63%, respectively, in feed; administration of 10% in feed killed 5/5 female mice. In 2- and 4-wk studies of diethylhexyl adipate, the oral NOAEL for ovarian toxicity was 200 mg/kg in rats; an increase in atresia of the large follicle and a decrease in currently formed corpora lutea were seen in females dosed with 1000 and 2000 mg/kg diethylhexyl adipate.
Dibutyl Adipate
Male and female Crj:CD(SD) rats, number per group not specified, were dosed orally, by gavage, with 0, 20, 140, or
1000 mg/kg dibutyl adipate in olive oil daily for 28 days.106 No clinical, hematological, or microscopic test-article related
changes were observed.
Diethylhexyl Adipate
In a 14-day dietary study, groups of 5 male rats and mice were given ≤50,000 ppm and groups of 5 female rats and mice were given ≤100,000 ppm diethylhexyl adipate. Male rats and mice fed 50,000 ppm and female rats and mice fed ≥25,000 ppm had decreased weight gains or weight loss. (It is not specified whether the results were statistically significant.) One female rat and all female mice of the 100,000 ppm group died. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Groups of 5 male and 5 female F344 rats were fed a diet containing 0-5.0% (males) or 0-10% (females) diethylhexyl
adipate for 14 days, after which time they were killed for necropsy.117 One female of the 10% group died. Weight gain was
decreased for male rats of the 5% group and female rats of the 2.5 and 5% groups. Feed consumption was decreased for the
animals of the 5 and 10% groups. Females of the 10% group were lethargic, and piloerection, wetness of hair, and ataxia
were observed. Microscopically, gray-white casts were observed in the livers one female of both the 2.5 and 5% groups and
for 2 females of the 10% group, and atrophy of the spleen in one female of the 10% group. These findings were not
considered test-article related. The NOEL was 2.5% and the lowest observable effect level (LOEL) was 5% diethylhexyl
adipate.
Groups of 5 male and 5 female B6C3F1 mice were dosed following the same protocol, with the same dose
concentrations, as described above. All females of the 10% dose group died, and all animals were lethargic and emaciated
prior to death. Feed consumption was decreased in this group. Weight loss was observed for males of the 5% group and
female of the 2.5% group. No compound-related microscopic effects were found. The NOEL was 0.63% and the LOEL was
2.5% diethylhexyl adipate.
In the 14-day study described in the section on “Peroxisome Proliferation” in which 5 male and 5 female Wistar and
F344 rats and Swiss and B6C3F1 mice were dosed with 0-2.5 g/kg diethylhexyl adipate in corn oil for 14 days, diethylhexyl
adipate was toxic to female B6C3F1 mice, causing mortality, at a dose level of 2.5 g/kg.92 The toxicity of two metabolites of
diethylhexyl adipate, 2-ethylhexanol and 2-ethylhexanoic acid, was also examined using Wistar rats and Swiss mice. 2-Ethyl-
hexanol was toxic to male and female rats, with mortality reported at doses >1.05 g/kg in male and female rats. 2-Ethylhexa-
noic acid was toxic to female rats, with mortality reported at doses ≥1.9 g/kg; mortality was not reported for male rats.. These
effects were not reported in mice.
In a 1 and 4-wk dietary study described in the section on “Peroxisome Proliferation” in which groups of 5-8 rats and
mice were fed diets containing 0-4.0% and 0-2.5% diethylhexyl adipate, respectively, feed consumption by rats was decreased
in the 4.0% group at 1 wk and in the 2.5 and 4.0% dose groups at 4 wks.94 Body weights were significantly reduced in these
CIR Panel Book Page 79
32
groups. Feed consumption by mice was not affected, but a significant decrease in body weights was seen in the 1.2 and 2.5%
dose groups at 4 wks.
Toxicity was evaluated in a study in which groups of 10 female Crl:CD(SD) rats were dosed, by gavage, with 5
ml/kg of 0, 200, 1000, or 2000 mg/kg diethylhexyl adipate in corn oil for 2 or 4 wks.120 All animals survived until study
termination. In the 2-wk study, no statistically significant findings were observed for the animals dosed with 200 mg/kg, and
the only statistically significant finding in the 1000 mg/kg dose group was an increase in relative liver weight. In the 2000
mg/kg dose group, there was staining around the perineum, statistically significant increases in relative liver and kidney
weights, and a statistically significant decrease in the relative weight of the left ovary. Microscopically, abnormal findings
were reported for both the ovary and kidney. In the ovary, an increase in atresia of the large follicle and a decrease in current-
ly formed corpora lutea were seen in animals dosed with 1000 and 2000 mg/kg, and in the 2000 mg/kg group, an increase in
follicular cysts was observed. In the kidney, an eosinophilic change of the proximal tubule was observed for the 2000 mg/kg
dose group. The NOAEL was 200 mg/kg.
In the rats dosed for 4 wks, similar observations were made. There was staining around the perineum of animals
dosed with 1000 and 2000 mg/kg diethylhexyl adipate, and final body weights of animals dosed with 2000 mg/kg were
statistically significantly decreased. The relative kidney weights were statistically significantly increased in animals at all
dose levels, and liver weights were statistically significantly increased in animals of the 1000 and 2000 mg/kg dose groups.
The mean estrous cycle length was statistically significantly decreased in the 200 mg/kg dose group, but this was not
considered treatment-related since a dose-response was not seen. The same microscopic abnormalities reported in the 2 wk
study were seen in the ovaries and kidneys of the animals dosed with 1000 and 2000 mg/kg in the 4-wk study. As in the 2-wk
study, the NOAEL for ovarian toxicity was 200 mg/kg.
Short-Term Dermal Toxicity
In a short-term dermal study in which 10 rabbits were dosed dermally with 0.5 or 1.0 ml/kg of a 20% dispersion of dibutyl adipate for 6 wks, there was a significant reduction in body weights in the high dose group, and renal lesions in one animal of each group. There were no signs of toxicity in guinea pigs in an immersion study with 20.75% diisopropyl adipate, diluted to an actual concentration of 0.10% adipate. Dermal administration of diethylhexyl adipate to rabbits for 2 wks resulted in slight to moderate erythema at the test site, but toxic effects were not reported for most of the animals.
Dibutyl Adipate
Groups of 10 rabbits were dosed dermally with 0.5 or 1.0 ml/kg/day of a 20% dispersion of dibutyl adipate, 5x/wk for 6 wks. A significant reduction in body weight gain was seen for animals of the 1.0 ml/kg/day group, and renal lesions were seen in one animal of each group. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5
Diisopropyl Adipate
An immersion study was performed using guinea pigs in which a product containing 20.75% diisopropyl adipate was diluted, giving an actual adipate concentration of 0.10%. The animals were immersed 4 h/day for 3 days. There were no signs of systemic toxicity, and the degree of dermal irritation was considered minimal. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Diethylhexyl Adipate
Diethylhexyl adipate, 410 or 2060 mg/kg, was applied to the shaved abdomen of male rabbits, 4 per group, 5 days
per wk for 2 wks.117 Mineral oil was applied in the same manner to a group of 4 rabbits as a negative control. A collar was
used to restrict ingestion. One animal in the 410 mg/kg group died during wk 2 of the study. All other animals in this group
appeared normal. Slight to moderate erythema was observed at the test site. No animals of the 2060 mg/kg group died, but 3
CIR Panel Book Page 80
33
of the 4 did not gain weight, and they had labored breathing and were lethargic during wk 2. Moderate erythema was
observed in this group. Microscopically, one animal of the 2060 mg/kg group had altered cytology of the liver parenchymal
cells. No other microscopic lesions were noted.
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
No deaths occurred when 4 rats, 2 guinea pigs, 2 rabbits and 1 cat were exposed to 400 mg diethylhexyl sebacate/m3,
7 hrs/day, for 10 days.1 Details were not provided.
Subchronic Oral Toxicity
In a subchronic oral toxicity study using rats, the NOEL for diethyl malonate was 1000 mg/kg/day. Dietary administration of ≤2.5% di-C7-9 branched and linear alkyl esters of adipic acid (approx. 1500 and 1900 mg/kg/day for males and females, respectively) for 90 days did not result in systemic toxicity. The NOAELS for male and female rats were 1500 and 1950 mg/kg/day, respectively. Subchronic oral administration of diethyl-hexyl adipate to rats caused significant decreases in body weight gains and increases in liver and kidney weights. The dietary NOEL for rats in a 90-day study was 610 mg/kg. In mice, no lesions were induced by dietary administration of ≤25,000 ppm diethylhexyl adipate for 13 wks. A decrease in body weights was seen in mice fed a diet with 1.2 and 2.5% diethylhexyl adipate. For diisononyl adipate, dietary administration of up to 500 mg/kg for 13 wks, a statistically significant increase in relative kidney weights was reported, but there were not toxicological findings. With dogs, 3.0% dietary diisononyl adipate resulted in a decrease in body weights, testes weight, and feed consumption, increased liver weight, elevated enzyme levels, liver and kidney discolora-tion, and microscopic changes in the liver, testes, spleen, and kidneys.
Diethyl Malonate
Groups of 10-16 male and female CD rats were fed diets containing either 0, 36 (males) or 41 mg/kg/day (females)
diethyl malonate.14 No treatment related effects were observed, and the NOEL was 1000 mg/kg/day.
Di-C7-9 Branched and Linear Alkyl Esters of Adipic Acid
Groups of 15 male and 15 female Sprague-Dawley rats were fed a diet containing 0, 0.1, 0.5, or 2.5% di-C7-9
branched and linear alkyl esters of adipic acid for 90 days, corresponding to approximately 1500 mg/kg/day for high dose
males and 1900 mg/kg/day for high dose females.85 All rats were killed for necropsy at study termination. No systemic
toxicity was reported. Small, but significant, increases in absolute and relative kidney weights reported for females of the
2.5% dose group were not considered treatment-related. The NOAELs for male and female rats were 1500 and 1950
mg/kg/day, respectively.
Diethylhexyl Adipate
In a 13-wk dietary study, groups of 10 rats and 10 mice were fed ≤25,000 ppm diethylhexyl adipate. With the exception of decreased weight gain for some of the groups, no compound-related toxicologic effects were observed. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
In a 90-day dietary study, groups of 10 rats per group were fed 0-4740 mg/kg diethylhexyl adipate for 90 days.117
Mortality occurred in the 4740 mg/kg group, but the number of deaths was not specified. Decreased growth and feed con-
sumption was reported for animals fed 2920 mg/kg. Changes in kidney and liver weights were noted, but no details were
given. The NOEL was 610 mg/kg, and the LOEL was 2920 mg/kg diethylhexyl adipate.
Groups of 10 male and 10 female F344 rats and B6C3F1 mice were fed a diet containing 0-25,000 ppm for 13 wks,
after which time the surviving animals were necropsied.121 No compound-related deaths occurred. No lesions were induced
by administration of ≤25,000 ppm diethylhexyl adipate.
Groups of 15 male and 15 female Sprague Dawley rats were fed 0 or 2.5% diethylhexyl adipate for 90 days.85 At
study termination, all animals were killed for necropsy. Body weight gains were statistically significantly decreased for
treated males and females, and relative kidney and liver weights were statistically significantly increased for treated females,
CIR Panel Book Page 81
34
when compared to controls.
In a 13-wk dietary study described in the section on “Peroxisome Proliferation” in which groups of 5-8 rats and
mice were fed diets containing 0-4.0% and 0-2.5% diethylhexyl adipate, feed consumption by rats was decreased in the 2.5
and 4.0% dose groups, and body weights were significantly reduced in these groups.94 Feed consumption by mice was not
affected, but a significant decrease in body weights was seen in the 1.2 and 2.5% dose groups
Diisononyl Adipate
Groups of 10 male and 10 female rats were fed 0, 50, 150, or 500 mg/kg diisononyl adipate for 13 wks.85 A
statistically significant increase in relative kidney weights was reported for males and females given 500 mg/kg, but absolute
kidney weights were not affected and no significant microscopic effects were seen. Microscopic changes in any of the organs,
including the testes and epididymis of males and ovaries of females, were not observed. There were not significant
toxicological findings, and the NOAEL was 500 mg/kg/day.
In another 13-wk study, groups of 4 male and 4 female beagle dogs were fed 0, 0.3, 1.0, or 3.0% diisononyl adipate;
the high dose was increased to 6% during wks 9-13. No significant findings were reported for the 0.3 or 1.0% groups. In the
high dose group, decreased body weight, testes weight, and feed consumption, increased liver weight, elevated enzyme levels,
liver and kidney discoloration, and microscopic changes in the liver, testes, spleen, and kidneys were reported. The dietary
NOAEL for diisononyl adipate was 1.0%.
Subchronic Dermal Toxicity
No adverse effects were reported with whole-body application of an 6.25% emulsion of dibutyl adipate to dogs for 3 mos. Unoccluded dermal application of up to 2000 mg/kg ditridecyl adipate for 13 wks to rats produced slight erythema, but no systemic toxicity.
Dibutyl Adipate
No adverse effects were reported in a study using 4 dogs in which entire-body applications of an emulsion containing 6.25% dibutyl adipate were made 2x/wk for 3 mos. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5
Ditridecyl Adipate
Ditridecyl adipate, 0, 800, or 2000 mg/kg, was applied to the backs of groups of 10 male and 10 female Sprague-
Dawley rats, 5 days/wk for 13 wks.85 The test sites were not occluded, but the animals wore Elizabethan collars. Slight
erythema and flaking of the skin was observed in the treated groups, with hyperplasia of the sebaceous glands in the dermis,
but otherwise no significant differences were observed between test and control animals. Differences in relative organ
weights were not statistically significant, and ditridecyl adipate did not appear to cause systemic toxicity.
Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
Groups of 12 F344 rats, gender not specified, were exposed 4 h/day, 5 days/wk, to 25 or 250 mg/m3 diethylhexyl
sebacate for ≤13 wks.85 No adverse systemic or lung effects were observed.
Chronic Oral Toxicity
In a 6-mos study in which rats were dosed intragastrically with ≤2.0 g/kg diethylhexyl adipate, hepatic detoxification appeared depressed at the beginning of the study, while in a 10-mos study, a decrease in central nervous system excitability was noted. Dietary administration of ≤1.25% dibutyl sebacate for 1 yr or ≤6.25% for 2 yrs did not have an effect on growth
Diethylhexyl Adipate
Intragastric doses of ≤2.0 g/kg diethylhexyl adipate to rats (number not stated) for 6 mos produced no enzy-matic changes, but levels of sulphydryl compounds in the blood were increased. Hepatic detoxification
CIR Panel Book Page 82
35
appeared depressed at the onset of the study, but it was accelerated after 6 mos. Administration of 0.1 g/kg for 10 mos decreased central nervous system excitability. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Dibutyl Sebacate
Groups of 5 male and 5 female Sprague-Dawley rats were fed a diet containing 0, 0.01, 0.05, 0.25, or 1.25% dibutyl
sebacate for 1 yr.116 Necropsies were performed whenever rats exhibited significant weight losses or other evidences of
severe concurrent infection. Dibutyl sebacate had no effect on growth or well-being.
The researches then fed groups of 16 male Sprague Dawley rats a diet containing 0.01, 0.05, 0.25, 1.25, or 6.25%
dibutyl sebacate for 2 yrs.116 Two control groups were given untreated feed. Necropsies were performed on 3 rats from each
group after 1yr, and the experiment was terminated at the end of the 2-year feeding period. Interim, animals were killed
whenever they became moribund. In such instances the rats usually had incapacitating tumors or severe intercurrent infec-
tions. Dibutyl sebacate did not adversely affect growth or survival, and it did not produce significant hematological changes
in peripheral blood. As the rats increased in age, slight changes in distribution of leukocytes were found, but these trends
occurred in both the control and treatment groups.
Inhalation Toxicity
In a 4-hr inhalation toxicity study of 5.9 mg/l of a mixture of 66.0% dimethyl glutarate, 16.5% dimethyl succinate, and 17.0% dimethyl adipate, the anterior and posterior nasal passageways were affected. Regeneration of damaged olfactory epithelium was related to the severity of the initial tissue damage.
Dimethyl Glutarate/Dimethyl Succinate/Dimethyl Adipate Mixture
Male Crl:Cd/BR rats were used to study the development of nasal lesions upon exposure to a solvent mixture of
66.0% dimethyl glutarate, 16.5% dimethyl succinate, and 17.0% dimethyl adipate, termed dibasic esters.122 A group of 42
rats were exposed, nose-only, to dibasic esters at an aerosol concentration of 5.9 mg/l for 4 hr, and a negative control group of
24 rats was exposed to air only. The mean dibasic esters aerosol concentration was 5900 mg/m3, and the mass median aero-
dynamic diameter was 3.9 µm. Seven test animals and 4 controls were killed at 1, 4, 7, 14, 21, or 42 days post-exposure.
Three test and 3 control animals were injected i.p. with BrdU 2 h prior to being killed. Both the anterior and posterior nasal
passages were affected. Nasal lesions were distributed along major inspiratory airflow routes, and the lesions were markedly
less severe in the posterior nasal cavity. Regeneration of damaged olfactory epithelium was related to the severity of the
initial tissue damage, with extensively damaged epithelium failing to regain a normal structure at 6 wks. Numerous mitotic
figures and BrdU labeling were found in the regenerating basal cells, stem cells, and sustentacular cells at 4 and 7 days.
Ocular Irritation
Ocular irritation appeared to lessen in severity as chain length of the dicarboxylic acid esters increased. Diethyl malonate was slightly to moderately irritating to rabbit eyes. Dibutyl, diisopropyl, and diethylhexyl adipate were non- or minimal ocular irritants. Diisopropyl sebacate was minimally irritating, while diethylhexyl sebacate was non-irritating to rabbit eyes. Dioctyldodecyl and diisocetyl dodecanedioate were not irritating to rabbit eyes.
Ocular irritation data on esters of dicarboxylic acids are presented in Table 9. Data from the original safety assess-
ments on dibutyl, diisopropyl and diethylhexyl adipate are included in italics. The available ocular irritation data on esterase
metabolites are also summarized in this table.
Diethyl Malonate
The ocular irritation potential of diethyl malonate was evaluated using rabbits, number and gender not specified.14
A volume of 0.1 ml was instilled into the conjunctival sac of one eye, which was not rinsed, and the contralateral eye was
untreated and served as the negative control. Diethyl malonate produced slight to moderate irritation.
CIR Panel Book Page 83
36
Dimethyl Malonate
In a similar study as described above, undiluted dimethyl malonate produced slight to moderate irritation in rabbit
eyes.14 All signs of irritation were cleared by day 8.
Dibutyl Adipate
Undiluted dibutyl adipate was minimally irritating to they eyes of rabbits, and 0.1% in olive oil was non-irritating. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5
Diisopropyl Adipate
The ocular irritation potential of 2 lots of undiluted diisopropyl adipate was evaluated using rabbits. One caused negligible irritation, while the other was non-irritating. A formulation containing 0.7% diisopropyl adipate produced some corneal stippling in rabbit eyes, while a formulation containing 5.0% and one containing 20.75% were non-irritating to rabbit eyes. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2 The ocular irritation of undiluted diisopropyl adipate was evaluated using 3 albino rabbits.114 A volume of 0.1 ml
was instilled into the conjunctival sac of one eye, which was not rinsed. The contralateral eye was untreated and served as the
negative control. Diisopropyl adipate was not irritating.
Diethylhexyl Adipate
Undiluted diethylhexyl adipate was non-irritating to rabbit eyes and a formulation containing 0.0175 was, at most, a mild transient irritant. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Diisopropyl Sebacate
A primary ocular irritation study was performed using 6 New Zealand white to determine the ocular irritation
potential of diisopropyl sebacate.123 A volume o f 0.1 ml was applied to one eye of each animal, which was not rinsed, and
the contralateral eye of each animal served as the control. The average Draize scores were 2.0 at 24 and 48 h, 0.3 at 72 h, and
0.0 at 4 days. Diisopropyl sebacate was a minimal ocular irritant.
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
The ocular irritation o f a cream containing 1.2% diethylhexyl sebacate was evaluated using the in vitro EpiOcular
MTT viability assay .124 The tissue samples were exposed to undiluted test material for 64 min, 256 min, or 1200 min.
Following treatment, the viability of those tissues were calculated. The ET50 (time for tissue viability to be reduced by 50%)
was 484.9 min, and diethylhexyl sebacate was considered to be non-irritating.
Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate
The primary eye irritation of dioctyldodecyl dodecanedioate was evaluated using 6 albino rabbits.125 A volume of
0.1 ml was applied to one eye of each animal, which was not rinsed. and the contralateral eye served as a negative control.
They eyes were evaluated at 24, 48, and 72 h. At 24 h, the maximum mean total score (MMTS) was 0.00, and dioctyldodecyl
dodecanedioate was considered not irritating.
Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate
The primary eye irritation of diisocetyl dodecanedioate was evaluated using the procedure described above.126 The
MMTS was 0.00, and diisocetyl dodecanedioate was considered not irritating to the eyes of rabbits.
Dermal Irritation
The esters of dicarboxylic acids were mostly non or mildly irritating to rabbits. Some minimal irritation was seen with diisopropyl adipate, undiluted or at 5-20.75% in formulation, and moderate erythema was reported with undiluted dibutyl adipate.
CIR Panel Book Page 84
37
Diethyl Malonate
The dermal irritation potential of diethyl malonate was evaluated using a 24 h occlusive application.14 Diethyl
malonate was slightly irritating to rabbit skin.
Dimethyl Malonate Dimethyl malonate was applied undiluted to rabbit skin for 4 h under a semi-occlusive patch.14 Slight erythema was
observed only at 30-60 min after patch removal, and dimethyl malonate was considered non-irritating to rabbit skin.
Dibutyl Adipate
Application of undiluted butyl adipate to rabbit skin resulted in a primary irritation score of 2/8. Undiluted dibutyl adipate caused moderate erythema in rabbits following repeated dermal exposure. However, material impregnated with dibutyl adipate was not irritating to the skin of rabbits. Application of dibutyl adipate at 10% in acetone produced no observable adverse effect when applied to rabbit ears, and no dermal reaction was observed following twice daily application for 14 days to the backs of hairless mice Two perfume formulations containing 1.1% diisopropyl adipate were not primary dermal irritants using rabbits. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5
Diisopropyl Adipate
Draize tests of undiluted diisopropyl adipate resulted in, at most, mild irritation of rabbit skin. In Draize tests with formulations containing 5.0% or 20.75% diisopropyl adipate, minimal irritation was reported with both formulations. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Diethylhexyl Adipate
Undiluted diethylhexyl adipate was a very mild irritant when applied under occlusion to intact and abraded rabbit skin). A formulation containing 0.175% diethylhexyl adipate had an irritation index of 1.6/4. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Diisodecyl Adipate
The dermal irritation potential of diisodecyl adipate was determined using 3 albino rabbits.112 Undiluted test
material was applied to the skin for 4 h under a semi-occlusive patch. The erythema scores were 0-1 during 1-72 h, and the
edema scores were 0. Diisodecyl adipate was considered non-irritating to rabbit skin.
Dioctyldodecyl Adipate
The dermal irritation of dioctyldodecyl adipate was evaluated using the same procedure.113 The erythema scores
were 0-2 during 1-72 h, and the edema scores were 0-1. Dioctyldodecyl adipate was considered non-irritating to rabbit skin.
Diisocetyl Adipate
The dermal irritation of diisocetyl adipate was evaluated using the same procedure.111 The erythema scores were 0-2
during 1-72 h, and the edema scores were 0-1. Diisocetyl adipate was considered non-irritating to rabbit skin.
Diethyl Sebacate
Undiluted diethyl sebacate and 30% diethyl sebacate in ethanol were tested on 8 male Japanese White strain rabbits
(gender not specified).127 The flank of the animals was clipped free of hair 1 day prior to application of test substance. The
skin of 4 animals abraded. The test substance, 0.3 ml, was applied occlusively to the back of all animals for 24 h. The skin
reactions were evaluated at 24 h and 72 h. The primary irritation score was 0.0 (none to weak irritant) in undiluted diethyl
sebacate and 0.3 (none to weak irritant) in 30% diethyl sebacate. These results suggest that 100% diethyl sebacate has no
primary skin irritation under these test conditions.
Diisopropyl Sebacate
A primary dermal irritation study on diisopropyl sebacate was performed using 6 New Zealand white rabbits.123 A
dermal application of 0.5 ml of undiluted test material was applied to an abraded and an intact site on each animal. The test
CIR Panel Book Page 85
38
sites were occluded for 24 h and observed individually for erythema, edema, and other effects 24 and 72 h after application.
Mean scores from the 24 and 72 h reading were averaged to give a primary irritation index (PII) of 2.88. Diisopropyl sebacate
was not considered a primary dermal irritant.
The dermal irritation potential of diisopropyl sebacate was determined using 3 albino rabbits.128 Undiluted test
material was applied to the skin for 4 h under a semi-occlusive patch. The erythema scores were 1 during 1-72 h, and the
edema scores were 0-1. Diisopropyl sebacate was considered non-irritating to rabbit skin.
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
The dermal irritation potential of diethylhexyl sebacate was evaluated using the same procedure.110 The erythema
scores were 1 during 1-72 h, and the edema scores were 0. Diethylhexyl sebacate was considered non-irritating to rabbit skin.
Patch tests with diethylhexyl sebacate (neat; 48-hr occluded) did not irritate the skin of 2-4 rabbits.1 It was also
reported that diethylhexyl sebacate was non-irritating to the skin of guinea pigs. No further study details were provided
Dermal Sensitization
Dimethyl malonate, dibutyl and diethylhexyl adipate, diethylhexyl sebacate, and dioctyldodecyl dodecanedioate were not sensitizers in guinea pigs or rabbits.
Dimethyl Malonate
Dimethyl malonate was not a sensitizer in a Buehler guinea pig sensitization test.14 Details were not provided.
Dibutyl Adipate
Dibutyl adipate was not a dermal sensitizer in guinea pigs when tested at 25% in a maximization test. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5
Diethylhexyl Adipate
Diethylhexyl adipate, 0.1%, was not a sensitizer in a maximization study using guinea pigs. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
A limited attempt was made to sensitize a group of 2-4 rabbits by applying diethylhexyl sebacate using occlusive
patches.1 No reactions were seen in an occlusive challenge with the undiluted test article 2 weeks later. Details were not
provided.
Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate
A maximization test was performed to evaluate the sensitization potential of dioctyldodecyl dodecanedioate.129 Ten
female guinea pigs were used. The dose used at intradermal injection was 0.1 ml, and 0.5 ml was used for the topical
challenge. Slight erythema was observed at induction, but a sensitization reaction was not observed.
Dermal irritation and sensitization data on esters of dicarboxylic acids are presented in Table 10. Data from the
original safety assessments on dibutyl, diisopropyl and diethylhexyl adipate are included in italics. The available dermal
irritation and sensitization data on esterase metabolites are also summarized in this table.
Phototoxicity
Diisopropyl Adipate
Two perfume formulations containing 1.1% diisopropyl adipate were not phototoxic using rabbits. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Mucous Membrane Irritation
Diethylhexyl Adipate
A product containing 0.175% diethylhexyl adipate did not produce mucous membrane irritation in rabbits.
CIR Panel Book Page 86
39
From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
REPRODUCTIVE AND DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY
Oral administration of up to 1000 mg/kg dimethyl malonate did not have an effect on fertility, and no development toxicity was reported. The NOAEL was 300 mg/kg for repeated dose and maternal toxicity and 1000 mg/kg for fertility and developmental toxicity. Oral administration of up to 100 mg/kg dibutyl adipate did not cause any reproductive effects, and the NOEL for parental and offspring toxicity was 300 mg/kg/day and for reproductive toxicity was 100 mg/kg/day. Oral administration of ≤7000 mg/kg di-C7-9 branched and linear alkyl esters of adipic acid branched and linear alkyl esters of adipic acid did not result in developmental toxicity. Dietary administration of up to 1.2% diethylhexyl adipate did not affect fertility when fed to rats prior to mating. Fetal weight, total litter weight, and litter size were reduced with 1.2% diethylhexyl adipate. In a study in which gravid rats were fed the same doses during gestation, no significant effects on fetal weight or litter size were reported. An increased incidence of minor skeletal abnormalities was attributed to fetotoxicity. . In a study in which diethylhexyl adipate was given orally to rats from day 7 of gestation until post-natal day 17, antiandrogenic effects were not observed, although some increase in post-natal death were observed. Administration of up to 2000 mg/kg diethylhexyl adipate prior to dosing and through day 7 of gestation did have an effect on the mean estrus cycle length at a dose of 1000 and 2000 mg/kg, and did appear to disturb ovulation. Significant decreases were also seen in implantation rate and number of live embryos, as well as an increase in pre-implantation loss. Diethylhexyl adipate did not produce testicular toxic effects when fed at up to 25,000 ppm in the diet for 4 wks. Dietary administration of 6.25% dibutyl sebacate to male and female for 10 wks prior to mating had no adverse effects on fertility, litter size, or survival of offspring. Diethylhexyl sebacate, 200 ppm in the diet, did not produce reproductive or developmental effects.
Dermal applications of up to 2000 mg/kg ditridecyl adipate affected mean fetal body weights and crown-rump lengths. Ditridecyl adipate, 2000 mg/kg, did not have an effect on sperm morphology. Some visceral anomalies were reported. The NOAELs for maternal toxicity and developmental and reproductive effects were 2000 and 800 mg/kg/day, respectively.
Dimethyl, diethyl, dipropyl dibutyl, diisobutyl, and diethylhexyl adipate were evaluated for fetotoxic and terato-genic effects in rats when administered i.p. at 1/3 – 1/30 of the i.p. LD50 values. Some effect on resorptions and abnormalities were seen with all but diethyl adipate.
Inhalation by rats of up to 1.0 mg/l of a mixture of dimethyl glutarate, dimethyl succinate, and dimethyl adipate on days 7-16 of gestation or for 14 days prior to mating, during mating and gestation, and lactation, produced no observed adverse developmental or reproductive effects. The only exception was a statistically significant decrease in pup weight at birth and day 21.
Dimethyl Malonate
The reproductive and developmental toxicity of dimethyl malonate was evaluated using groups of 10 male and 10
female Wistar rats.14 The animals were dosed with 0, 100, 300, or 1000 mg/kg dimethyl malonate orally, by gavage. Males
were dosed for 2 wks prior to mating, during mating, and 2 wks after mating, for a total of 39 doses. Females were dosed 2
weeks prior to mating, during mating, and through day 4 of lactation. A recovery group of 5 male and 5 female high dose
animals were observed for 14 days after the termination of dosing. Microscopically, the incidence of treatment-related
hepatocellular hypertrophy of the liver was observed for males and females given 1000 mg/kg dimethyl malonate. This effect
was not observed in the recovery animals or in the other test groups. No other significant toxicological effects were observed.
Performance in a functional observation battery was similar for test and control animals. There was no effect on fertility. An
increase in post-implantation loss was increased in the 100 mg/kg group, resulting in a statistically significant decrease in the
number of live pups. This effect was not considered treatment related, and no developmental toxicity was reported. The
NOAEL was 300 mg/kg for repeated dose and maternal toxicity and 1000 mg/kg for fertility and developmental toxicity.
Dimethyl Adipate
The fetotoxic and teratogenic effects of dimethyl adipate were evaluated in a study in which groups of 5 gravid
Sprague Dawley rats were dosed i.p. with 0.0603-0.6028 ml/kg (1/30, 1/10, 1/5, and 1/3 of the i.p. LD50 value) on days 5, 10,
and 15 of gestation.115 A pooled volume control consisted of animals dosed with 10 ml/kg distilled water, saline, or cotton-
CIR Panel Book Page 87
40
seed oil. A positive control group was not used. All animals were killed and examined on day 20 of gestation. The mean
fetal weights and the numbers of live fetuses were not statistically significantly different between treated and blunt-needle
control groups. Resorptions in animals dosed with 0.1809 ml/kg were statistically significantly increased when compared to
the pooled controls, but not the blunt-needle controls. Gross and skeletal abnormalities, but not visceral, were statistically
significantly increased in fetuses of the 0.3617 and 0.6028 ml/kg groups.
Diethyl Adipate
The fetotoxic and teratogenic effects of diethyl adipate were evaluated following the same procedure described
above.115 These rats were dosed i.p. with 0.0837-0.8373 ml/kg diethyl adipate. The mean fetal weight and the number of live
fetuses were not statistically significantly different between treated and blunt-needle control groups, and the number of resorp-
tions was similar between treated animals and both the blunt needle and pooled controls. There were no differences in the
incidences of gross, skeletal, or visceral abnormalities in fetuses of the treated groups compared to pooled controls.
Dipropyl Adipate
The fetotoxic and teratogenic effects of dipropyl adipate were evaluated following the same procedure described
earlier.115 These rats were dosed i.p. with 0.1262-1.2619 ml/kg dipropyl adipate. The numbers of live and dead fetuses were
not statistically significantly different between treated and blunt-needle control groups, but there was a statistically significant
decrease in the mean fetal weight of the 0.7572 ml/kg group. Resorptions in animals dosed with 1.2619 ml/kg were statisti-
cally significantly increased when compared to the pooled controls, but not the blunt-needle controls. Gross abnormalities,
but not skeletal or visceral, were statistically significantly increased in fetuses of the 1.2619 ml/kg group.
Dibutyl Adipate
A reproductive toxicity study was performed in which groups of 5 gravid Sprague Dawley rats were dosed i.p. with 0.1748-1.7480 ml/kg dibutyl adipate on days 5, 10, and 15 of gestation. The incidence of gross abnormalities was only statistically significantly increased in the high dose group when compared to pooled controls. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5 The reproductive toxicity of dibutyl adipate was evaluated in a study Sprague-Dawley rats.106 Groups of 13 males
and 13 female’s rats were dosed with 0, 100, 300, or 1000 mg/kg dibutyl adipate orally, by gavage, for 14 days prior to
mating through parturition; males were dosed for a total of 42 days and female dams were dosed until day 3 of lactation. The
test article had no effect on fertility. Body weight gains of males of the 1000 mg/kg group were slightly decreased. Kidney
weights of the high dose males and females sere increased compared to controls. No gross or microscopic effects were noted
at necropsy, and the internal genitalia were normal. Dosing with dibutyl adipate did not produce any reproductive effects.
The only effect on the offspring was a decrease in pup weight on post-natal days 0 and 4 and in viability on post-natal day 4.
The NOEL for parental and offspring toxicity was 300 mg/kg/day. The reproductive NOEL was 1000 mg/kg/day.
Di-C7-9 Branched and Linear Alkyl Esters of Adipic Acid
Groups of 24 gravid Sprague Dawley rats were dosed orally by gavage with 0, 1000, 4000, or 7000 mg/kg/day di-
C7-9 branched and linear alkyl esters of adipic acid on days 6-19 of gestation, and all animals were killed and examined on
day 20.85 All dams survived until study termination. Body weights were significantly decreased for dams of the 7000 mg/kg
group. Weights of male and female fetuses of the 7000 mg/kg group were slightly, but not statistically significantly,
decreased compared to the other groups. A greater incidence of rudimentary structures was observed for high dose fetuses as
compared to the other groups in this study, but the incidence was within the range of historical controls. There was no
evidence of developmental toxicity at any dose tested.
CIR Panel Book Page 88
41
Ditridecyl Adipate
The reproductive and developmental toxicity of ditridecyl adipate was evaluated using groups of 15 mated female
Sprague-Dawley rats.85 Doses of 0, 800, and 2000 mg/kg were applied dermally without occlusion on days 0-19 of gestation,
and the dams were killed on day 20. Mild skin irritation consisting of erythema and flaking were observed at the test sites of
the treated animals. No maternal mortality was reported. Weight gains were statistically significantly decreased for the 2000
mg/kg group during days 0-3 and 16-20 of gestation. Weight gain was statistically significantly decreased in the 800 mg/kg
group during days 0-3 of gestation. Mean fetal body weights and crown-rump lengths were affected exposure to the test
article. No differences in skeletal anomalies were observed, but there were some differences in visceral anomalies, including
increased incidence of levocardia at 2000 mg/kg. These anomalies were not considered treatment-related. The NOAEL for
maternal toxicity was 2000 mg/kg/day, and for developmental and reproductive effects it was 800 mg/kg/day.
Groups of 25 mated female rats were dosed dermally with 0 and 2000 mg/kg ditridecyl adipate following the same
study protocol as above. Again, there were no signs of maternal toxicity. No developmental toxicity was reported, and there
were no visceral anomalies.
Tridecyl adipate, 2000 mg/kg, was applied, unoccluded, to groups of 10 male Sprague-Dawley rats, 5 days/wk for
13 wks, and the effect on sperm morphology was evaluated.85 (The 'Subchronic Dermal Toxicity’ study was described
earlier.) No differences in sperm morphology were observed between control and test animals.
Diisobutyl Adipate
The fetotoxic and teratogenic effects of diisobutyl adipate were evaluated following the procedure described in the
earlier i.p. study.115 These rats were dosed i.p. with 0.1983-1.9833 ml/kg diisobutyl adipate. The numbers of live and dead
fetuses were not statistically significantly different between treated and blunt-needle control groups, but there was a statistical-
ly significant decrease in the mean fetal weight of the 1.1900 and 0.9833ml/kg dose groups. The number of resorptions was
similar between treated animals and both the blunt needle and pooled controls. Gross abnormalities, but not skeletal or vis-
ceral, were statistically significantly increased in fetuses of the 0.5950 and 1.9833 ml/kg groups.
Diethylhexyl Adipate
The reproductive effects of diethylhexyl adipate were studied in Swiss mice. Groups of 10 male mice were dosed i.p. with ≤9.3 g/kg and then mated with undosed females. A reduction in the number of gravid females was considered an anti-fertility effect, and the dominant lethal mutation was determined directly from the dose-dependent increase in the number of early fetal deaths and indirectly from the dose- and time-dependent decrease in implantations. There were no test article-related changes in the incidence of late fetal deaths. It was noted that the experimental design and interpretation have been questioned by some. Diethylhexyl adipate, ≤9.3 g/kg, was administered by i.p. injection to groups of 5 gravid Sprague Dawley rats on day 5, 10, and 15 of gestation. Resorption rates were similar to controls. A decrease in the mean fetal body weight and a significant increase in gross fetal abnormalities at the high dose were observed when compared to pooled control values. However teratogenic effects were not observed when compared to concurrent controls. It was stated that the lack of historical and positive controls affected the validity of the results. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2 Groups of 15 male and 30 female Wistar rats were fed a diet containing 0, 0.03, 0.18, or 1.2% diethylhexyl adipate
(calculated as 28, 170, or 1080 mg/kg/day) for 10 weeks prior to mating.85 Dosing was terminated, and the animals were
mated. (A different source indicated that dosing continued throughout the study.130) A reduction in body weight gain was
reported during gestation for the dams of the 1.2% group. No test article-related effects on fertility were observed. Fetal
weight, total litter weight, and litter size were reduced in the 1.2% group, but the number of pups born live, or their survival,
was not affected. The NOAEL was 170 mg/kg/day and the LOAEL was 1080 mg/kg/day.
CIR Panel Book Page 89
42
In another study in which gravid females were fed the same doses as above on days 1-22 of gestation, maternal body
weight and feed consumption were statistically decreased in the 1.2% group. No significant effects on fetal weight or litter
size were reported. Animals of the 0.18 and 1.2% groups had slightly increased incidences of minor skeletal abnormalities;
this increase was attributed to fetotoxicity. The NOEL for maternal toxicity was 170 mg/kg/day. The NOAELs for develop-
mental toxicity and fetotoxicity were 170 and 28 mg/kg/day, respectively. The LOAEL was 1080 mg/kg day.
A dose-range finding study was performed using groups of 8 gravid Wistar rats that were dosed by gavage with 2
ml/kg of 0, 800, or 1200 mg/day diethylhexyl adipate, in peanut oil, from day 7 of gestation until day 17 after parturition.131
No signs of toxicity were reported in any of the groups. In the 800 mg/kg group, the only statistically significant observation
made was decreased body weights of male and female pups on day 3. In the 1200 mg/kg group, statistically significant effects
were observed for a number of parameters, including decreased maternal weight gain during days 7-21 of gestation, increased
length of gestation (by 1 day), decreased pup body weights at birth and day 3, and an increase in perinatal loss per litter.
(Perinatal loss was 42% in the 1200 mg/kg groups, as compared to 4.6% in controls.)
Based on the results of the dose-range finding study, groups of 20 gravid Wistar rats were dosed with 2 ml/kg of 0,
200, 400, or 800 mg/kg diethylhexyl adipate, in peanut oil, from day 7 of gestation until post-natal day 17. At postnatal day
21, all dams and pups were killed, with the exception that one male and one female pup per litter was kept for further evalua-
tion. No signs of toxicity were reported in any of the groups. No significant effects were observed in the 200 mg/kg group.
In the 400 mg/kg dose groups, the number of postnatal deaths per number of pups was statistically significant increased. In
the 800 mg/kg group, statistically significant effects were observed for a number of parameters, including increased length of
gestation (by 1 day), decreased pup body weights at birth and days 3 and 13, increased mean number of postnatal deaths, and
an increase in postnatal death per number of pups. The percentage of perinatal loss per litter was twice as high in the 400 and
800 mg/kg groups (23%) as compared to controls (11%), but the change was not statistically significant. Testicular testoster-
one levels were unaffected in any of the pups that were killed on postnatal day 21 or the adult male offspring, and all other
hormones that were measured were similar to controls. None of the sperm parameters that were evaluated were affected by
dosing. The only statistically significant effects, noted in the 800 mg/kg group, were increased relative liver weights in male
pups on day 21 and increased body weights and decreased adrenal weights in adult male offspring. Diethylhexyl adipate did
not produce any antiandrogenic effects in the study. Fetal steroidogenesis was not evaluated. NOAEL was 200 mg/kg.
Groups of 10 female Crl:CD(SD) rats were dosed with 5 ml/kg, by gavage, of 0, 200, 1000, or 2000 mg/kg diethyl-
hexyl adipate in corn oil for 2 wks prior to mating with undosed males, throughout mating, and until day 7 of gestation day.120
The dams were killed on day 14 of gestation. All animals survived until study termination. Body weights and body weight
gains were significantly decreased in the 2000 mg/kg dose group prior to mating. Staining around the perineum was observed
in the 1000 and 2000 mg/kg dose groups. No statistically significant differences were observed for the 200 mg/kg group
compared to controls. The mean estrus cycle length was statistically significantly increased in the 1000 and 2000 mg/kg
groups, and the post-implantation loss rate was also statistically significantly increased in these groups. Additionally, in the
2000 mg/kg group, there was a significant decrease in implantation rate, and the number of live embryos was statistically
significantly decreased and the pre-implantation loss rate statistically significantly increased. The researchers stated that the
effects observed in this fertility study, in conjunction with the ovarian effects described earlier in the repeated dose study,
suggest that diethylhexyl adipate disturbed ovulation. This correlated with the effect on estrus cycle length.
The testicular toxicity of diethylhexyl adipate was examined using male F344 rats.132 Groups of six rats were fed a
diet containing 6000 or 25,000 ppm diethylhexyl adipate for 4 wks, and the controls were given untreated feed. Some groups
CIR Panel Book Page 90
43
were dosed i.p. with 200 mg/kg thioacetamide, 3x/wk for 4 wks, and prior to dosing with diethylhexyl adipate to evaluate
whether liver disease enhanced testicular effects. (There was a 1-wk rest period prior to dosing with diethylhexyl adipate.)
The final body weights of animals given 25,000 ppm diethylhexyl adipate, with and without prior administration of thioceta-
mide, were statistically significantly decreased compared to their respective controls. The relative liver weights of these
animals were statistically significantly increased. No significant effect on the relative weights of the testes or epididymis were
seen for any of the test groups. Diethylhexyl adipate did not have any testicular toxic effects, with or without the induction of
hepatic damage.
Dibutyl Sebacate
A test group of 20 male and 20 female Sprague-Dawley rats was fed a diet containing 6.25% dibutyl sebacate for 10
wks, while a control group of 12 male and 12 female rats were fed the basal diet, and then animals of each group were then
mated.116 The dams were allowed to deliver their litters, and at weaning, 24 male and 24 female offspring were randomly
chosen, fed the test diet for 21 days, and then killed for necropsy. The study results indicated that ingestion of a diet contain-
ing 6.25% dibutyl sebacate had no adverse effect on fertility, litter size, or survival of offspring. Growth was decreased dur-
ing the pre-weaning and post-weaning periods. However, no gross pathological changes were found among young rats killed
at the end of the 21-day post-weaning period.
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
Reproduction, suckling and growth were normal in a four-generation study of rats fed a diet containing 200 ppm
diethylhexyl sebacate (~10 mg/kg/day).1 No reproductive or developmental toxicity was observed.
Dimethyl Glutarate/Dimethyl Succinate/Dimethyl Adipate Mixture
The developmental toxicity produced by the inhalation of dibasic esters (mixture of 65.1% dimethyl glutarate, 17.8%
dimethyl succinate, and 16.8% dimethyl adipate) was evaluated in rats.133 Groups of 24 gravid Crl:CD rats were exposed for
6 h/day to 0, 0.16, 0.4, or 1.0 mg/l dibasic esters, by whole body inhalation, on days 7-16 of gestation. The aerosol particle
size in the 1.0 mg/l chamber was 5.3-5.4 µm, with 72-74% of the aerosol <10 µm. The animals were killed on day 21 of
gestation. All animals survived until study termination. Body weight gains were statistically significantly decreased in the 0.4
and 1.0 mg/l groups. Feed consumption by these groups was reduced during the first 6 exposures; statistical significance was
not given. Statistically significant differences in absolute and relative liver weights were not observed, but there was a
significant trend of decreased absolute, but not relative, liver weights. The only significant clinical signs observed were
perinasal staining and wet fur of rats in the 1.0 mg/l group. Reproductive and developmental effects were not observed, and
dibasic esters was not a developmental toxicant in rats following inhalation of ≤1.0 mg/l.
Groups of 20 Crl:CD(SD)BR rats/gender were exposed for 6 h/day, 5 days/wk, to 0, 0.16, 0.40, or 1.0 mg/l dibasic
esters by whole body inhalation for 14 wks prior to mating, and then 7 days/wk for 8 wks of mating, gestation, and lactation. 134 The mean aerosol particle size in the 1.0 mg/l chamber was 6.2 µm, with 69% of the aerosol <10 µm. Exposure was
discontinued from day 109 of gestation through day 3 post-partum. All parental rats and 10 pups/gender were killed and
necropsied on day 21 post-partum. The remaining pups were not necropsied. Maternal body weights in the 0.40 mg/l group
were decreased during the last week of the study, while body weights of male and female rats of the 1.0 mg/l group were
slightly decreased from wk 7 on. Relative liver weights were slightly, but not significantly, decreased in the 0.4 and 1.0 mg/l
groups. Other differences in organ weights were not considered dose-related. With the exception of a statistically significant
decrease in pup body weights at birth and day 21, no reproductive or developmental effects were observed. The only
microscopic findings were squamous metaplasia in the olfactory epithelium of all treated parental rats. This effect was
CIR Panel Book Page 91
44
minimal in the 0.16 mg/l group and mild to moderate in the 0.4 and 1.0 mg/ml groups. The NOEL for reproductive
parameters was 1.0 mg/l.
Endocrine Disruption
Diethylhexyl adipate appeared to have endocrine-mediated effects in a 28-day oral study; however, it was stated that the findings may be attributable to the disturbance ovarian function according to the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonad axis.
Diethylhexyl Adipate
A 28-day repeated-dose toxicity study was performed to determine whether diethylhexyl adipate has endocrine-
mediated activities.135 Groups of 10 male and 10 female Crj:CD (SD) rats were dosed orally by gavage with 0, 40, 200, or
1000 mg/kg diethylhexyl adipate in corn oil, at a volume of 10 ml/kg, for a minimum of 28 days. In addition to clinical
observations, a functional observation battery was performed during wk 4, estrous cycling was assessed from day 22,
hormone analysis was measured at the end of the test period, and sperm morphology and sperm count were examined. Male
animals were killed and necropsied on day 29, while females were killed and necropsied on days 30-34 when in diestrous.
Signs of toxicity were not observed, and no clinical chemistry or hematological findings were recorded. Hormonal and
spermatological analyses were normal. Statistically significant increased were seen in relative kidney weights in males of the
200 and 1000 mg/kg groups, relative liver weights of males in the 1000 mg/kg group, and in relative liver, kidney, and
adrenal weights in females of the 1000 mg/kg group. Microscopically, increased eosinophilic bodies and hyaline droplets
were seen in the kidneys of male rats of the 1000 mg/kg group. Ovarian follicle atresia was observed in 4 females of the 1000
mg/kg group, accompanied by a prolonged estrous cycle in 2 of these rats. A change in the estrous cycle is an important
endpoint for determination of endocrine-mediated effects in the enhanced TG 407 assay. The researchers stated that this
effect, in conjunction with the microscopic findings, appears to be related to endocrine-mediated effects of diethylhexyl
adipate. However, it was also stated that these finding may be attributable to the disturbance of ovarian function according to
the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonad axis. The changes in relative organ weights were considered toxic effects, and the NOEL
was 40 mg/kg/day.
The effect of diethylhexyl adipate on estrogen receptor and thyroid hormone (TH) functions was also examined.136
The TH-like activity was assessed using the rat pituitary tumor cell line Gh3 expressing intracellular TH and estrogen
receptors and responding to physiological concentration of TH by proliferation. At low potency, diethylhexyl adipate
stimulated the TH- dependent rat pituitary GH3 cell proliferation in a concentration-dependent manner. Cotreatment of GH3
cells with diethylhexyl adipate potentiated the L-3,5,3’-triiodothyronine (T3)-EC50 potentiated the T3-induced GH3 cell
proliferation.
Diisononyl Adipate
In a subchronic dietary study described earlier, groups of male and female beagle dogs were fed 0, 0.3, 1.0, or 3.0%
(wks 1-8) and 6.0% (wks 9-13) diisononyl adipate for 13 wks.85 Reproductive tissues were evaluated. No significant findings
were reported for the 0.3 and 1.0% groups. In the high dose group, testes weight was decreased. At microscopic examina-
tion, it was found that the epididymal ducts were devoid of spermatozoa, the seminiferous tubules were composed of sertoli
cells and spermatogonia, spermatocytes and spermatids were not evident, and there was almost total aspermatogenesis.
Ovaries were not weighed at necropsy. There were no gross or microscopic changes in any of the test groups upon compari-
son to controls.
GENOTOXICITY
The esters of dicarboxylic acids are not mutagenic or genotoxic a battery of in vitro and in vivo tests. The only
CIR Panel Book Page 92
45
non-negative results reported were equivocal results in a sister-chromatid exchange assay with ≤400 µg/ml diethylhexyl adipate in the presence of metabolic activation and a dose-dependent inhibition of 3H-thymidine into replicating DNA, with a dose-dependent increase in the ratio of acid-incorporated 3H-thymidine with ≤0.01 M diethylhexyl adipate.. (The same effect was seen in the 3H-thymidine assay with 2-ethylhexanol.)
Diethyl Malonate
Diethyl malonate was not mutagenic in an Ames test or a cytogenetic assay using human peripheral lymphocytes at
concentrations ≤5000 µg/plate.14
Dimethyl Malonate Dimethyl malonate was not mutagenic in an Ames test at concentrations ≤5000 µg/plate.14
Dimethyl Succinate
Dimethyl succinate was not mutagenic in an Ames tests with concentrations of ≤ 20,000 µg/plate137 or in a
preincubation assay with concentrations of ≤10,000 µg/plate.138
Dimethyl Glutarate
Dimethyl glutarate was not mutagenic in a preincubation assay with concentrations of ≤10,000 µg/plate.139
Dimethyl Adipate
Dimethyl adipate was not mutagenic in a preincubation assay with concentrations of ≤10,000 µg/plate.140
Dibutyl Adipate
Dibutyl adipate was mutagenic in an Ames test at concentrations of ≤5000 µg/plate. It was not genotoxic in an in vivo mouse micronucleus assay in which the animals were dosed with ≤2000 mg/kg. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5
Di-C7-9 Branched and Linear Alkyl Esters of Adipic Acid
Di-C7-9 branched and linear alkyl esters of adipic acid were not mutagenic in an Ames test at concentrations of
≤10.0 µl/plate.85
Ditridecyl Adipate
Ditridecyl adipate was not mutagenic in an Ames test at concentrations of 0-10 µl/plate, and it was not clastogenic in
an in vivo micronucleus assay using rats dosed dermally with 0, 800, or 2000 mg/kg ditridecyl adipate.85
Diethylhexyl Adipate
Diethylhexyl adipate was not mutagenic in an Ames. (The specific concentrations tested were not provided.) From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2 Diethylhexyl adipate was not mutagenic in a number of genotoxicity studies. In vitro, negative results were reported
in Ames tests at concentrations ranging from ≤150 -10,000 µg/plate,85,141-143 in an NTP preincubation assay,144 in a liquid
suspension assay,145 and in a forward mutation assay using L5178Y cells at concentrations ≤1000 µg/ml .146 In an assay for
sister chromatid exchanges and chromosomal aberrations using concentrations of ≤200 µg/plate, results were negative,147
while in another assay with ≤400 µl/plate, results were negative without, but equivocal with, metabolic activation in the sister
chromatid exchange assay and there was some evidence of genotoxicity without, but none with, metabolic activation in the
chromosomal aberration assay.148 In a 3H-thymidine assay, there was a dose-dependent inhibition of 3H-thymidine into repli-
cating DNA, with a dose-dependent increase in the ratio of acid-soluble DNA-incorporated 3H-thymidine.142 In vivo, results
were negative in micronucleus tests85,149 and chromosomal aberration assays.150,151
An Ames test was performed on urine of rats dosed with diethylhexyl adipate to assess whether mutagenic substances
occur in the urine following diethylhexyl adipate adminstration.152 Groups of ≥6 male Sprague-Dawley rats were dosed orally
by gavage with 0 or 2000 mg/kg diethylhexyl adipate in corn oil for 15 days. Urine was collected daily. The urine was not
CIR Panel Book Page 93
46
mutagenic in the Ames test, indicating that it is not converted to metabolic urinary metabolites. The urine of rats dosed with
1000 mg/kg 2-ethylhexanol by gavage for 15 days was also tested in an Ames assay. The urine of these rats also was not
mutagenic. Urine from rats that were dosed with a known mutagen gave a positive response in an Ames test.
Diisononyl Adipate
Diisononyl adipate was not mutagenic in an Ames assay at ≤1000 µg/plate, and it was not genotoxic in a mouse
lymphoma assay, a transformation assay, or a BALB/3t3 assay at concentrations of ≤100, 1000, or 1.3 µg/ml, respectively.153
Diethyl Sebacate
Diethyl sebacate was non-mutagenic in an Escherichia coli Sd-4-73 reversion (streptomycin dependence to
independence) assay.154
Dibutyl Sebacate
Dibutyl sebacate, ≤10,000 µg/plate, was not mutagenic in the Ames assay.155,156
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
Diethylhexyl sebacate was not mutagenic in an Ames assay at concentrations of ≤10,000 µg/plate.141,157 In the rat
liver foci test, diethylhexyl sebacate demonstrated no evidence of activity when administered orally at 500 mg/kg 3x/wk for
11 wks, following a single oral treatment with a known carcinogen.158
Details of the genotoxicity studies on esters of dicarboxylic acids are described in Table 11. Data from the original
safety assessments on dibutyl and diethylhexyl adipate are included in italics. Details of the available genotoxicity data on
esterase metabolites are also summarized in this table.
CARCINOGENICITY
In a 2-yr NTP study, ≤2.5% diethylhexyl adipate did not produce tumors in male or female rats, but it did increase the incidence of hepatocellular adenoma and carcinoma in male and female mice. Diethylhexyl adipate did not cause skin tumors with weekly application of 10 mg to the back of mice in a lifetime study. Other compounds with a 2-ethylhexyl group that have been evaluated for carcinogenicity had some evidence of hepatocarcinogenicity, ranging from very strong to equivocal, in rodents. The IARC has stated that diethylhexyl adipate is not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity in humans. However, feeding of diethylhexyl sebacate to rats for 19mos did not result in carcinogenic effects.
Diethylhexyl Adipate
In an NTP carcinogenicity study, administration of ≤25,000 ppm diethylhexyl adipate to rats for 103 wks did not produce carcinogenic effects. However, mice fed the same amount for 103 wks had dose-related body weight reductions and a higher incidence of hepatocellular adenoma and carcinoma than the controls. In another study in which rats were fed ≤2.5% diethylhexyl adipate for 2 yrs, tumor incidence for the test animals was similar to that of controls. The same researchers found no tumors in dogs fed up to 0.2% diethylhexyl adipate for 1 yr. A single 10 mg dose of diethylhexyl adipate given by s.c.. injection was not carcinogenic in mice. In a lifetime study, diethylhexyl adipate caused no skin tumors when 10 mg was applied weekly to the back skin of mice. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Research has shown that other compounds with a 2-ethylhexyl group that have been evaluated for carcinogenicity
had some evidence of hepatocarcinogenicity, ranging from very strong to equivocal, in rodents. 121
In an evaluation of the carcinogenic risk of diethylhexyl adipate, the IARC stated that there was limited evidence in
experimental animals for the carcinogenicity of diethylhexyl adipate.17 Therefore, the overall evaluation of diethylhexyl
adipate was not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans (Group 3).
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
No evidence of carcinogenicity was observed in an unspecified number of rats fed a diet providing about 10 mg
diethylhexyl sebacate/kg/day for up to 19 months.1 No further study details were provided.
CIR Panel Book Page 94
47
Tumor Promotion
Diethylhexyl Adipate
A group of 14 male F344 rats were used to assess the carcinogenic potential of diethylhexyl adipate in a medium-
term liver bioassay.159 The rats were given a single i.p. dose of diethylnitrosamine, and 2 wks later they were given 20,000
ppm diethylhexyl adipate in the diet. At wk 3, a partial hepatectomy was performed. Positive results for carcinogenic
potential were indicated by a significant increase in GST-P positive foci. Diethylhexyl adipate did not have an enhancing
effect on the development of GST-P-positive foci.
CLINICAL ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY
Human Exposure
Diethylhexyl Adipate
Diethylhexyl adipate can migrate into food, and it is most marked when plasticized PVC film comes in direct contact
with fatty foods.88 Using the analyses of a range of typical food, a maximum intake of 16 mg/person/day for diethylhexyl
adipate was estimated. The amount of diethylhexyl adipate used in PVC films was reduced, and the estimate was revised to
8.2 mg/day.
Dibutyl Sebacate
Dibutyl sebacate, a component of PVC, can pass from the packing films to the enclosed food.40
Dermal Irritation and Sensitization
In a number of irritation and sensitization studies, the diesters of dicarboxylic acids are not irritants or sensitizers. The only exception noted was that undiluted diisopropyl adipate was moderately irritating in one cumulative irritancy test, and some slight irritation was seen with formulations containing diethylhexyl adipate.
Dimethyl Malonate
The sensitization potential of 8% dimethyl malonate in petrolatum was evaluated in a maximization test using 25
subjects.14 Dimethyl malonate was not a sensitizer.
Dibutyl Adipate
Undiluted dibutyl adipate was not irritating in a 24-hr clinical patch test with 10 subjects. Slight reactions (not defined) were reported for 4 of 18 subjects in a 24-h patch test with dibutyl adipate, 20% in alcohol. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5
Diisopropyl Adipate
The dermal irritation and sensitization o f diisopropyl adipate was evaluated in a number of studies. Undiluted diisopropyl adipate produced no irritation in 4 h patch tests, but was moderately irritating in a 21-day cumulative irritancy test. Formulations containing 0.26-20.75% diisopropyl adipate caused minimal to mild irritation, but no sensitization. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Diethylhexyl Adipate
The dermal irritation and sensitization o f diethylhexyl adipate was evaluated in a number of studies. Clini-cal assessment of diethylhexyl adipate at concentrations of 0.01-9.0% in formulation showed, at most, erythema and papules when applied under occlusion for extended periods of time. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Diisostearyl Adipate
A human repeat insult patch test (HRIPT) using 50 subjects was used to evaluate the irritation and sensitization
potential of diisostearyl adipate.160 Two-tenths ml was applied neat to the back of each subject under an occlusive patch for
24 h, after which time the subject removed the patch. This procedure was performed 3 times per wk for 3 wks, for a total of 9
CIR Panel Book Page 95
48
induction patches. Following a 10-14 day non-treatment period, a 24 h challenge patch was applied to a previously untreated
site, and reactions were scored at 24 and 48 h. No adverse reactions were observed, and diisostearyl adipate was not a
primary irritant or a sensitizer.
Diethyl Sebacate
A single insult occlusive patch test (SIOPT) was performed using 20 subjects to determine the irritation potential of
a body cream containing 1.5% diethyl sebacate.161 The test patch was applied for 24 h. The PII was 0.00, and the body
cream containing 1.5% diethyl sebacate was non-irritating.
The sensitization potential of a body cream containing 1.5% diethyl sebacate was evaluated in a maximization
study.162 During induction, 0.05 ml of 0.25% aq. sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) was applied under an occlusive patch for 24 h.
At that time, the patch was removed and 0.05 ml of the test material was applied to the same site under an occlusive patch for
48-72 h. If no irritation was present at the test site upon patch removal, an occlusive patch with 0.25% aq. SLS was applied
for 24 h, followed by a patch of the test material. This sequence was used for 5 induction patches. If irritation developed
during induction, the SLS patch was eliminated. After a 10-day non-treatment period, a challenge was performed at a pre-
viously untreated site. The challenge site was pretreated with 0.05 ml of 5.0% aq. SLS under an occlusive patch for 1 h,
followed by an occlusive patch of the test material for 48 h. Twenty-five subjects completed the study. No reactions were
seen at challenge, and a body cream containing 1.5% diethyl sebacate did not have contact-sensitizing potential.
Diisopropyl Sebacate
An SIOPT was performed using 20 subjects to determine the irritation potential of a foundation containing 1.8%
diisopropyl sebacate.163 The patch was applied for 24 h. The foundation containing 1.8% diisopropyl sebacate was not
irritating.
The irritation and sensitization potential of diisopropyl sebacate was evaluated in a patch test that consisted of four
24-h applications of diisopropyl sebacate as supplied (approximately 100%) during weeks 1, 2, 3, and 6 on a 2 cm x2 cm
area of skin on the right upper arm of each subject.164 Examinations were performed immediately after patch removal. The
induction phase was performed during wks 1-4 using 107 subjects. No clinically significant effects were detected on any of
the subjects during this phase. During wk 6, the challenge phase was conducted on 105 subjects. No clinically significant
effects were noted in any of the subjects during this phase. Diisopropyl sebacate was not observed to have any significant
skin-irritating or sensitizing activity under the conditions of this study.
A maximization assay was performed, using a modified protocol of the maximization assay procedure described
earlier, to determine the contact-sensitization potential of a foundation containing 2.2% diisopropyl sebacate.165 In this study,
the test material was allowed to volatilize for 30 min before the occlusive patch was applied. Twenty-five subjects completed
the study. No reactions were seen at challenge, and a foundation containing 2.2% diisopropyl sebacate did not have contact-
sensitizing potential.
Two heat protection hair spray products containing 1% diisopropyl sebacate were tested using a modified Draize
HRIPT procedure to determine the potential of those products to induce irritation and contact sensitization.166 The products
were tested neat and allowed to volatilize prior to patch application. Samples were patched under semi-occlusive conditions.
Approximately 0.2ml was used in each patch. One hundred ten subjects completed the study. Generally transient, barely
perceptible (0.5-level) to mild (1-level) patch test responses on 22 test subjects for one formulation and only barely per-
ceptible (0.5-level) patch test response on 15 test subjects with the other formulation during the induction and/or challenge
phases of the study were reported. Both products were considered to be non-irritating and non-sensitizing.
CIR Panel Book Page 96
49
A heat protection hair spray product containing 7.2% diisopropyl sebacate was tested using an HRIPT to determine
the potential of this product to induce irritation and contact sensitization.167 The product was tested neat under semi-occlusive
conditions. Approximately 0.2 ml sample was used in each patch. Fifty-one subjects completed the study. No skin reactivity
was observed in any of the test subjects during the course of the study.
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
Diethylhexyl sebacate was applied neat using occlusive patches to the skin of 15-30 subjects (sex not specified) for
48-h.1 No local reactions were observed in the challenge phase (48-h covered contact with neat liquid) that was carried out 2
weeks later, presumably due to limited induction.
Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate
An HRIPT with 50 subjects was performed to evaluate the irritation and sensitization potential of dioctyldodecyl
dodecanedioate.160 Two-tenths ml was applied to the back of each subject under an occlusive patch for 24 h, after which time
the subject removed the patch. This procedure was performed 3 times per wk for 3 wks, for a total of 9 induction patches.
Following a 10-14 day non-treatment period, a 24 h challenge patch was applied to a previously untreated site, and reactions
were scored at 24 and 48 h. No adverse reactions were observed, and dioctyldodecyl dodecanedioate was not a primary
irritant or a sensitizer.
Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate
An HRIPT with 50 subjects was performed as described above to evaluate the irritation and sensitization potential of
diisocetyl dodecanedioate.160 No adverse reactions were observed, and diisocetyl dodecanedioate was not a primary irritant
or a sensitizer.
Clinical dermal irritation and sensitization data on esters of dicarboxylic acids are presented in Table 12. Data from
the original safety assessments on dibutyl, diisopropyl and diethylhexyl adipate are included in italics. The available dermal
irritation and sensitization data on esterase metabolites are also summarized in this table.
Phototoxicity and Photosensitization
A 10% dilution of dibutyl adipate and formulations containing 0.7-17% diisopropyl adipate and 9% diethylhexyl adipate were not phototoxic.
Dibutyl Adipate
Dibutyl adipate, as a 10% dilution in liquid paraffin, was not phototoxic in a clinical study.5
Diisopropyl Adipate
In photopatch test studies, formulations containing 0.7-17.0% diisopropyl adipate were not phototoxic, primary irritants, or sensitizers. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Diethylhexyl Adipate
In a photopatch test with 9.0% diethylhexyl adipate, no phototoxic or photoallergic reactions were observed. From the Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate2
Ocular Irritation
Dibutyl Adipate
Dibutyl adipate, 0.1% in paraffin oil, was not an ocular irritant in two subjects. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5
CIR Panel Book Page 97
50
Comedogenicity
Dibutyl Adipate
Dibutyl adipate, 10-100% (vehicle not stated), was not comedogenic in clinical testing. From the Amended Final Report on Dibutyl Adipate5
Case Reports
A number of investigators have reported cases of allergic contact dermatitis in response to diethyl sebacate-contain-
ing products, and have demonstrated diethyl sebacate to be the substance, or one of several substances in the products, elicit-
ing the dermatitis.37,168-172 Two case studies were reported of allergic reactions to lotion containing diisopropyl sebacate.173,174
In a case study where one patient was sensitized to other sebacate esters, diethylhexyl sebacate was not irritating.173 For
stearyl alcohol, a metabolite of distearyl succinate, contact sensitization was reported in 3 individuals.175 These case reports
are described in Table 13.
Risk Assessment
Diethylhexyl Adipate
According to the Integrated Risk Information System of the EPA, the weight-of-evidence classification for diethyl-
hexyl adipate was “possible human carcinogen”.130 The classification was based on an absence of human data and increased
liver tumors in female mice. The only genotoxic effect was a positive dominant lethal assay. It was noted that diethylhexyl
adipate exhibits structural relationships to other non-genotoxic compounds that are classified as probable and possible
carcinogens.
CIR Panel Book Page 98
51
SUMMARY
This safety assessment includes sebacic acid and other alkyl α,ω-dicarboxylic acids, salts, monoesters and diesters,
for a total of 56 ingredients. The dicarboxylic acids are terminally functionalized straight alkyl chains characterized by a
separation between the acid functional groups of one to 10 carbons. The simple alkyl di-esters are the result of the condensa-
tion of alkyl dicarboxylic acids and two equivalents of alkyl alcohols. These ingredients can be metabolized via hydrolysis
back to the parent alcohol, the mono-ester, and the parent dicarboxylic acid. The simple alkyl esters (mono- and di-) of these
dicarboxylic acids have straight or branched side chains ranging in length from one to 18 carbons. This safety assessment is
divided into two parts – (1) the dicarboxylic acids and their salts and (2) esters of dicarboxylic acids
A safety assessment of diethylhexyl adipate and diisopropyl adipate was published in 1984 with the conclusion that
these ingredients are safe as used in cosmetics. Additionally, dibutyl adipate was previously reviewed in 1996 and the avail-
able data were found insufficient to support the safety of dibutyl adipate in cosmetic formulations. When re-reviewed in
2006, additional data were made available to address the needs identified by the CIR Expert Panel, and an amended conclu-
sion was issued stating that dibutyl adipate is safe for use in cosmetic formulations.
While many of the alkyl dicarboxylic acids are natural products, commercial production of these acids has historical-
ly occurred via alkali pyrolysis of lipids.
A relationship exists between the molecular weight and the log octanol – water partioning coefficient. Physical
properties change as chain length increases, and the water solubility of these acids is inversely proportional to their chain
length. Odd versus even chain length also plays a role. The alternating effects are believed to be the result of the inability of
odd carbon number compounds to assume an in-plane orientation of both carboxyl groups with respect to the hydrocarbon
chain. The diesters, in contrast, are much more lipid soluble and more difficult to dissolve in water. The short-chain alkyl
mono- and diesters are more soluble in water, less lipophilic, and relatively more volatile than the corresponding longer-chain
alkyl esters.
The ingredients in this report function in cosmetics as pH-adjusters, fragrance ingredients, plasticizers, skin-condi-
tioning agents and/or solvents and corrosion inhibitors. The majority of the dicarboxylic acids function in cosmetics as pH
adjusters and fragrance ingredients. Six of the 12 dicarboxylic acids and their salts and 24 of the 44 esters included in this
safety assessment are reported to be used in cosmetic formulations. For the dicarboxylic acids and their salts, disodium succi-
nate has the greatest number of reported uses, with a total of 45. The acid with the greatest concentration of use is succinic
acid, 26%; use at this concentration is in rinse-off products. The greatest leave-on concentration is 0.4%, disodium succinate,
with dermal contact exposure. For the esters, diisopropyl adipate has the greatest number of uses, with 70 reported. The con-
centration of use is greatest for dimethyl glutarate, 15% in a dermal rinse-off product. The ingredients with the greatest leave-
on use concentrations, which are all dermal contact exposures, are diethylhexyl adipate, 14%, diisostearyl adipate, 10%, and
diisopropyl sebacate, 10%. With the exception of dipotassium azelate, disodium sebacate, and di-C12-15 alkyl adipate, the
dicarboxylic acids and their salts and esters are listed for use by the European Union (EU) without restriction.
Dicarboxylic Acids and Their Salts Dicarboxylic acids are natural metabolic products of the ω-oxidation of monocarboxylic acids when the β-oxidation
of free fatty acids is impaired. Under normal physiological conditions, dicarboxylic acids are rapidly β-oxidized, resulting in
very low cellular concentrations and practically non-detectable concentrations in the plasma. Oxidation of odd- and even-
numbered chains proceeds to different end points; even chains are completely, while odd-number chains are not completely
oxidized.
CIR Panel Book Page 99
52
Unchanged dicarboxylic acid was found in the urine of rats. With oral dosing, approximately 53-67% adipic acid,
40% azelaic acid, and 50% dodecanedioate was recovered with the respective acid. With i.v. dosing, 59-71% adipic acid
and 35% sebacate was recovered. In humans, 6.76-61 adipic acid, and 61% azelaic acid were found in the urine after dosing
with the respective acid. With azelaic acid and dodecanedioic acid, radioactivity was found in all tissues, and it decreased
after 24 h in all tissues except adipose tissue. Radioactivity was found in expired carbon dioxide following dosing adipic acid
(70%), azelaic acid (14.5%), and disodium sebacate (25%). For rats dosed orally with azelaic, sebacic, undecanedioic, and
dodecanedioic acid, 2.5, 2.1, 1.8, and 1.6% of the respective acid was found in the urine unchanged. The amount recovered
decreased with increasing chain length. After oral dosing, 60, 17, 5, and 0.1% of azelaic, sebacic, decanedioic, and undecane-
dioic acids, respectively, were recovered unchanged in the urine. In the plasma of both animals and humans, dicarboxylic
acid catabolites that were 2-, 4-, or 6- carbons shorter than the corresponding dicarboxylic acid were found.
Adipic acid did not induce peroxisome proliferation. Dicarboxylic acids did have some cellular effects and inhibited
mitochondrial oxidoreductases, reversibly inhibited microsomal NADPH and cytochrome P450 reductase ,and competitively
inhibited tyrosinase in vitro.
The oral LD50 values of the dicarboxylic acids for rats ranged from 0.94 g/kg adipic acid (although most reported
values were >5 g/kg) to ≥4 g/kg azelaic acid. The reported dermal LD50 values ranged from >6 g/kg dodecanedioic acid to
>10 g/kg glutaric acid.
In short-term oral toxicity studies, ≤3000 mg/kg/day adipic acid did not produce significant toxicological effects in
rats. Signs of toxicity were seen at >3600 mg/kg/day. No toxicity was observed with guinea pigs fed 400-600 mg/day azelaic
acid. Short-term inhalation exposure to 126 mg/m3 adipic acid to rats did not produce signs of toxicity, but exposure of mice
to 460 mg/m3 did.
In a subchronic oral study, 10 male and 10 female rats exposed to 10% sodium succinate in the drinking water died,
but no compound-related lesions were found. Body weights were decreased in rats given ≥2.5% sodium succinate for 13 wks,
but toxicological treatment-related changes were not observed. Glutaric acid ad a low degree of toxicity to rats (at 2%) and
dogs (concentration not specified) when given in the drinking water. Dietary administration of ≤3400 mg/kg/day adipic acid
for 19 wks produced slight effects in the liver of male rats; the NOAEL was 3333 mg/kg. A mixture of adipic, glutaric, and
succinic acids had a low degree of toxicity in rats when tested at 3% for 90-days. Signs of toxicity were reported in a sub-
chronic inhalation study in which mice were exposed to 13 or 120 mg/m3 adipic acid.
A low degree of toxicity to sodium succinate was observed in a 2 yr oral study using rats. Slight effects were seen in
the livers of rats fed ≤3200 mg/kg/day adipic acid for 33 wks, and the NOAEL for rats fed a diet containing adipic acid for 2
yrs was 1%; no significant toxicological effects were seen at concentrations of ≤5%. No significant toxicological effects were
observed for mice fed ≤280 mg/kg or rabbits fed ≤400 mg/kg azelaic acid for 180 days. Disodium sebacate was not not toxic
to rats or rabbits fed up to 1000 mg/kg for 6 mos.
For the dicarboxylic acids, the severity of ocular irritation seems to decrease with increasing carbon number. Suc-
cinic acid was a severe ocular irritant, glutaric acid was moderately irritating, and dodecanedioic acid was a slight irritant.
Ocular irritation produced by adipic acid was dose-dependent. Slight to mild dermal irritation was observed for the succinic,
glutaric, and adipic acid. Adipic acid, dodecanedioic acid, and a mixture of succinic, glutaric, and adipic acids are not
sensitizers.
Reproductive and developmental effects were not seen upon oral dosing with the dicarboxylic acids or disodium
sebacate. Malonic acid has a spermicidal effect on human spermatozoa. Glutaric acid was tested at doses of ≤1300 mg/kg in
CIR Panel Book Page 100
53
rats and 500 mg/kg in rabbits, adipic acid at doses of ≤263 mg/kg in mice, 288 mg/kg in rats, 205 mg/kg in hamsters, or 250
mg/kg in rabbits, azelaic acid at doses of ≤140 mg/kg in rats and 200 mg/kg in rabbits, disodium sebacate at 500 mg/kg in rats
and 1000 mg/kg in rabbits, and dodecanedioic acid was tested at ≤1000 mg/kg using rats. Embryotoxic effects were reported
for in a reproductive study of 2500 mg/kg/day azelaic acid using rats and in reproductive studies with ≤500 mg/kg/day azelaic
acid using rabbits and monkey. Sodium salts of some dicarboxylic acid had a specific inhibitory effect on the uterine horn,
and this effect progressively increased with chain length.
The dicarboxylic acids are not genotoxic, and consistently were not mutagenic in Ames tests. Positive result were
seen in a transformation assay on glutaric acid using Balb/c-3T3 cells, both with and without metabolic activation. The
results of a mouse lymphoma assay, with and without metabolic activation, on glutaric acid was pH-dependent. Equivocal
results were obtained in an in vitro chromosomal aberration assay of ≤15 mg/mg disodium succinate using Chinese hamster
fibroblast cells. The dicarboxylic acids were not genotoxic in in vivo assays.
Carcinogenic results were not seen in rats given up to 2% sodium succinate in the drinking water or 5% adipic acid
in feed for 2 yrs. An increase in the incidence of C-cell adenoma/carcinoma of the thyroid in females given 2% sodium
succinate, and a positive trend in the occurrence of this tumor, was considered a function of experimental variability and not
related to dosing.
In a cumulative irritancy test, the cumulative irritation of a 15% azelaic acid gel increased with successive patching.
It is not known if the vehicle played a role in the irritation scores. Daily application of a 20% azelaic cream causes erythema
and irritation.
Esters of Dicarboxylic Acids
The metabolism of diesters in animals is expected to occur, initially, via enzymatic hydrolysis, leading to the corre-
sponding dicarboxylic acids and the corresponding linear or branched alcohol. These dicarboxylic acids and alcohols can be
further metabolized or conjugated to polar products that are excreted in urine, or, the enzymatic hydrolysis may be
incomplete and result, at least for some diesters, in the production of monoesters.
In vitro using pig skin, 8.8 and 3% of undiluted diethyl malonate was found in the skin and receptor fluid, respective-
ly, 30 and 10% of diethyl malonate in ethanol was found in the skin and receptor fluid, respectively, and 0.2-0.9 and 0.2-1.6%
diethyl malonate in acetone was found in the skin are receptor fluid, respectively. Using human skin, 16% of the applied di-
ethyl malonate penetrated. In vivo, absorption of diethyl malonate, estimated from urinary and fecal recovery, was 15% in
nude mice, 4 % in human skin grafted to nude mice, 6% in pig skin grafted to nude mice, 2.5% in pigs, and 4% in dogs.
Approximately 11% of ditridecyl adipate was absorbed through the skin of rats; 5.5-7.4% of the applied dose was
found in the tissues, 3.5-4.7%was found in the urine, and 0.4-0.7% was found in the feces. Prior dosing with ditridecyl
adipate did not significantly affect absorption.
In vitro, diethylhexyl adipate was readily hydrolyzed to MEHA or adipic acid in rat liver, pancreas, and small
intestine tissue preparations. In animals, diethylhexyl adipate is hydrolyzed to adipic acid and 2-ethylhexanol or MEHA. 2-
Ethylhexanol is converted to 2-ethylhexanoic acid, which may form a glucuronide conjugate or may be subjected to ω- and
(ω-1)-oxidation and further metabolism. More than 98% of diethylhexyl adipate administered orally to rats was excreted in
48 h; 21-45% of the radioactivity was expired in carbon dioxide and 34-52% was excreted in the urine. Diethylhexyl adipate
and MEHA are not found in the blood or urine; diethylhexyl adipate or the metabolites are recovered in the tissues. Metabo-
lism studies have shown that excretion in the urine is not as unchanged diethylhexyl adipate; mostly adipic acid is found. In
humans, peak urinary elimination of all metabolites occurred within 8 h of dosing.
CIR Panel Book Page 101
54
Diethylhexyl sebacate is not readily absorbed through the skin of guinea pigs. Metabolism in rodents and humans
may follow partially common pathways, producing 2-ethylhexanol as an intermediary metabolite.
Peroxisome proliferation causes an increase in liver weights and can induce hepatocarcinogenicity in rats and mice.
Diethylhexyl adipate is a peroxisome proliferator requiring extensive phase I metabolism to produce the proximate peroxi-
some proliferator, which in both mice and rats appears to be 2-ethylhexanoic acid. Studies conducted to explain the species
difference in liver tumors seen in mice, but not rats, in the NTP carcinogenicity study on diethylhexyl adipate suggested that
diethylhexyl adipate-induce cell replication, rather than hepatic peroxisome proliferation, provided a better correlation with
tumor formation. Diethylhexyl adipate is not as potent a proliferator as diethylhexyl phthalate. Peroxisome proliferation is
not believed to pose the risk of inducing hepatocarcinogenesis in humans.
Diethylhexyl adipate did not bind covalently to hepatic DNA in mice. It did stimulate DNA synthesis in livers of
rats. In another study, a significant increase in 8-OH-dG was seen in rat liver, but not kidney DNA. The IARC remarked that
the weight of evidence for diethylhexyl adipate demonstrated that rodent, peroxisome proliferators do not act as direct DNA-
damaging agents.
The oral and dermal LD50 values of esters of dicarboxylic acids are greater than 2 g/kg. Mostly, acute exposure via
inhalation to diethyl malonate, dibutyl adipate, and diethylhexyl sebacate did not result in death of rats
Oral administration of ≤1000 mg/kg dibutyl adipate for 28 days was not toxic effects in rats. In short-term oral dos-
ing with diethylhexyl adipate, decreased weight gain was reported for rats and mice. The NOELs for rats and mice were 2
and 0.63%, respectively, in feed; administration of 10% in feed killed 5/5 female mice. In 2- and 4-wk studies of diethylhexyl
adipate, the oral NOAEL for ovarian toxicity was 200 mg/kg in rats; an increase in atresia of the large follicle and a decrease
in currently formed corpora lutea were seen in females dosed with 1000 and 2000 mg/kg diethylhexyl adipate.
In a short-term dermal study in which 10 rabbits were dosed dermally with 0.5 or 1.0 ml/kg of a 20% dispersion of
dibutyl adipate for 6 wks, there was a significant reduction in body weights in the high dose group, and renal lesions in one
animal of each group. There were no signs of toxicity in guinea pigs in an immersion study with 20.75% diisopropyl adipate,
diluted to an actual concentration of 0.10% adipate. Dermal administration of diethylhexyl adipate to rabbits for 2 wks
resulted in slight to moderate erythema at the test site, but toxic effects were not reported for most of the animals.
In a subchronic oral toxicity study using rats, the NOEL for diethyl malonate was 1000 mg/kg/day. Dietary admini-
stration of ≤2.5% di-C7-9 branched and linear alkyl esters of adipic (approx. 1500 and 1900 mg/kg/day for males and
females, respectively) for 90 days did not result in systemic toxicity. The NOAELS for male and female rats were 1500 and
1950 mg/kg/day, respectively. Subchronic oral administration of diethylhexyl adipate to rats caused significant decreases in
body weight gains and increases in liver and kidney weights. The dietary NOEL for rats in a 90-day study was 610 mg/kg. In
mice, no lesions were induced by dietary administration of ≤25,000 ppm diethylhexyl adipate for 13 wks. A decrease in body
weights was seen in mice fed a diet with 1.2 and 2.5% diethylhexyl adipate. For diisononyl adipate, dietary administration of
up to 500 mg/kg for 13 wks, a statistically significant increase in relative kidney weights was reported, but there were not
toxicological findings. With dogs, 3.0% dietary diisononyl adipate resulted in a decrease in body weights, testes weight, and
feed consumption, increased liver weight, elevated enzyme levels, liver and kidney discoloration, and microscopic changes in
the liver, testes, spleen, and kidneys.
No adverse effects were reported with whole-body application of an 6.25% emulsion of dibutyl adipate to dogs for 3
mos. Unoccluded dermal application of up to 2000 mg/kg ditridecyl adipate for 13 wks to rats produced slight erythema, but
no systemic toxicity.
CIR Panel Book Page 102
55
In a 6-mos study in which rats were dosed intragastrically with diethylhexyl adipate, hepatic detoxification appeared
depressed at the beginning of the study, while in a 10-mos study, a decrease in central nervous system excitability was noted.
Dietary administration of ≤1.25% dibutyl sebacate for 1 yr or ≤6.25% for 2 yrs did not have an effect on growth
In a 4-hr inhalation toxicity study of 5.9 mg/l of a mixture of 66.0% dimethyl glutarate, 16.5% dimethyl succinate,
and 17.0% dimethyl adipate, the anterior and posterior nasal passageways were affected. Regeneration of damaged olfactory
epithelium was related to the severity of the initial tissue damage. In a 13-wk study with ≤250 mg/m3 diethylhexyl sebacate,
no systemic or lung effects were observed.
Ocular irritation appeared to lessen in severity as chain length of the dicarboxylic acid esters increased. Diethyl
malonate was slightly to moderately irritating to rabbit eyes. Dibutyl, diisopropyl, and diethylhexyl adipate were non- or min-
imal ocular irritants. Diisopropyl sebacate was minimally irritating, while diethylhexyl sebacate was non-irritating to rabbit
eyes. Dioctyldodecyl and diisocetyl dodecanedioate were not irritating to rabbit eyes.
The esters of dicarboxylic acids were mostly non or mildly irritating to rabbits. Some minimal irritation was seen
with diisopropyl adipate, undiluted or at 5-20.75% in formulation, and moderate erythema was reported with undiluted dibutyl
adipate. Dimethyl malonate, dibutyl and diethylhexyl adipate, diethylhexyl sebacate, and dioctyldodecyl dodecanedioate
were not sensitizers in guinea pigs or rabbits. Perfume formulations containing 1.1% diisopropyl adipate were not phototoxic.
Oral administration of up to 1000 mg/kg dimethyl malonate did not have an effect on fertility, and no development
toxicity was reported. The NOAEL was 300 mg/kg for repeated dose and maternal toxicity and 1000 mg/kg for fertility and
developmental toxicity. Oral administration of up to 100 mg/kg dibutyl adipate did not cause any reproductive effects, and
the NOEL for parental and offspring toxicity was 300 mg/kg/day and for reproductive toxicity was 100 mg/kg/day. Oral
administration of ≤7000 mg/kg di-C7-9 branched and linear alkyl esters of adipic acid branched and linear alkyl esters of
adipic acid did not result in developmental toxicity. Dietary administration of up to 1.2% diethylhexyl adipate did not affect
fertility when fed to rats prior to mating. Fetal weight, total litter weight, and litter size were reduced with 1.2% diethylhexyl
adipate. In a study in which gravid rats were fed the same doses during gestation, no significant effects on fetal weight or
litter size were reported. An increased incidence of minor skeletal abnormalities was attributed to fetotoxicity. . In a study in
which diethylhexyl adipate was given orally to rats from day 7 of gestation until post-natal day 17, antiandrogenic effects
were not observed, although some increase in post-natal death were observed. Administration of up to 2000 mg/kg diethyl-
hexyl adipate prior to dosing and through day 7 of gestation did have an effect on the mean estrus cycle length at a dose of
1000 and 2000 mg/kg, and did appear to disturb ovulation. Significant decreases were also seen in implantation rate and
number of live embryos, as well as an increase in pre-implantation loss. Diethylhexyl adipate did not produce testicular toxic
effects when fed at up to 25,000 ppm in the diet for 4 wks. Dietary administration of 6.25% dibutyl sebacate to male and fe-
male for 10 wks prior to mating had no adverse effects on fertility, litter size, or survival of offspring. Diethylhexyl sebacate,
200 ppm in the diet, did not produce reproductive or developmental effects.
Dermal applications of up to 2000 mg/kg ditridecyl adipate affected mean fetal body weights and crown-rump
lengths. Ditridecyl adipate, 2000 mg/kg, did not have an effect on sperm morphology. Some visceral anomalies were
reported. The NOAELs for maternal toxicity and developmental and reproductive effects were 2000 and 800 mg/kg/day,
respectively.
Dimethyl, diethyl, dipropyl dibutyl, diisobutyl, and diethylhexyl adipate were evaluated for fetotoxic and teratogenic
effects in rats when administered i.p. at 1/3 – 1/30 of the i.p. LD50 values. Some effect on resorptions and abnormalities were
seen with all but diethyl adipate.
CIR Panel Book Page 103
56
Inhalation by rats of ≤1.0 mg/l of a mixture of dimethyl glutarate, dimethyl succinate, and dimethyl adipate on days
7-16 of gestation or for 14 days prior to mating, during mating and gestation, and lactation, no adverse developmental or re-
productive effects were observed. The only exception was a statistically significant decrease in pup weight at birth and day
21.
Diethylhexyl adipate appeared to have endocrine-mediated effects in a 28-day oral study; however, it was stated that
the findings may be attributable to the disturbance ovarian function according to the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonad axis.
The esters of dicarboxylic acids are not mutagenic or genotoxic a battery of in vitro and in vivo tests. The only non-
negative results reported were equivocal results in a sister-chromatid exchange assay with ≤400 µg/ml diethylhexyl adipate in
the presence of metabolic activation and a dose-dependent inhibition of 3H-thymidine into replicating DNA, with a dose-
dependent increase in the ratio of acid-incorporated 3H-thymidine with ≤0.01 M diethylhexyl adipate.. (The same effect was
seen in the 3H-thymidine assay with 2-ethylhexanol.)
In a 2-yr NTP study, ≤2.5% diethylhexyl adipate did not produce tumors in male or female rats, but it did increase
the incidence of hepatocellular adenoma and carcinoma in male and female mice. Diethylhexyl adipate did not cause skin
tumors with weekly application of 10 mg to the back of mice in a lifetime study. Other compounds with a 2-ethylhexyl group
that have been evaluated for carcinogenicity had some evidence of hepatocarcinogenicity, ranging from very strong to
equivocal, in rodents. The IARC has sated that diethylhexyl adipate is not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity in humans.
However, feeding of diethylhexyl sebacate to rats for 19mos did not result in carcinogenic effects.
In a number of irritation and sensitization studies, the diesters of dicarboxylic acids are not irritants or sensitizers.
The only exception noted was that undiluted diisopropyl adipate was moderately irritating in one cumulative irritancy test, and
some slight irritation was seen with formulations containing diethylhexyl adipate. A 10% dilution of dibutyl adipate and
formulations containing 0.7-17% diisopropyl adipate and 9% diethylhexyl adipate were not phototoxic.
Cases of allergic contact dermatitis in response to diethyl sebacate-containing products have been reported, and it
has been demonstrated diethyl sebacate was the substance, or one of several substances in the products, eliciting the derma-
titis. Two case studies were reported of allergic reactions to lotion containing diisopropyl sebacate.
According to the Integrated Risk Information System of the EPA, the weight-of-evidence classification for diethyl-
hexyl adipate was “possible human carcinogen”. The classification was based on an absence of human data and increased
liver tumors in female mice.
DISCUSSION
To be determined at the meeting.
CONCLUSION
To be determined at the meeting.
CIR Panel Book Page 104
57
REFERENCES
1. BIBRA Working Group. 1996. Diethylhexyl Sebacate Toxicity Profile. 6 pages.
2. Elder RL,ed. Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate. J Am Coll Toxicol. 1984;3:(3):101-129.
3. Andersen FA (ed). Annual review of Cosmetic Ingredient Safey Assessments - 2002/2003. Int J Toxicol. 2005;24:(Suppl 1):1-102.
4. Andersen FA (ed). Annual review of Cosmetic Ingredient Safety Assessments - 2004/2005. Int J Toxicol. 2006;25:(Suppl 1):1-89.
5. Andersen FA,ed. Amended final report of the safety assessment of dibutyl adipate as used in cosmetics. Int J Toxicol. 2006;25:(Suppl 1):129-134.
6. Vasihtha, A. K, Trivedi, R. K., and Das, G. Sebacic Acid and 2-Octanol from Castor Oil. Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society. 1990;67:(5):333-337.
7. Editor: Kroschwitz, J. Concise Encyclopedia od Chemical Technology. 4th ed. 2001.
8. Nghiem NP, Davison BH, and Thomspon JE. Effect of biotin on the production of succinic acid by anaerobiospirillum succinicproducents. Gov't Reports Announcements & Index. Appl.Biochem.Biotechnol. 1995;633:57-58.
9. Kadesch, Richard G. Dibasic Acids. Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society. 1954;31:568-573.
10. Breathnach, A. S. Azelaic Acid - Biological Activities and Therapeutic Applications. Drugs of Today. 1989;25:(7):463-472.
11. Aditya K.Gupta, Melissa D. Gover. Azelaic acid (15% gel) in the treatment of acne rosacea. International Journal of Dermatology. 2007;46:(5):533-538.
12. Kadesch, Richard G. Dibasic Acids. Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society. 1954;31:(11):568-573.
13. Ayorinde et al. Synthesis of Dodecanedioic Acid from Vernonia galamensis Oil. Jounal of the American Oil Chemists' Society. 1989;66:(5):690.
14. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.SIDS Initial Assessment for SIAM 22 -Malonic Acid Diesters, Dimethylmalonate, 108-59-8, and Diethylmalonate, 105-53-3. 2005. http://www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/Malonates.pdf. Accessed 7-29-2010.
15. Gattermann, T. Wieland. Praxis des Organischen Chemikers. 40th ed. 1961.
16. Cognis Deutchsland GmbH & Co. 2002. Data Profile: Cetiol® B. 4 pages.
17. International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Di(2-ethylhexyl) adipate. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of the carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans. 2000;77:149-175.
18. American Chemistry Council Aliphatic Esters Diesters Task Group.High Production Volume (HPV) Chemical Challenge Program test plan for th diesters category of the aliphatic esters chemicals. Dated June 2, 2010. 6-28-2010. http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemrtk/pubs/summaries/alipestr/c13466rt8.pdf. Accessed 7-8-0010.
19. Kvatadze MK. The gas-chromatographic detection of Sebacic Acid in the air. Gig.Tr.Prof.Zabol. 1989;9:45-46.
20. Hokoku Corporation. Impurity data on diisopropyl sebacate. Unpublished data submitted by the Personal Care Products Council (1 p). 2010.
21. Cognis Deutchsland GmbH & Co. 2002. Cetiol® B Toxicological Evaluation. 8 pages.
CIR Panel Book Page 105
58
22. Gottschalck TE and Bailey J, eds. International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary and Handbook. 2010. 13:(1-3):Washington DC: Personal Care Products Council.2977.
23. Food and Drug Administration.Frequency of use of cosmetic ingredients. 2010.
24. James, A. C., Stahlhofen, W, Rudolf, G, Kobrich, R, Briant, J. K., Egan, M. J., Nixon, W, and Birchall, A. Annexe D. Deposition of inhaled particles. Annals of the ICRP. 1994;24:(1-3):231-2.
25. Oberdorster, G, Oberdorster, E, and Oberdorster, J. Nanotoxicology: An Emerging Discipline Evolving from Studies of Ultrafine Particles. Environmental Health Perspectives. 2005;113:(7):823-839.
26. Bower, D. 1999. Unpublished information on hair spray particle sizes provided at the September 9, 1999 CIR Expert Panel meeting.
27. Johnson, M. A. The Influence of Particle Size. Spray Technology and Marketing. 2004;November:24-27.
28. European Commission.Cosing database on cosmetic ingredient and substances. 2010. http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/cosmetics/cosing/. Accessed 7-27-2010.
29. Dekker. Ingredients. The Chemistry and Manufacture of Cosmetics. 1999. III:(2):
30. American Chemistry Council Aliphatic Esters Diesters Task Group.High Production Volume (HPV) Chemical Challenge Program test plan for th diesters category of the aliphatic esters chemicals. Dated June 2, 2010. 6-28-2010. http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemrtk/pubs/summaries/alipestr/c13466rt8.pdf. Accessed 7-8-0010.
31. The Merck Index. 2009. http://themerckindex.cambridgesoft.com/TheMerckIndex/index.asp. Accessed 10-20-2009.
32. Food and Drug Administration.GRAS status sof succinic acid. 10-31-2006. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fcn/fcnDetailNavigation.cfm?rpt=scogsListing&id=339. Accessed 7-28-2010.
33. Food and Drug Administration.GRAS status of adipic acid. 10-31-2006. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fcn/fcnDetailNavigation.cfm?rpt=scogsListing&id=9.
34. Food and Drug Administration.Azelaic Acid 20% Cream – Drug Approval Label. 1999. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2003/20428slr016_azelex_lbl.pdf.
35. Food and Drug Administration.Azelaic Acid 15% Gel – Drug Approval Label. 2003. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2005/021470s003lbl.pdf.
36. Jung, H. W., Tschaplinski, T. J., Wang, L., Glazebrook, J., and Greenberg, J. T. Priming in Systemic Plant Immunity. Science. 2009;324:(5923):89-91.
37. Schneider KW. Contact dermatitis due to diethyl sebacate. Cont.Derm. 1980;6:506-507.
38. Shikani AH, Eisele DW, and Domb AJ. Polymer delivery of chemotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. Arch.Otolaryngol.Head and Neck Surg. 1994;120:1242-1247.
39. Bergman K and Albanus L. Di-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate: absorption, autoradiographic distribution and elimination in mice and rats. Fd Chem Toxicol. 1987;25:(4):309-316.
40. Mochida K, Gomyoda M, and Fujita T. Acetyl tributyl citrate and Dibutyl Sebacate inhibit the growth of cultured mammalian cells. Bulletin of Environ.Contamin.and Toxicol. 1996;56:635-637.
41. Greco AV and Mingrone G. Dicarboxylic acids, an alternate fuel substrate in parental nutrition: an update. Clin.Nutr. 1995;14:143-148.
42. Bertuzzi A, Gandolfi A, Salinari S, Mingrone G, and Greco AV. Pharmacokinetics of dicarboxylic acids in man. Engng Med Biol. 1994;13:472-478.
CIR Panel Book Page 106
59
43. Nguyen, Q. H. and Bui, T. P. Azelaic acid: pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties and its therapeutic role in hyperpigmentary disorders and acne. Int.J.Dermatol. 1995;34:(2):75-84.
44. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.IUCLID Data Set for Adipic Acid. 2-15-2006. http://www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/124049.pdf. Accessed 7-29-2010.
45. Kennedy GL. Toxicity of adipic acid. Drug.Chem.Toxicol. 2002;25:191-202.
46. Passi S, Nazzaro-Porro M, Picardo M, Mingrone G, and Fasella P. Metabolism of straight saturated medium chain length (C9 to C12) dicarboxylic acids. J Lipid Res. 1983;24:1140-1147.
47. Akhavan A and Bershad S. Topical acne drugs: review of clinical properties, systemic exposure, and safety. Am.J.Clin.Dermatol. 2003;4:473-492.
48. Allergan Inc. 2004. Package Insert: AZELEX – Azelaic Acid cream (20%).
49. Passi S. Pharmacology and pharmacokinetics of azelaic acid. (Secondary reference in Breathnach 1999). Rev Comtemp Pharmacother. 1993;4:441-447.
50. Täuber U, Weiss C, and Matthes H. Percutaneous absorption of azelaic acid in humans. Exp Dermatol. 1992;1:176-179.
51. Tataranni PA, Mingrone G, DeGaetano A, Raguso C, and Greco AV. Tracer study of metabolism and tissue distributon of sebacic acid in rats. Ann Mutr Metab. 1992;36:296-303.
52. Favuzzi AM, Mingrone G, Bertuzzi A, and et al. Pharmacokinetics of Sebacic Acid in rats. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 1999;3:119-125.
53. Mingrone G, Greco AV, Castegneto M, De Gaetano A, Raguso C, and et al. Tissue uptake and oxdation of Disodium Sebacate in man. J.Parenter.Enteral.Nutr. 1991;15:(4):454-459.
54. Greco AV, Mingrone G, Raguso C, and et al. Metabolic effects and disposition of sebacate, an laternate dicarboxylic fuel substrate. Ann.Nutr.Metab. 1992;36:1-11.
55. Mingrone, G., Tacchino, R. M., Castagneto, M., Finotti, E., and Greco, A. V. Use of even-numbered carbon atom dicarboxylic salts in parenteral nutrition as fuel substrate. JPEN J.Parenter.Enteral Nutr. 1992;16:32-38.
56. Mingrone G, Greco AV, Tataranni PA, DeGaetano A, and Castagneto M. Pharmacokinetic profile of dodecanedioic acid, a proposed alternative fuel substrate. JPEN. 1994;18:225-230.
57. Del Rosso, J. Q., Lehman, P. A., and Raney, S. G. Impact of order of application of moisturizers on percutaneous absorption kinetics: evaluation of sequential application of moisturizer lotions and azelaic acid gel 15% using a human skin model. Cutis. 2009;83:119-124.
58. Moody DE and Reddy, J. K. Hepatic peroxisome (microbody) proliferation in rats fed plasticizers and related compounds. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1978;45:497-504.
59. Robins, E. J., Breathnach, A. S., Ward, B. J., Bhasin, Y. P., Ethridge, L., Nazzaro-Porro, M., Passi, S., and Picardo, M. Effect of dicarboxylic acids on Harding-Passey and Cloudman S91 melanoma cells in tissue culture. J.Invest Dermatol. 1985;85:(3):216-221.
60. Passi S, Picardo M, Mingrone G, Breathnach AS, and Navarro-Porro M.Azelaic Acid - biochemistry and metabolism. 1989.
61. Detmar, M., Mayer-da-Silva, A., Stadler, R., and Orfanos, C. E. Effects of azelaic acid on proliferation and ultrastructure of mouse keratinocytes in vitro. J.Invest Dermatol. 1989;93:(1):70-74.
62. Nazzaro-Porro, M., Passi, S., Zina, G., Bernengo, A., and Breathnach, A. Effect of azelaic acid on human malignant melanoma. Lancet. 1980;1:1109-1111.
CIR Panel Book Page 107
60
63. Breathnach, A. S. Azelaic acid: potential as a general antitumoural agent. Med.Hypotheses. 1999;52:(3):221-226.
64. Greco AV, Mingrone G, Arcieri Mastromattei E, Finotti E, and Castegneto M. Toxicity of Disodium Sebacate. Drug Exp.Clin.Res. 1990;16:531-536.
65. Environmental Protection Agency.Robust summary for dicarboxylic acid category. 7-10-2001. http://www.epa.gov/HPV/pubs/summaries/dicarbx/c13108.pdf. Accessed 7-19-2010.
66. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.SIDS report on Dodecanedioic Acid, CAS No. 693-23-2. 1994. http://www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/693232.pdf. Accessed 7-29-2010.
67. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.SIDS Initial Report for SIAM 18 - Adipic Acid, CAS No. 124-04-9. 2004. http://www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/124049.pdf. Accessed 7-29-2010.
68. Maekawa, A., Todate, A., Onodera, H., Matsushima, Y., Nagaoka, T., Shibutani, M., Ogasawara, H., Kodama, Y., and Hayashi, Y. Lack of toxicity/carcinogenicity of monosodium succinate in F344 rats. Food Chem.Toxicol. 1990;28:(4):235-241.
69. Mingrone G, Greco AV, Navarro-Porro M, and Passi S. Toxicity of Azelaic Acid. Drugs Exp.Clin.Res. 1983;9:447-455.
70. Fukui S, Shimoyama T, Tamura K, Yamamura M, and Satomi M. Mucosal blood flow and generation of superoxide in rat experimental colitis induced by Succinic Acid. J.Gastroenterol. 1997;32:464-471.
71. Brown-Woodman PD, Post EJ, Chow PY, and White IG. Effects of malonic, citric and caffeic acids on the motility of human sperm and penetration of cervical mucous. Int.J.Fertil. 1985;30:38-44.
72. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.SIDS Initial Assessment for SIAM 16 - Disodium Succinate, CAS No. 150-90-3. 2003. http://www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/150903.pdf. Accessed 7-29-2010.
73. Bradford JC, Brown GL, Caldwell JA, and Drobeck HP. Teratology and mutagenicity studies with glutaric acid. Teratol. 1984;29:19A.
74. Mingrone G, Manicelli R, and Metro D. Influence of sodium salts of saturated medium chain length C6, C9, C10 and C12 dicarboxylic acids on the uterine horn of rat in vitro. Q.J.Exp.Physiol. 1988;73:153-162.
75. National Toxicology Program.Salmonella assayon malonic acid. Study ID: 228078. 1989. http://ntp-apps.niehs.nih.gov/ntp_tox/index.cfm?fuseaction=salmonella.salmonellaData&endpointlist=SA&study%5Fno=228078&cas%5Fno=141%2D82%2D2&activetab=detail. Accessed 7-26-2010.
76. Ishidate M Jr, Sofuni T, Yoshikawa K, Hayaski M, Nohmi T, Sawada M, and MAtsouka A. Primary mutagenicity screening of food additives currently used in Japan. Food Chem Toxicol. 1984;22:(8):623-636.
77. TOXNET.CCRIS database - Sodium Succinate. CAS No. 2292-54-5. 2-14-1997. Accessed 7-26-2010.
78. National Toxicology Program.Salmonella assay on adipic acid. Study ID: A86767. 1997. http://ntp-apps.niehs.nih.gov/ntp_tox/index.cfm?fuseaction=salmonella.salmonellaData&endpointlist=SA&study%5Fno=A86767&cas%5Fno=124%2D04%2D9&activetab=detail. Accessed 7-26-2010.
79. TOXNET.CCRIS database - Adipic acid. CAS No. 124-04-9. 10-1-2009. http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search/f?./temp/~vDEUtx:1.
80. Otoshi T, Iwata H, Yamamoto S, Murai T, Yamaguchi S, Matsui-Yuasa I, Otani S, and Fukushima S. Severity of promotion by sodium salts of succinic acid in rat urinary bladder carcinogenesis correlates with sodium ion concentration under conditions of equal urinary pH. Carcinogenesis. 1993;14:(11):2277-2281.
81. Ziel, K., Yelverton, C. B., Balkrishnan, R., and Feldman, S. R. Cumulative irritation potential of metronidazole gel compared to azelaic acid gel after repeated applications to healthy skin. J.Drugs Dermatol. 2005;4:(6):727-
CIR Panel Book Page 108
61
731.
82. Feldman, S., Careccia, R. E., Barham, K. L., and Hancox, J. Diagnosis and treatment of acne. Am.Fam.Physician. 2004;69:(9):2123-2130.
83. American Chemistry Council Aliphatic Esters Diesters Task Group.High Production Volume (HPV) Chemical Challenge Program test plan for th diesters category of the aliphatic esters chemicals. Dated June 2, 2010. 6-28-2010. http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemrtk/pubs/summaries/alipestr/c13466rt8.pdf. Accessed 7-8-0010.
84. Dirven, H. A., Theuws, J. L., Jongeneelen, F. J., and Bos, R. P. Non-mutagenicity of 4 metabolites of di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP) and 3 structurally related derivatives of di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate (DEHA) in the Salmonella mutagenicity assay. Mutat.Res. 1991;260:(1):121-130.
85. Environmental Protection Agency.Robust summaries for substances in the HPV test plan for the diesters category of the aliphatic esters chemicals. 6-2-2010. http://www.epa.gov/oppt/chemrtk/pubs/summaries/alipestr/c13466rr8.pdf. Accessed 7-8-2010.
86. Takahashi T, Tanaka A, and Yamaha T. Elimination, distribution, and metabolsim of di-(2-ethylhexyl)adipate (DEHA) in rats. Toxicology. 1981;22:223-233.
87. Cornu, M. C., Keith, Y., Elcombe, C. R., and Lhuguenot, J. C. In vivo and in vitro metabolism of di-(2-ethylhexyl) adipate a peroxisome proliferator, in the rat. Arch.Toxicol. 1988;Suppl 12:265-268.
88. Loftus, N. J., Laird, W. J., Steel, G. T., Wilks, M. F., and Woollen, B. H. Metabolism and pharmacokinetics of deuterium-labelled di-2-(ethylhexyl) adipate (DEHA) in humans. Food Chem.Toxicol. 1993;31:(9):609-614.
89. Fukuyasu H, Orikasa Y, Kai F, Inouye S, Yamaguchi H, and et al. In vivo activity and metabolic fate of 2-(2,3,3-triiodoallyl)tetrazole (ME1401), a novel antifungal agent. Drugs Exp.Clin.Res. 1989;15:(8):335-347.
90. Lake BG. Mechanisms of hepatocarcinogenicity of peroxisome-proliferating drugs and chemicals. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 1995;35:483-507.
91. Cornu, M. C., Lhuguenot, J. C., Brady, A. M., Moore, R., and Elcombe, C. R. Identification of the proximate proliferator(s) derived from di (2-ethylhexyl) adipate and species differences in response. Biochem Pharmacol. 1992;43:(10):2129-2134.
92. Keith, Y., Cornu, M. C., Canning, P. M., Foster, J., Lhuguenot, J. C., and Elcombe, C. R. Peroxisome proliferation due to di (2-ethylhexyl) adipate, 2-ethylhexanol and 2-ethylhexanoic acid. Arch.Toxicol. 1992;66:(5):321-326.
93. National Toxicology Program.Carcinogenesis bioassay of di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate (CAS No. 103-23-1). F344 and B6C3F1 mice. (Feed study). 1982. http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/LT_rpts/tr212.pdf. Accessed 6-20-2010.
94. Lake, B. G., Price, R. J., Cunninghame, M. E., and Walters, D. G. Comparison of the effects of di-(2-ethylhexyl)adipate on hepatic peroxisome proliferation and cell replication in the rat and mouse. Toxicology. 1997;123:(3):217-226.
95. Tomaszewski, K. E., Agarwal, D. K., and Melnick, R. L. Invitro steady-state levels of hydrogen eroxide after exposure of male F344 rats and female B6C3F1 mice to hepatic peroxisome proliferators. Carcinogenesis. 1986;7:(11):1871-1876.
96. Reddy, J. K., Reddy, M. K., Usman, M. I., Lalwani, N. D., and Rao, M. S. Comparison of hepatic peroxisome proliferative effect and its implication for hepatocarcinogenicity of phthalate esters, di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate, and di(2-ethylhexyl) adipate with a hypolipidemic drug. Environ.Health Perspect. 1986;65:317-327.
97. Barber, E. D., Astill, B. D., Moran, E. J., Schneider, B. F., Gray, T. J., Lake, B. G., and Evans, J. G. Peroxisome
CIR Panel Book Page 109
62
induction studies on seven phthalate esters. Toxicol.Ind.Health. 1987;3:7-22.
98. Lin, L. I. The use of multivariate analysis to compare peroxisome induction data on phthalate esters in rats. Toxicol.Ind.Health. 1987;3:(2):25-48.
99. von Däniken A., Lutz, W. K., Jâckh, R., and Schlatter, C. Investigation of the potential for binding of di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate and di(2-ethylhexyl) adipate to liver DNA in vivo. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1984;73:(3):373-387.
100. Büsser, M.-T. and Lutz, W. K. Stimulation of DNA Synthesis in Rat and Mouse Liver by Various Tumor Promoters. Carcinogenesis. 1987;8:(10):1433-1437.
101. Takagi, A., Sai, K., Umemura, T., Hasegawa, R., and Kurokawa, Y. Significant increase of 8-hydroxydeoxyguanosine in liver DNA of rats following short-term exposure to the peroxisome proliferators di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate and di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate. Jpn.J.Cancer Res. 1990;81:213-215.
102. Kawashima, Y., Hanioka, N., Matsumura, M., and Kozuka, H. Induction of microsomal stearoyl-CoA desaturation by the administration of various peroxisome proliferators. (Secondary reference in IARC 2000). Biochim.Biophys.Acta. 1983;752:259-264.
103. Kawashima Y, Nakagawa S, Tachibana Y, and Kozuka H. Effects of peroxisome proliferators on fatty acid-binding protein in rat liver. (Secondary reference in IARC 2000). Biochim Biophys Acta. 1983;754:21-27.
104. Yanagita T., Satoh M., Nomura H., Enomoto N., and Sugano M. Alteration of hepatic phospholipids in rats and mice by feeding di-(2-ethylhexyl)adipate and di-(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate. (Secondary reference in IARC 2000.). Lipids. 1987;22:572-577.
105. Motojima, K., Passilly, P., Peters, J. M., Gonzalez, F. J., and Latruffe, N. Expression of putative fatty acid transporter genes are regulated by peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha and gamma activators in a tissue- and inducer-specific manner. (Secondary reference in IARC 2000). J.Biol.Chem. 1998;273:16710-16714.
106. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.SIDS Initial Report for Siam 4 - Dibutyl Adipate CAS No. 105-99-7. 1996. http://www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/105997.pdf. Accessed 7-29-2010.
107. AMA Laboratories. Acute oral toxicity of Liquiwax DIADD (Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate). AMA Ref No. WPAT90-59/OT5982.II. Unpublished data submitted by the Council (3 pp). 12-13-1990.
108. AMA Laboratories. Acute oral toxicity of Liquiwax DICDD (Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate). AMA Ref No: WPAT90-59/OT6098.II Unpublished data submitted by the Council (3 pp). 1-3-1991.
109. AMA Laboratories. Acute dermal toxicity - limit test - Liquiiwax DIADD (Dioctyldedecyl Dodecanediaote). AMA Ref No. WPAT93-155/AD1076.BII. Unpublished data submitted by Council (4 pp). 6-14-1993.
110. EviC-CEBA. Attestation of biological significance (acute oral toxicity and dermal irritation) on diethylhexyl sebacate. Study ref. T 207/4072. Unpublished data submitted by the Council (2 pp). 4-7-1994.
111. EviC-CEBA. Attestation of biological significance (acute oral toxicity and dermal irritation) on diisocetyl adipate. Study ref. T 207/4073. Unpublished data submitted by the Council (2 pp). 4-7-1994.
112. EviC-CEBA. Attestation of biological test (acute oral toxicity and dermal irritation) on diisodecyl adipate. Study ref. T 207/4076. Unpublished data submitted by the Council (2 pp). 5-9-1994.
113. EviC-CEBA. Attestation of biological significance (acute oral toxicity and dermal irritation) on dioctyldodecyl adipate. Study ref. T 207/4071. Unpublished data submitted by the Council (2 pp). 5-9-1994.
114. EviC-CEBA. Study of acute toxicity and local tolerance (acute oral, acute dermal, and ocular irritation) on diisopropyl adipate. Study report: Te 297/98-1589 and Te 298/98-1589. Unpublished data submitted by the Council (4 pp). 5-27-1998.
CIR Panel Book Page 110
63
115. Singh AR, Lawrence WH, and Autian J. Embryonic-fetal toxicity and teratogenic effects of adipic acid esters in rats. J Pharm Sci. 1973;62:(10):1596-1600.
116. Smith CC. Toxicity of butyl stearate, dibutyl sebacate, dibutyl phthalate, and methoxyethyl oleate. AMA Arch.Ind.Hyg.Occup.Med. 1953;7:310-318.
117. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development.SIDS Initial Report for SIAM 10 - Bis(2-ethylhexyl) Adipate (DEHA), CAS No. 103-23-1. 2000. http://www.chem.unep.ch/irptc/sids/OECDSIDS/103231.pdf. Accessed 7-29-2010.
118. ExxonMobil Chemical Company.High Production Volume (HPV) Chemical Challenge Program. Test plan for the alkyl alcohols C6-C13 Category. 2-5-2002. http://www.epa.gov/HPV/pubs/summaries/alkal613/c13590rs.pdf. Accessed 2010.
119. Smyth HF, Carpenter CP, and Weil CS. Range-finding toxicity data: List IV. AMA Arch.Ind.Hyg.Occup.Med. 1949;4:119-122.
120. Wato, E., Asahiyama, M., Suzuki, A., Funyu, S., and Amano, Y. Collaborative work on evaluation of ovarian toxicity. 9) Effects of 2- or 4-week repeated dose studies and fertility study of di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate (DEHA) in female rats. J.Toxicol.Sci. 2009;34:(Special Issue I):SP101-SP109.
121. Kluwe, W. M. Carcinogenic potential of phthalic acid esters and related compounds: structure-activity relationships. Environ.Health Perspect. 1986;65:271-278.
122. Lee, K. P., Valentine, R., and Bogdanffy, M. S. Nasal lesion development and reversibility in rats exposed to aerosols of dibasic esters. Toxicol.Pathol. 1992;20:(3 Part 1):376-393.
123. Consumer Product Testing. 1991. Primary dermal irritation in rabbits, primary ocular irritation in rabbits of Schermcemol DIS (Diisopropyl Sebacate). Experiment Reference Number: 91055. (Material tested as supplied - approx. 100%). 3 pages.
124. MB Research Laboratories. 2003. EpiOcular MTT viability assay of a cream containing 1.2% Diethylhexyl Sebacate. 10 pages.
125. AMA Laboratories. Primary eye irritation of liquiwax DIADD (Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate). AMA Lab No. WPAT90-59/PE5982.II. Unpublished data submitted by theCouncil (5 pp). 12-3-1990.
126. AMA Laboratories. Primary eye irritation of liquiwax DICDD (Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate). AMA Ref No: WPAT90-59/PE6098.II. Unpublished data submitted by the Council (3 pp). 12-22-1990.
127. Personal Care Products Council. 1989. Summary of safety data on Diethyl Sebacate (primary skin irritation, cumulative skin irritation, contact allergenicity). 8 pages.
128. EviC-CEBA. Attestation of biological significance (acute oral toxicity and dermal irritation) on diisopropyl sebacate. Study ref. T 207/4078. Unpublished data submitted by the Council (2 pp). 4-7-1998.
129. AMA Laboratories. Guinea pig maximization test (Kligman) on liquiwax DIADD (Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate). AMA Ref No: WPAT93-GPMB1076.BII. Unpublished data submitted by the Council (6 pp). 6-14-1993.
130. Environmental Protection Agency.Integrated Risk Information System. Di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate. (CASRN 103-23-1). 3-6-2010. N:\CIR\DicarboxylicAcids\DatabaseSearchResults\EPA\IRIS-searched7-8-10_updatred3-16-10.mht. Accessed 7-8-2010.
131. Dalgaard, M., Hass, U., Vinggaard, A. M., Jarfelt, K., Lam, H. R., rensen, I. K., Sommer, H. M., and Ladefoged, O. Di(2-ethylhexyl) adipate (DEHA) induced developmental toxicity but not antiandrogenic effects in pre- and postnatally exposed Wistar rats. Reprod.Toxicol. 2003;17:(2):163-170.
132. Kang, J. S., Morimura, K., Toda, C., Wanibuchi, H., Wei, M., Kojima, N., and Fukushima, S. Testicular toxicity of DEHP, but not DEHA, is elevated under conditions of thioacetamide-induced liver damage.
CIR Panel Book Page 111
64
Reprod.Toxicol. 2006;21:253-259.
133. Alvarez, L., Driscoll, C., Kelly, D. P., Staples, R. E., Chromey, N. C., and Kennedy, G. L., Jr. Developmental toxicity of dibasic esters by inhalation in the rat. Drug Chem.Toxicol. 1995;189:(4):295-314.
134. Kelly, D. P., Kennedy, G. L., Jr., and KEENAN, C. M. Reproduction study with dibasic esters following inhalation in the rat. Drug Chem.Toxicol. 1998;21:(3):253-267.
135. Miyata, K., Shiraishi, K., Houshuyama, S., Imatanaka, N., Umano, T., Minobe, Y., and Yamasaki, K. Subacute oral toxicity study of di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate based on the draft protocol for the "Enhanced OECD Test Guideline no. 407". Arch.Toxicol. 2006;80:181-186.
136. Ghisari, M. and Bonefeld-Jorgensen, E. C. Effects of plasticizers and their mixtures on estrogen receptor and thyroid hormone functions. Toxicol.Lett. 2009;189:(1):67-77.
137. Andersen, P. H. and Jensen, N. J. Mutagenic investigation of flavourings: dimethyl succinate, ethyl pyruvate and aconitic acid are negative in the Salmonella/mammalian-microsome test. Food Addit.Contam. 1984;1:(3):283-288.
138. National Toxicology Program.Salmonella assay on dimethyl succinate. Study ID: 947738. 1988. http://ntp-apps.niehs.nih.gov/ntp_tox/index.cfm?fuseaction=salmonella.salmonellaData&endpointlist=SA&study%5Fno=947738&cas%5Fno=106%2D65%2D0&activetab=detail. Accessed 7-26-2010.
139. National Toxicology Program.Salmonella assay on dimethyl glutarate. Study ID A20348. 1995. http://ntp-apps.niehs.nih.gov/ntp_tox/index.cfm?fuseaction=salmonella.salmonellaData&endpointlist=SA&study%5Fno=A20348&cas%5Fno=1119%2D40%2D0&activetab=detail. Accessed 7-26-2010.
140. National Toxicology Program.Salmonella assay on dimethyl adipate. Study ID: A45330. 1994. http://ntp-apps.niehs.nih.gov/ntp_tox/index.cfm?fuseaction=salmonella.salmonellaData&endpointlist=SA&study%5Fno=A45330&cas%5Fno=627%2D93%2D0&activetab=detail. Accessed 7-26-2010.
141. Zeiger E, Haworth E, Mortelmans S, and et al. Mutagenicity testing of di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate and related chemicals in Salmonella. Environ Mutagen. 1985;7:213-232.
142. Warren JR, Lalwani, N. D., and Reddy, J. K. Phthalate esters as peroxisome proliferator carcinogens. Environ.Health Perspect. 1982;45:35-40.
143. Simmon VF, Kauhanen K, and Tardiff R.G. Mutagenic activity of chemicals identified in drinking water. Dev Toxicol Environ Sci. 1977;2:249-258.
144. National Toxicology Program.Salmonella assay eith diethylhexyl adipate. Study ID: 963935. 1988. http://ntp-apps.niehs.nih.gov/ntp_tox/index.cfm?fuseaction=salmonella.salmonellaData&endpointlist=SA&study%5Fno=963935&cas%5Fno=103%2D23%2D1&activetab=detail. Accessed 7-26-2010.
145. Seed JL. Mutagenic activity of phthalate estes in bacterial seed liquid suspension assays. Environ.Health Perspect. 1982;45:111-114.
146. McGregor, D. B., Brown, A., Cattanach, P., Edwards, I., McBride, D., Riach, C., and Caspary, W. J. Responses of the L5178Y tk+/tk- mouse lymphoma cell forward mutation assay: III. 72 coded chemicals. (Secondary reference in IARC 2000). Environ.Mol.Mutagen. 1988;12:(1):85-154.
147. Reisenbichler, H. and Eckl, P. M. Genotoxic effects of selected peroxisome proliferators. (Secondary reference in IARC 2000). Mutat.Res. 1993;286:135-144.
148. Galloway SM, Armstrong MJ, Rueben C, Colman S, Brown B, CAnnon C, Bloom AD, Nakamura F, Ahmed M, Duk S, Rimpo J, Margolin BH, REsnick MA, Anderson B, and Zeiger E. Chromosome aberrations and sister chromatid exchanges in Chinese hamster ovary cells: Evaluation of 108 chemicals. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1987;10:(Suppl 10):1-175.
CIR Panel Book Page 112
65
149. Shelby, MD, Erexson GL, Hook GH, and Tice RR. Evaluation of a three-exposure mouse bone marrow micronucleus protocol: Results with 49 chemicals. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1993;21:160-179.
150. Shelby, MD and Witt, KL. Comparison of results from mouse bone marrow chromosome aberration and micronucleus tests. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1995;25:302-313.
151. National Toxicology Program.Chromosome aberration assay of diethylhexyl adipate. Study ID: 959525. 1988. http://ntp-apps.niehs.nih.gov/ntp_tox/index.cfm?fuseaction=invivoca.casummary&study_no=959525&cas_no=103%2D23%2D1&endpointlist=CA. Accessed 7-26-2010.
152. DiVincenzo, G. D., Hamilton, M. L., Mueller, K. R., Donish, W. H., and Barber, E. D. Bacterial mutagenicity testing of urine from rats dosed with 2-ethylhexanol derived plasticizers. Toxicology. 1985;34:(3):247-259.
153. McKee, R. H., Lington, A. W., and Traul, K. A. An evaluation of the genotoxic potential of di-isononyl adipate. Environ.Mutagen. 1986;8:(6):817-827.
154. Szybalski W. Special microbiological systems - Observations on chemical mutagenesis in microorganisms. Ann.NY Acad.Sci. 1958;76:475-489.
155. Wild, D., King, M. T., Gocke, E., and Eckhardt, K. Study of artificial flavoring substances for mutagenicity in the salmonella/microsome, basc and micronucleus tests. Fd Chem Toxicol. 1983;21:707-719.
156. TOXNET.CCRIS database - Dibutyl Sebacate. CAS No. 109-43-3. 2-12-2001. http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search/f?./temp/~LfAk2H:2. Accessed 7-26-2010.
157. TOXNET.CCRIS database - Diethylhexyl Sebacate. CAS NO. 122-62-3. 6-2-2010. http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search/f?./temp/~J98xpD:1. Accessed 7-26-2010.
158. Osterle D and Deml E. Promoting activity of di(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate in rat liver foci bioassay. J.Cancer Res.Clin.Oncol. 1988;114:(2):133-136.
159. Hasegawa R and Ito N. Liver medium-term bioassay in rats for screening of carcinogenesis and modifying factors in hepatocarcinogenesis. Fd Chem Toxicol. 1992;30:(11):979-992.
160. AMA Laboratories. 50 Human subject repeat insult patch test skin irritation/sensitization evaluation on Liquiwax DISA (Diisostearyl Adipate), DICDD (Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate), and DIADD (Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate). AMA Ref No: WP96-BERN1-18/RIPT4618.BII. Unpublished data submitted by the Council. 4-11-1996.
161. Anonymous. Clinical evaluation report: human patch test of a body cream containing 1.5% diethyl sebacate. Unpublished data submittd by the Personal Care Products Council. 2003.
162. KGL Inc. 2003. An evaluation of the contact-sensitization potential of a topical coded product (body cream containing 1.5% diethyl sebacate) in human skin by means of the maximization assay. 10 pages.
163. Anonymous. Clinical evaluation report: human patch test of a foundation containing 1.8% diisopropyl sebacate. Unpublished data submitted by the Council.. 2000.
164. Product Investigations Inc. 2005. Determination of the irritating and sensitizing propensities of Schercemol DIS (Diisopropyl Sebacate) on human skin. Report: PII No. 19745. (Material tested as supplied - approx. 100%). 12 pages.
165. KGL Inc. 2006. An evaluation of the contact-sensitization potential of a topical coded product (foundation containing 2.2% diisopropyl sebacate) in human skin by means of the maximization assay. 10 pages.
166. Reliance Clinical Testing Services. 2007. Summary of HRIPT of two heat protection hair sprays containing 1% Diisopropyl Sebacate. 1 pages.
CIR Panel Book Page 113
66
167. Essex Testing Clinic Inc. 2007. Summary of HRIPT of a heat protection hair spray containing 7.2% Diisopropyl Sebacate.
168. Kimura M and Kawada A. Contact dermatitis due to Diethyl Sebacate. Contact Dermatitis. 1999;40:48-49.
169. Narita T, Oiso N, Ota T, Kawara S, and Kawada A. Allergic contact dermatitis due to Diethyl Sebacate in a hand cream. Contact Dermatitis. 2006;55:117.
170. Sasaki E, Hata M, Aramaki J, and Honda M. Allergic contact dermatitis due to Diethyl Sebacate. Contact Dermatitis. 1997;36:172.
171. Soga F, Katoh N, and Kishimoto S. Contact dermatitis due to lanoconazole, cetyl alcohol and Diethyl Sebacate in lanoconazole cream. Contact Dermatitis. 2004;50:49-50.
172. Tanaka M, Kobayashi S, Murata T, Tanikawa A, and Nishikawa T. Allergic contact dermatitis from Diethyl Sebacate in lanoconazole cream. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;43:233-234.
173. De Groot AC, Conemans JM, and Schutte T. Contact allergy to Diisopropyl Sebacate in Zineryt lotion. Contact Dermatitis. 1991;25:260-261.
174. Dooms-Goossens A, De Veyhlder H, De Boulle K, and Maertens M. Allergic contact dermatitis due to Diisopropyl Sebacate. Contact Dermatitis. 1986;15:192.
175. Elder RL (ed). Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Stearyl Alcohol, Oleyl Alcohol, and Octyl Dodecanol. Journal of the American College of Toxicology. 1985;4:(5):1-29.
176. Opdyke, D. L. J. Fragrance Raw Materials Monographs - Supplement to Earlier Monographs on Fragrance Materials. 1973. 1079
177. Andersen, F. A. Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Formic Acid. International Journal of Toxicology. 1997;16:(3).
178. International Programme on Chemical Safety.Methanol: Poisons Information Monograph 335. 2009. http://www.inchem.org/documents/pims/chemical/pim335.htm. Accessed 10-20-2009.
179. D'Alessandro, A., Osterloh, J. D., Chuwers, P., Quinlan, P. J., Kelly, T. J., and Becker, C. E. Formate in serum and urine after controlled methanol exposure at the threshold limit value. Environ.Health Perspect. 1994;102:(2):178-181.
180. Heldreth BA. Final report on Methyl Acetate, Simple Alkyl Acetate Estes and Related Alcohols (Draft). Report in progress. Available from the Cosmetic Ingredient Review. 2010.
181. Andersen, F. A. Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Methyl Alcohol. International Journal of Toxicology. 2001;20:((Suppl. 1)):57-85.
182. American Chemistry Council and Oxo Process Panel. Screening Information Data Set (SIDS) Initial Assessment Report for SIDS Initial Assessment Meeting (SIAM) 27: n-Propyl Acetate. OECD. 2008.
183. Nelson BK, Brightwell WS, Taylor BJ, Khan A, Burg JR, Kreig EF Jr, and Massari VJ. Behavioral teratology investigatoi of 1-propanol administered by inhalation to rats. Neurotoxicol Teratol. 1989;11:(2):153-159.
184. Stillman MA, Maiback HI, and Shalita AR. Relative irritancy of free fatty acids of different chain length. Contact Derm. 1975;1:65-69.
185. Wahlberg JE and MAibach HI. Nonanoic acid irrigation: A positive control at routine patch testing? Contact Derm. 1980;6:(2):128-130.
186. Agner, T. and Serup J. Skin reactions to irritants assessed by polysulfide rubber replica. Contact Dermatitis. 1987. 17:(4):205-211.
CIR Panel Book Page 114
67
187. Agner T and Serup J. Nonanoic acid irrigation: A positive contorl at routine patch testing? Contact Derm. 1987;17:(4):20-211.
188. Willis CM, Stephens JM, and Wilkinson JD. Experimentally-induced irritant contact dermatitis. Determination of optimum irritant concentrations. Contact Derm. 2010;1:20-24.
189. Agner T and Serup J. Seasonal variation ofskin resistance to irritants. Br J Dermatol. 2010;121:(3):323-328.
190. Elder RL (ed). Final Report on the Safety Assessment of Cetearyl Alcohol, Cetyl Alcohol, lsostearyl Alcohol, Myristyl Alcohol, and Behenyl Alcohol. Journal of the American College of Toxicology. 1988;7:(3):359-413.
191. Martinez, T. T., Jaeger, R. W., deCastro, F. J., Thompson, M. W., and Hamilton, M. F. A comparison of the absorption and metabolism of isopropyl alcohol by oral, dermal and inhalation routes. Vet Hum Toxicol. 1986;28:(3):233-236.
192. Burleight-Flayer H, Garman R, Neptun D, Bevan C, Gardiner T, Kapp R, Tyler T, and Wright G. Isopropanol vapor inhalaiton oncogenicity study in Fischer 344 rats and CD-1 mice. Fund Appl Toxicol. 1997;36:(2):95-111.
193. International Programme on Chemical Safety.Isopropyl Alcohol: Poisons Information Monograph 290. 2009. http://www.inchem.org/documents/pims/chemical/pim290.htm. Accessed 10-12-2009.
194. Tyl, R. W., Masten, L. W., Marr, M. C., Myers, C. B., Slauter, R. W., Gardiner, T. H., Strother, D. E., McKee, R. H., and Tyler, T. R. Developmental toxicity evaluation of isopropanol by gavage in rats and rabbits. Fundam.Appl Toxicol. 1994;22:(1):139-151.
195. Damato JM, Martin DM, and Fehn PA. Allergic contact sensitization test of a spray concentrate containining 80.74% isopropyl alcohol. 1979.
196. Anonymous. Final Report Repeated Insult Patch Test of a Hair Dye Base (3373) Containing 2.85% Isopropyl Alcohol and 1.95% Isopropyl Acetate. Unpublished data submitted by teh Council. 2010.
197. Suihko C and Serup J. Fluorescence confocal laser scanning microscopy for in vivo imaging of epidermal reactions to two experimental irritants. Skin Res Technol. 2008;14:(4):498-503.
198. High Production Volume (HPV) Chemical Challenge Program. Test Plan for the Alkyl Alcohols C6 - C13 Category. 2002.
199. International Program on Chemical Safety.Butyl acetates. 2005. http://www.inchem.org/documents/cicads/cicad64.htm. Accessed 11-20-2009.
200. Kawaguchi, M., Yamazaki, T., and Nakazawa, H. Biological effects of di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate. Environmental.Sciences.: an.International.Journal of Environmental.Physiology.and Toxicology. 2002;9:(2-3):198.
CIR Panel Book Page 115
68
APPENDIX I – ESTEARSE METABOLITE SUMMARY DATA Decyl Alcohol – metabolite of Decyl Succinate Clinical Irritation and Sensitization Tested in at a concentration of 3% in petrolatum, decyl alcohol produced no irritation in a 48 h closed-patch test in 25 human subjects.176 Methanol – metabolite of Dimethyl Succinate, Dimethyl Glutarate, Dimethyl Adipate Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion
Methanol is further metabolized to formaldehyde and then to formic acid. The CIR Expert Panel concluded that formic acid is safe where used in cosmetic formulations as a pH adjustor with a 64 ppm limit for the free acid.177 The main toxicological risks in humans are severe metabolic acidosis with increased anion gap, typically following oral exposure resulting in > 100 mg/L of formate in the urine.178 The acidosis and the formic acid metabolite are believed to play a central role in both the central nervous system toxicity and the ocular toxicity. A study to determine the formate levels that resulted from exposure of human volunteers to 200 ppm of methanol for 4 h was conducted. Human volunteers (n=27; age 20-55 y) were exposed to 200 ppm methanol (the Occupational Safety and Health Administration [OSHA] Permissible Exposure Limit) for 4 h and to water vapor for 4 h in a double-blind, random study.179 Urine samples were collected at 0, 4 and 8 h and blood samples were collected from the subjects before they entered the chamber, every 15 min for the first hour, every 30 min from the first to the third hour and at 4 h. Urine and serum samples were analyzed for formate (LOD 0.5 mg/L). Twenty-six of 27 enrolled subjects completed the study (11 females and 15 males). The researchers did not find any statistically significant differences in serum or urine formate levels between the two exposure conditions at any time point. At the end of the 4 h methanol exposure, formate concentrations of 14.28 ± 8.90 and 7.14 ± 5.17 mg/L were measured in serum and urine, respectively. Under control conditions, formate concentrations of 12.68 ± 6.43 (p=0.38; n=26) and 6.64 ± 4.26 (p=0.59; n=25) mg/L were measured in serum and urine respectively. After 8 h (4 h of no exposure) the serum concentrations were not statistically different with 12.38 ± 6.53 mg/L under methanol exposure conditions and 12.95 ± 8.01 (P=0.6; n=26) under control conditions. Urine formate concentrations after 8 h were 6.08 ± 3.49 and 5.64 ±3.70 mg/L (p=0.6; n=25) in exposed and control conditions, respectively, and were not statistically significantly different. From CIR Final Report on Methyl Acetate180
Clinical Irritation and Sensitization
Methyl Alcohol caused primary irritation to the skin; prolonged and repeated contact with Methyl Alcohol resulted in de-fatting and dermatitis. In one occupational study, 3.2% of 274 metalworkers with dermatitis had positive results to a patch test of 30% Methyl Alcohol. Typical allergic responses observed after contact with alcohols were eczematous eruption and wheal and flare at the exposure sites. Eczema and erythema were reported after the consumption of alcoholic beverages by persons sensitized to ethyl alcohol. Five percent Methyl Alcohol caused a slight positive (+) reaction in a closed patch test for allergic contact dermatitis, and concentrations of 7% and 70% caused (+++) reactions. From the CIR final report on methyl alcohol181
Clinical Assessment of Safety
Clinical data show that Methyl Alcohol can cause severe metabolic acidosis, blindness, and death: toxicity was manifested earlier and at a lower dose compared to ethyl alcohol, but the comparative fatal dose was the same for both alcohols. All routes of exposure were toxicologically equivalent, as the alcohol distributed readily and uniformly throughout all tissues and organs. Individual susceptibilities to Methyl Alcohol varied, but typically, the ingestion of 80 to 150 ml of 80% Methyl Alcohol was fatal. Symptoms of Methyl Alcohol intoxication after ingestion were delayed for 12 to 18 hours; afterwards, the symptoms included headache, anorexia, weakness, fatigue, leg cramps, and/or pain and vertigo. Severe gastrointestinal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, mania, failed vision, and convulsions could occur. Chronic exposure to Methyl Alcohol could cause edema, granular degeneration, and necrosis of heart muscle fibers, as well as fatty degeneration of the heart muscle; sudden cardiac failure was associated with Methyl Alcohol intoxication. The liver and kidneys often had parenchymatous degeneration, and the liver had focal necrosis and fatty infiltration. Severe acidosis was necessary for the development of blindness. Similar symptoms were observed after percutaneous or inhalation exposure to Methyl Alcohol. From the CIR final report on methyl alcohol181
CIR Panel Book Page 116
69
Propyl Alcohol – metabolite of Dipropyl Adipate Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion
Rats (strain/sex/number not specified) were exposed via inhalation to 2,000 ppm (8360 mg/m3) for 90 min.182 Propyl acetate was rapidly hydrolyzed to propyl alcohol. During the 90 min exposure period, blood levels of propyl alcohol were between 2.6 and 7.7 fold greater than propyl acetate. From the CIR final report on Methyl Acetate180
Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity
The effects of propyl alcohol on fertility were investigated by exposing male Sprague-Dawley rats (18/group) to 0, 3500 or 7000 ppm (0, 8.61 or 17.2 mg/L) propyl alcohol vapor via inhalation 7 h/day, 7days/week for 62 days, prior to mating with unexposed virgin females.183 Female Sprague-Dawley rats (15/group) were similarly exposed and mated with unexposed males. Following parturition, litters were culled to 4/sex and the pups fostered by unexposed dams. The pups were weaned on post natal day (PND) 25 and weighed on PND’s 7, 14, 21, 28 and 35. Male rats exposed to 7000 ppm exhibited a decrease in mating success with 2/16 producing a litter (1 male died as a result of a cage fight and 1 male did not mate). Mating success was not affected in 3500 ppm exposed males or in females. Six males from the 7000 ppm group were retained to determine if this effect was reversible. All 6 males successfully mated 15 weeks after exposure. The authors reported that weight gain was not affected in 7000 ppm exposed females (data not shown), but feed intake was decreased in this treatment group. Crooked tails were observed in 2-3 offspring in 2 of 15 litters from the 7000 ppm maternally exposed group. No other effects on female fertility were reported. No significant differences resulted between offspring of the 7000 ppm group and controls on several behavioral toxicology measures including the Ascent test, Rotorod test, Open Field test, activity test, running wheel activity, avoidance conditioning, and operant conditioning. Activity measures were significantly different between offspring of the 3500 ppm exposure group and controls. From the CIR final report on Methyl Acetate180
Clinical Irritation and Sensitization
A cumulative irritation study was conducted involving 20 male subjects, where the relative irritancy of free fatty acids of different chain lengths was evaluated.184 Equimolar concentrations (0.5 M and 1.0 M) of even- and odd-numbered - straight chain saturated fatty acids were dissolved in propanol. Each Al-test® patch containing a fatty acid (0.5 M) was applied to the interscapular area of 10 subjects, and, similarly, each fatty acid was applied at a higher concentration (1.0 M) to the remaining 10 subjects. A control patch containing propanol was also applied to each subject. Patches remained in place for 24 h and reactions were scored 30 minutes after patch removal. This procedure was repeated daily for a total of 10 applications. In both groups of 10 subjects, there were no reactions to propanol. In an irritation study, wherein 116 healthy male subjects (21 to 55 years old) were patch tested with pelargonic acid at concentrations of 5%, 10%, 20%, and 39.9% in propanol, a propanol-treated control patch was used.185 Dose response curves were developed. Patches (Al-test® discs) were saturated with 0.04 ml of a test solution and applied to the upper back for 48 h. Reactions were scored at 48 h and 96 h post-application. There were no reactions to propanol. In an another irritation study, wherein 16 volunteers (10 females, 6 males; median age of 29.5 years) were patch tested (closed patches, Finn chambers) with 20% pelargonic acid in propanol (pH of 4.3), propanol was one of the controls used.186 Patches were applied to the anterolateral surface of both upper arms for 24 h. Reactions were scored at 24, 48, and 96 h post-application according to the following scale: 0 (no reaction) to 3 (strong positive reaction: marked erythema, infiltration, possibly vesicles, bullae, pustules and/or pronounced crusting). There were no reactions to propanol. A skin irritation study was conducted using 42 healthy, non-atopic male volunteers (mean age = 34 years; skin types: II [20 subjects], III [17 subjects], and IV [5 subjects]).187 Pelargonic acid was patch-tested (Finn chambers, volar forearm) at the following concentrations (in propanol): 40% (12 subjects), 60% (32 subjects), 70% (32 subjects), and 80% (28 subjects), and propanol was used as a control. Each subject received between 3 and 10 patch tests. The patches remained in place for 48 h, and reactions were scored 1 h later according to the following scale: - (no visible reaction) to 4+ (intense erythema with bullous formation). There were no reactions to propanol. In an irritation study, wherein 16 healthy subjects (ages not stated) were patch tested with pelargonic acid (20% in
CIR Panel Book Page 117
70
propanol), propanol was used as a control.188 Closed patches (Finn chambers) containing the test substance were applied to the anterolateral surface of both upper arms. The patches were removed at 24 h post-application and reactions were scored at 24 h and 96 h post-application. There were no reactions to propanol. In study conducted to investigate a possible seasonal variation in the skin response to pelargonic acid during the winter and summer, propanol was used as a control.189 The study was conducted using 17 healthy volunteers (10 males, 7 females; mean age = 27 years). The test substance was applied (closed patch, Finn chamber) to each arm for 24 h. Reactions were scored at 30 min post-removal. Reactions were not observed at sites treated with propanol, water, or to which an empty chamber was applied. From CIR final report on Methyl Acetate180
Cetyl Alcohol – metabolite of Dicetyl Succinate and Dicetyl Adipate Clinical Irritation and Sensitization
A topical tolerance study involving an 11.5% Cetyl Alcohol cream base was conducted with 80 male subjects, ranging in age from 21 to 52 years and in weight from 120 to 220 pounds. The preparations were applied five times daily (every 3 hours) for 10 days. One subject had erythema, folliculitis, and pustule formation (forearm site). A formulation containing 6.0% Cetyl Alcohol was tested for its skin irritation potential in 20 subjects according to the protocol stated above. The product did not induce skin irritation. In another study, the skin irritation potential of a cream containing 6.0% Cetyl Alcohol was evaluated in 12 female subjects (18-60 years old). The total irritation score (all panelists) for the 21 applications was 418, indicating mild cumulative irritation. The skin irritation and sensitization potential of a product containing 8.4% Cetyl Alcohol was evaluated in 110 female subjects. Fourteen days after scoring of the tenth application site, a challenge patch was applied to each subject and removed after 48 h; sites were scored after patch removal. The product did not induce primary irritation or sensitization. The sensitization potential of a cream containing 3.0% Cetearyl Alcohol was evaluated in 25 subjects (18-25 years old). Following a 10-day non-treatment period, occlusive challenge patches were applied to new sites and removed after 48 h. Sensitization reactions were not observed in any of the subjects. From the CIR final report on cetyl alcohol190
Photosensitization
The photosensitization potential of a lipstick product containing 4.0% Cetyl Alcohol was evaluated in 52 subjects. The experimental procedure was not stated. Photosensitization reactions were not noted in any of the subjects. In another study, a skin care preparation containing 1.0% Cetyl Alcohol did not induce photosensitization in the 407 subjects tested. The experimental procedure was not stated. From CIR final report on cetyl alcohol190
Isopropyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisopropyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Sebacate Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion
Male rabbits (3/group; strain not specified) were treated by different routes of exposure to compare the absorption and metabolism of isopropyl alcohol.191 Groups 1 and 2 were treated via gavage with the equivalent of 2 and 4 ml/kg absolute isopropyl alcohol, respectively, as a 35% isopropanol/water solution. Groups 3 and 4 were treated via whole-body inhalation for 4 h (towels soaked with isopropyl alcohol were place in the inhalation chamber and replenished at ½ hour intervals to maintained a saturated environment; no exact concentration given), with Group 3 animals receiving an additional dermal exposure in the form of a towel soaked with 70% isopropyl alcohol applied to the animals’ chests and Group 4 animals having plastic barriers on their chests and towels prepared the same way as in Group 3 applied on top of the plastic barriers. The alcohol on the towels was replenished at half hour intervals throughout the duration of the experiment. Blood samples were taken at 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 h. Samples were analyzed for isopropyl alcohol and the metabolite acetone. Following gavage exposure to 2 or 4 ml/kg, maximum blood levels of 147 and 282 mg/dl, respectively, of isopropyl alcohol were measured. Concentrations of acetone rose steadily over the 4 h period and were 74 and 73 mg/dl
CIR Panel Book Page 118
71
following exposure to 2 or 4 ml/kg, respectively. The authors stated that the maximum levels of isopropyl alcohol observed in this experiment, correlated with inebriation and near coma in the animals. Following inhalation and dermal exposure, the concentration of isopropyl alcohol in the blood continued to rise and was 112 mg/dl at 4 h while the concentration of acetone was 19 at 4 h. Inhalation exposure with a plastic barrier between the soaked towel and the chest resulted in isopropyl alcohol and acetone blood levels of <10 mg/dl. The researchers concluded that isopropyl alcohol is absorbed by the dermal route but that prolonged dermal exposure (i.e. repeated sponging or soaking for several hours) would be required to produce significant toxicity. From CIR final report on Methyl Acetate180
Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity Fischer 344 rats and CD-1 mice (10/sex/group) were exposed via inhalation to 0, 100, 500, 1500, or 5000 ppm (0, 246, 1230, 3690, or 12,300 mg/m3) isopropyl alcohol for 6 h/day, 5 days/wk for 13 weeks.192 Ataxia, narcosis, hypoactivity and the lack of a startle reflex were observed during exposure at 5000 ppm. Hypoactivity was observed in animals exposed to 1500 ppm isopropyl alcohol. At 13 weeks, no gross lesions were observed. Microscopic examination of control and 5000 ppm exposed animal tissues showed hyaline droplets within the kidneys of male rats only. The size and frequency of the droplets was increased in the treated group. The authors concluded that the NOAEL for this study was 500 ppm and the lowest-observable adverse effect level (LOAEL) was 1500 ppm based upon clinical signs and changes in hematology at 6 weeks. To evaluate the neurobehavioral effects of isopropanol exposure, an additional 15 rats/sex were exposed (via inhalation) to 0, 500, 1500, or 5000 ppm (0, 1230, 3690, or 12,300 mg/m3) for 6 h/day, 5 days/wk for 13 weeks. Isopropyl alcohol did not produce any changes to the parameters of the functional observations battery which was conducted at 1, 2, 4, 9 and 13 weeks. Clinical signs observed in mice, during the exposure, included ataxia, narcosis, hypoactivity and lack of a startle reflex at 5000 ppm. Narcosis, ataxia and hypoactivity were observed in animals exposed to 1500 ppm isopropyl alcohol. At 5000 ppm, increased body weight and increased rate of weight gain were observed in female mice. At 13 weeks, no gross lesions were observed and no treatment-related microscopic changes were observed. A 10% and 21% increase in relative liver weight was observed in female mice at 1500 and 5000 ppm, respectively. The authors concluded that the NOAEL for this study was 500 ppm and the LOAEL was 1500 ppm based on clinical signs and increased liver weights. Ocular Irritation
Isopropyl alcohol has been labeled a severe ocular irritant based on rabbit ocular irritation tests.193 From CIR final report on Methyl Acetate180
Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity
Female Sprague-Dawley rats (25/group) were exposed to 0, 400, 800, or 1200 mg/kg/day isopropyl alcohol via gavage on gestational days (GD) 6 through 15.194 Female New Zealand white rabbits (15/group) were exposed to 0, 120, 240, or 480 mg/kg/day isopropyl alcohol via gavage on GD 6 through 18. Animals were observed for body weight, clinical effects and feed consumption and the fetuses examined for body weight, sex and visceral and skeletal alterations at GD 20 for rats and GD 30 for rabbits. In rats, 2 dams died at the 1200 mg/kg dose and 1 dam died at the 800 mg/kg dose. Maternal gestational weight gain was reduced at the highest dose tested. No other effects were observed on maternal reproductive health. Fetal body weights at the two highest doses were decreased statistically. No evidence of teratogenicity was observed at any dose. In rabbits, four does died at the 480 mg/kg dose. Treatment related clinical signs of toxicity were observed at the 480 mg/kg dose and included, cyanosis, lethargy, labored respiration and diarrhea. No treatment related findings were observed at GD 30. Decreased feed consumption and maternal body weights, at 480 mg/kg, were statistically significant. No other effects were observed on maternal reproductive health. No evidence of teratogenicity was observed in the rabbits at any dose. The authors determined NOAEL’s for both maternal and developmental toxicity of 400 mg/kg, each, in rats and 240 and 480 mg/kg, respectively, in rabbits. From CIR final report on Methyl Acetate180
Carcinogenicity
Fischer 344 rats and CD-1 mice (65/rats/sex/group; 55/mice/sex/group) were treated via inhalation with 0, 500, 2500, or 5000 ppm (0, 1230, 6150, or 12,300 mg/m3) isopropyl alcohol for 6 h/day, 5 days/wk for 104 weeks in rats and 78 weeks in mice.192 An additional 10/animals/sex/species were treated with these same concentrations of isopropyl alcohol for 6 h/day, 5 days/wk for 72 weeks in rats and 54 weeks in mice and underwent an interim evaluation. Another 10 mice/sex/group were treated according to the paradigm described above for 54 weeks and then allowed to recover before being killed at 78 weeks. Animals were observed and evaluated for body and organ weights, ophthalmology, and clinical and anatomic pathology. In rats, increased mortality due to chronic renal disease was observed at 5000 ppm (both sexes) and at 2500 ppm (males only). Hypoactivity and lack of startle reflex were observed in 2500 ppm treated rats and hypoactivity, lack of startle
CIR Panel Book Page 119
72
reflex and narcosis were observed in 5000 ppm treated rats. With the exception of the ataxia, the clinical signs were transient and ceased when the exposure ended. Increases in body weight, body weight gain, and liver weights were observed in 2500 and 5000 ppm treated rats. Chronic renal disease was exacerbated in rats treated with isopropyl alcohol. Male rats had a concentration related increase in absolute and relative testes weights. At the interim euthanasia (after 72 weeks) male rats treated with 5000 ppm had an increased frequency of testicular seminiferous tubule atrophy upon microscopic evaluation. At the terminal euthanasia (104 weeks), male rats had a concentration dependent increase in the incidence of interstitial (Leydig) cell adenomas of the testes at all administered doses. No other tumor types were increased in rats under these treatment conditions as compared to controls. In mice, no differences in mortality were observed between control and treated animals. Hypoactivity, lack of a startle reflex, narcosis, ataxia, and prostration were observed in 5000 ppm treated mice. Hypoactivity, lack of startle reflex and narcosis were observed in 2500 ppm treated mice. Increases in body weight, body weight gain, and liver weights were observed in 2500 and 5000 ppm treated mice. Male mice in all treatment groups had a decrease in relative testes weights, and female mice exposed to 5000 ppm isopropyl alcohol exhibited decreases in absolute and relative brain weights. At the terminal euthanasia (78 weeks) an increased incidence of minimal to mild renal tubular proteinosis was observed in males and females in all treatment groups. Male mice exposed to 2500 and 5000 ppm exhibited an increased incidence of dilation of the seminal vesicles. No neoplastic lesions were observed in male or female mice. The authors reported a NOAEL for toxic effects of 500 ppm for both rats and mice based on kidney and testicular effects.
IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) has determined that isopropyl alcohol is not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans (Group 3). From the CIR final report on Methyl Acetate180
Clinical Irritation and Sensitization
According to unpublished data, a 80.74% spray concentrate caused did not exhibit any potential for dermal sensitization in 9 human subjects.195 According to unpublished HRIPT study on 109 test subjects, a 2.85% hair dye base formulation of isopropyl alcohol and a 1.95% isopropyl acetate caused no dermal sensitization in humans.196 The applicability of fluorescence confocal laser scanning microscopy for in situ imaging of irritant contact dermatitis caused by pelargonic acid using 12 healthy individuals (8 males, 4 males; 18 to 64 years old) was studied.197 Using Finn chambers (occlusive patches), the flexor side of the right and left forearm was exposed to 60 µl of 10% (w/v) pelargonic acid in isopropanol solution and isopropanol vehicle. Isopropanol was used as a control. The Finn chambers were removed at 24 h post-application and reactions were scored according to the following scale: 0 (no visible reaction) to 4+ (intense erythema with bullous formation). Reactions were not observed at sites treated with isopropanol. From the CIR final report on Methyl Acetate180
Hexyl Alcohol – metabolite of Dihexyl Adipate Ocular Irritation Undiluted hexyl alcohol has been labeled as highly irritating on rabbit ocular irritation tests.198 Dermal Sensitization In a maximization test using guinea pigs, hexyl alcohol was not a sensitizer at 1% in petrolatum.198 Caprylic Alcohol – metabolite of Dicapryl Succinate, Dicapryl Adipate and Dicaprylyl/Capryl Sebacate Dermal Irritation – Animals Caprylic alcohol applied full strength to intact or abraded rabbit skin produced a mild irritation.176 Clinical Irritation and Sensitization Tested in at a concentration of 2% in petrolatum, caprylic alcohol produced no irritation in a 48 h closed-patch test in 25 human subjects.176
CIR Panel Book Page 120
73
Isobutyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisopropyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Sebacate Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity
Rats (10/sex/group) were exposed via inhalation to isobutyl alcohol vapor concentrations of approximately 0, 770, 3100, or 7700 mg/m3, for 6 h/day, 5 days/week, for 14 weeks.199 The functional observational battery was conducted along with endpoints of motor activity, neuropathology and scheduled-controlled operant behavior. A slight reduction in responsiveness to external stimuli was observed in all treated groups during exposure. This effect resolved upon cessation of exposure to isobutyl alcohol. From the CIR final report on Methyl Acetate180
Ethylhexyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diethylhexyl Succinate, Diethylhexyl Adipate and Diethylhexyl Sebacate Ocular Irritation Instillation of 20 µg of ethylhexyl alcohol into the conjunctival sac of rabbits caused moderately severe irritation of the cornea.198 Dermal Irritation – Animals Ethylhexyl alcohol was applied under occlusion to the skin of 3 male rabbits for 4 hours and found to be irritating.198 In another study with rabbits, 0.5 ml of ethylhexyl alcohol was applied under occlusion on intact skin for 1, 2, 4, and 24 hours. Irritation was considered high, and effects seen after 7 days were not reversible. Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity A group of female rats was exposed for 7 h per day to 850 mg/m3 of ethylhexyl alcohol on gestation days 1-19.198 Dams were sacrificed at day twenty. Ethylhexyl alcohol reduced maternal feed intake, but did not produce any malformations. The estrogenic activity of 2-ethylhexanoic acid was examined using an E-SCREEN assay using T47D human breast cancer cells.200 Weak estrogenic activity was observed. (Additional details were not provided.) Genotoxicity In vitro, ethylhexyl alcohol was negative in a number of Ames assays, a liquid suspension assay, mouse lymphoma assay, and unscheduled DNA synthesis assay.118,141,142,145,153 In a 3H-thymidine assay, there was a dose-dependent inhibition of 3H-thymi-dine into replicating DNA, with a dose-dependent increase in the ratio of acid-soluble DNA incorporated into the thymidine.142 The urine of rats dosed orally with 1000 mg/kg ethylhexyl alcohol was not mutagenic.152 In vivo, ethylhexyl alcohol was not genotoxic in a mouse micronucleus test or a transformation assay.153 MEHA, Mono-(2-Ethyl-5-Hydroxyhexyl)Adipate,Mono-(2-Ethyl-5-Oxohexyl)Adipate - metabolites of Diethylhexyl Adipate Genotoxicity MEHA was not mutagenic in an Ames assay at concentrations of ≤100084 or 10,000 µg/plate.141 Mono-2(ethyl-5- hydroxy-hexyl)adipate and mono-(2-ethyl-5-oxohexyl)adipate, were not mutagenic in an Ames assay at concentrations of ≤1000 µg/plate.84 Isooctyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisooctyl Adipate and Diisooctyl Sebacate Subchronic Oral Toxicity In a subchronic gavage toxicity study of a mixture of C7-9, branched alkyl alcohols in rats, a NOEL of 125 mg/kg/day and a lowest-observed effect level of 250 mg/kg/day were determined.118 Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity In an oral gavage developmental toxicity study of a mixture of C7-9, branched alkyl alcohols in rats, a maternal NOAEL of 500 mg/kg and a fetal NOAEL of 1000 mg/kg were reported.198 Genotoxicity A mixture of C7-9, branched alkyl alcohols were not mutagenic in in vitro bacterial and mammalian cell assays.198 Carcinogenicity
CIR Panel Book Page 121
74
Ethylhexyl alcohol was not oncogenic in rats dosed, via gavage, with 0, 50, 150, or 500 mg/kg, in an aqueous vehicle with 0.005% Cremophor EL.198 Nonyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisononyl Adipate Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity In an oral gavage developmental toxicity study of a mixture of C8-10, branched alkyl alcohols in rats, maternal and fetal NOAEL values were each reported to be 144 mg/kg. 198 Isodecyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisodecyl Adipate Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity In an oral gavage developmental toxicity study of a mixture of C9-11, branched alkyl alcohols in rats, a maternal NOAEL of 158 mg/kg and a fetal NOAEL of 790 mg/kg were reported. 198 Isostearyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisostearyl Glutarate, Diisostearyl Adipate and Isostearyl Sebacate Clinical Irritation and Sensitization
The skin irritation potential of lsostearyl Alcohol was evaluated in 19 male and female subjects (18-65 years old) at a concentration of 25.0% in petrolatum. The test substance did not induce skin irritation in any of the subjects (Primary Irritation Index = 0.05). In three similar studies, three different lipstick products containing 25.0, 27.0, and 28.0% Isostearyl Alcohol, respectively, were tested according to the same protocol. The three products did not induce skin irritation. The irritation and sensitization potential of Isostearyl Alcohol (25% v/v in 95.0% isopropyl alcohol) was evaluated in 12 male subjects (21-60 years old). Challenge applications were made to original and adjacent sites 2 weeks after removal of the last induction patch. Three of 12 subjects had slight erythema during induction, and there was no evidence of sensitization. The sensitization potential of a pump spray antiperspirant containing 5.0% Isostearyl Alcohol was evaluated using 148 male and female subjects. The product was applied via an occlusive patch to the upper arm for a total of nine induction applications (3 times/week for 3 weeks). Each patch remained for 24 h, and sites were scored immediately before subsequent applications. During the challenge phase, a patch was applied to the induction site and to a new site on the opposite arm of each subject. Reactions were scored 48 and 96 h after application. Ten of the twelve subjects with reactions suggestive of sensitization were re-challenged with the product 2 months later. Patches remained for 24 h, and sites were scored at 48 and 96 h post-application. Six subjects had reactions during the re-challenge. Four of the six subjects were then tested with 5.0% Isostearyl Alcohol in solution with ethanol 6 weeks after scoring of the first rechallenge; all had positive responses. Negative responses were reported when the product (without lsostearyl Alcohol) and 100.0% ethanol each were tested. In a second study, the same product was applied to 60 male and female subjects (same protocol). Five of the subjects had positive responses after the first challenge. One of the five was re-challenged with 5.0% Isostearyl Alcohol in ethanol solution, and a positive reaction was observed. From the CIR final report on Isostearyl Alcohol190
Isopropanol Comedogencity An LDLo of 2-4 ml/kg of isopropyl alcohol has been reported in adults and 6 ml/kg (9 ml/kg 70% isopropyl alcohol) was reported to induce coma in children.
CIR Panel Book Page 122
68
APPENDIX I – ESTEARSE METABOLITE SUMMARY DATA Decyl Alcohol – metabolite of Decyl Succinate Clinical Irritation and Sensitization Tested in at a concentration of 3% in petrolatum, decyl alcohol produced no irritation in a 48 h closed-patch test in 25 human subjects.177 Methanol – metabolite of Dimethyl Succinate, Dimethyl Glutarate, Dimethyl Adipate Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion
Methanol is further metabolized to formaldehyde and then to formic acid. The CIR Expert Panel concluded that formic acid is safe where used in cosmetic formulations as a pH adjustor with a 64 ppm limit for the free acid.178 The main toxicological risks in humans are severe metabolic acidosis with increased anion gap, typically following oral exposure resulting in > 100 mg/L of formate in the urine.179 The acidosis and the formic acid metabolite are believed to play a central role in both the central nervous system toxicity and the ocular toxicity. A study to determine the formate levels that resulted from exposure of human volunteers to 200 ppm of methanol for 4 h was conducted. Human volunteers (n=27; age 20-55 y) were exposed to 200 ppm methanol (the Occupational Safety and Health Administration [OSHA] Permissible Exposure Limit) for 4 h and to water vapor for 4 h in a double-blind, random study.180 Urine samples were collected at 0, 4 and 8 h and blood samples were collected from the subjects before they entered the chamber, every 15 min for the first hour, every 30 min from the first to the third hour and at 4 h. Urine and serum samples were analyzed for formate (LOD 0.5 mg/L). Twenty-six of 27 enrolled subjects completed the study (11 females and 15 males). The researchers did not find any statistically significant differences in serum or urine formate levels between the two exposure conditions at any time point. At the end of the 4 h methanol exposure, formate concentrations of 14.28 ± 8.90 and 7.14 ± 5.17 mg/L were measured in serum and urine, respectively. Under control conditions, formate concentrations of 12.68 ± 6.43 (p=0.38; n=26) and 6.64 ± 4.26 (p=0.59; n=25) mg/L were measured in serum and urine respectively. After 8 h (4 h of no exposure) the serum concentrations were not statistically different with 12.38 ± 6.53 mg/L under methanol exposure conditions and 12.95 ± 8.01 (P=0.6; n=26) under control conditions. Urine formate concentrations after 8 h were 6.08 ± 3.49 and 5.64 ±3.70 mg/L (p=0.6; n=25) in exposed and control conditions, respectively, and were not statistically significantly different. From CIR Final Report on Methyl Acetate181
Clinical Irritation and Sensitization
Methyl Alcohol caused primary irritation to the skin; prolonged and repeated contact with Methyl Alcohol resulted in de-fatting and dermatitis. In one occupational study, 3.2% of 274 metalworkers with dermatitis had positive results to a patch test of 30% Methyl Alcohol. Typical allergic responses observed after contact with alcohols were eczematous eruption and wheal and flare at the exposure sites. Eczema and erythema were reported after the consumption of alcoholic beverages by persons sensitized to ethyl alcohol. Five percent Methyl Alcohol caused a slight positive (+) reaction in a closed patch test for allergic contact dermatitis, and concentrations of 7% and 70% caused (+++) reactions. From the CIR final report on methyl alcohol182
Clinical Assessment of Safety
Clinical data show that Methyl Alcohol can cause severe metabolic acidosis, blindness, and death: toxicity was manifested earlier and at a lower dose compared to ethyl alcohol, but the comparative fatal dose was the same for both alcohols. All routes of exposure were toxicologically equivalent, as the alcohol distributed readily and uniformly throughout all tissues and organs. Individual susceptibilities to Methyl Alcohol varied, but typically, the ingestion of 80 to 150 ml of 80% Methyl Alcohol was fatal. Symptoms of Methyl Alcohol intoxication after ingestion were delayed for 12 to 18 hours; afterwards, the symptoms included headache, anorexia, weakness, fatigue, leg cramps, and/or pain and vertigo. Severe gastrointestinal pain, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, mania, failed vision, and convulsions could occur. Chronic exposure to Methyl Alcohol could cause edema, granular degeneration, and necrosis of heart muscle fibers, as well as fatty degeneration of the heart muscle; sudden cardiac failure was associated with Methyl Alcohol intoxication. The liver and kidneys often had parenchymatous degeneration, and the liver had focal necrosis and fatty infiltration. Severe acidosis was necessary for the development of blindness. Similar symptoms were observed after percutaneous or inhalation exposure to Methyl Alcohol. From the CIR final report on methyl alcohol182
CIR Panel Book Page 123
69
Propyl Alcohol – metabolite of Dipropyl Adipate Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion
Rats (strain/sex/number not specified) were exposed via inhalation to 2,000 ppm (8360 mg/m3) for 90 min.183 Propyl acetate was rapidly hydrolyzed to propyl alcohol. During the 90 min exposure period, blood levels of propyl alcohol were between 2.6 and 7.7 fold greater than propyl acetate. From the CIR final report on Methyl Acetate181
Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity
The effects of propyl alcohol on fertility were investigated by exposing male Sprague-Dawley rats (18/group) to 0, 3500 or 7000 ppm (0, 8.61 or 17.2 mg/L) propyl alcohol vapor via inhalation 7 h/day, 7days/week for 62 days, prior to mating with unexposed virgin females.184 Female Sprague-Dawley rats (15/group) were similarly exposed and mated with unexposed males. Following parturition, litters were culled to 4/sex and the pups fostered by unexposed dams. The pups were weaned on post natal day (PND) 25 and weighed on PND’s 7, 14, 21, 28 and 35. Male rats exposed to 7000 ppm exhibited a decrease in mating success with 2/16 producing a litter (1 male died as a result of a cage fight and 1 male did not mate). Mating success was not affected in 3500 ppm exposed males or in females. Six males from the 7000 ppm group were retained to determine if this effect was reversible. All 6 males successfully mated 15 weeks after exposure. The authors reported that weight gain was not affected in 7000 ppm exposed females (data not shown), but feed intake was decreased in this treatment group. Crooked tails were observed in 2-3 offspring in 2 of 15 litters from the 7000 ppm maternally exposed group. No other effects on female fertility were reported. No significant differences resulted between offspring of the 7000 ppm group and controls on several behavioral toxicology measures including the Ascent test, Rotorod test, Open Field test, activity test, running wheel activity, avoidance conditioning, and operant conditioning. Activity measures were significantly different between offspring of the 3500 ppm exposure group and controls. From the CIR final report on Methyl Acetate181
Clinical Irritation and Sensitization
A cumulative irritation study was conducted involving 20 male subjects, where the relative irritancy of free fatty acids of different chain lengths was evaluated.185 Equimolar concentrations (0.5 M and 1.0 M) of even- and odd-numbered - straight chain saturated fatty acids were dissolved in propanol. Each Al-test® patch containing a fatty acid (0.5 M) was applied to the interscapular area of 10 subjects, and, similarly, each fatty acid was applied at a higher concentration (1.0 M) to the remaining 10 subjects. A control patch containing propanol was also applied to each subject. Patches remained in place for 24 h and reactions were scored 30 minutes after patch removal. This procedure was repeated daily for a total of 10 applications. In both groups of 10 subjects, there were no reactions to propanol. In an irritation study, wherein 116 healthy male subjects (21 to 55 years old) were patch tested with pelargonic acid at concentrations of 5%, 10%, 20%, and 39.9% in propanol, a propanol-treated control patch was used.186 Dose response curves were developed. Patches (Al-test® discs) were saturated with 0.04 ml of a test solution and applied to the upper back for 48 h. Reactions were scored at 48 h and 96 h post-application. There were no reactions to propanol. In an another irritation study, wherein 16 volunteers (10 females, 6 males; median age of 29.5 years) were patch tested (closed patches, Finn chambers) with 20% pelargonic acid in propanol (pH of 4.3), propanol was one of the controls used.187 Patches were applied to the anterolateral surface of both upper arms for 24 h. Reactions were scored at 24, 48, and 96 h post-application according to the following scale: 0 (no reaction) to 3 (strong positive reaction: marked erythema, infiltration, possibly vesicles, bullae, pustules and/or pronounced crusting). There were no reactions to propanol. A skin irritation study was conducted using 42 healthy, non-atopic male volunteers (mean age = 34 years; skin types: II [20 subjects], III [17 subjects], and IV [5 subjects]).188 Pelargonic acid was patch-tested (Finn chambers, volar forearm) at the following concentrations (in propanol): 40% (12 subjects), 60% (32 subjects), 70% (32 subjects), and 80% (28 subjects), and propanol was used as a control. Each subject received between 3 and 10 patch tests. The patches remained in place for 48 h, and reactions were scored 1 h later according to the following scale: - (no visible reaction) to 4+ (intense erythema with bullous formation). There were no reactions to propanol. In an irritation study, wherein 16 healthy subjects (ages not stated) were patch tested with pelargonic acid (20% in
CIR Panel Book Page 124
70
propanol), propanol was used as a control.189 Closed patches (Finn chambers) containing the test substance were applied to the anterolateral surface of both upper arms. The patches were removed at 24 h post-application and reactions were scored at 24 h and 96 h post-application. There were no reactions to propanol. In study conducted to investigate a possible seasonal variation in the skin response to pelargonic acid during the winter and summer, propanol was used as a control.190 The study was conducted using 17 healthy volunteers (10 males, 7 females; mean age = 27 years). The test substance was applied (closed patch, Finn chamber) to each arm for 24 h. Reactions were scored at 30 min post-removal. Reactions were not observed at sites treated with propanol, water, or to which an empty chamber was applied. From CIR final report on Methyl Acetate181
Cetyl Alcohol – metabolite of Dicetyl Succinate and Dicetyl Adipate Clinical Irritation and Sensitization
A topical tolerance study involving an 11.5% Cetyl Alcohol cream base was conducted with 80 male subjects, ranging in age from 21 to 52 years and in weight from 120 to 220 pounds. The preparations were applied five times daily (every 3 hours) for 10 days. One subject had erythema, folliculitis, and pustule formation (forearm site). A formulation containing 6.0% Cetyl Alcohol was tested for its skin irritation potential in 20 subjects according to the protocol stated above. The product did not induce skin irritation. In another study, the skin irritation potential of a cream containing 6.0% Cetyl Alcohol was evaluated in 12 female subjects (18-60 years old). The total irritation score (all panelists) for the 21 applications was 418, indicating mild cumulative irritation. The skin irritation and sensitization potential of a product containing 8.4% Cetyl Alcohol was evaluated in 110 female subjects. Fourteen days after scoring of the tenth application site, a challenge patch was applied to each subject and removed after 48 h; sites were scored after patch removal. The product did not induce primary irritation or sensitization. The sensitization potential of a cream containing 3.0% Cetearyl Alcohol was evaluated in 25 subjects (18-25 years old). Following a 10-day non-treatment period, occlusive challenge patches were applied to new sites and removed after 48 h. Sensitization reactions were not observed in any of the subjects. From the CIR final report on cetyl alcohol191
Photosensitization
The photosensitization potential of a lipstick product containing 4.0% Cetyl Alcohol was evaluated in 52 subjects. The experimental procedure was not stated. Photosensitization reactions were not noted in any of the subjects. In another study, a skin care preparation containing 1.0% Cetyl Alcohol did not induce photosensitization in the 407 subjects tested. The experimental procedure was not stated. From CIR final report on cetyl alcohol191
Isopropyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisopropyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Sebacate Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion
Male rabbits (3/group; strain not specified) were treated by different routes of exposure to compare the absorption and metabolism of isopropyl alcohol.192 Groups 1 and 2 were treated via gavage with the equivalent of 2 and 4 ml/kg absolute isopropyl alcohol, respectively, as a 35% isopropanol/water solution. Groups 3 and 4 were treated via whole-body inhalation for 4 h (towels soaked with isopropyl alcohol were place in the inhalation chamber and replenished at ½ hour intervals to maintained a saturated environment; no exact concentration given), with Group 3 animals receiving an additional dermal exposure in the form of a towel soaked with 70% isopropyl alcohol applied to the animals’ chests and Group 4 animals having plastic barriers on their chests and towels prepared the same way as in Group 3 applied on top of the plastic barriers. The alcohol on the towels was replenished at half hour intervals throughout the duration of the experiment. Blood samples were taken at 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 h. Samples were analyzed for isopropyl alcohol and the metabolite acetone. Following gavage exposure to 2 or 4 ml/kg, maximum blood levels of 147 and 282 mg/dl, respectively, of isopropyl alcohol were measured. Concentrations of acetone rose steadily over the 4 h period and were 74 and 73 mg/dl
CIR Panel Book Page 125
71
following exposure to 2 or 4 ml/kg, respectively. The authors stated that the maximum levels of isopropyl alcohol observed in this experiment, correlated with inebriation and near coma in the animals. Following inhalation and dermal exposure, the concentration of isopropyl alcohol in the blood continued to rise and was 112 mg/dl at 4 h while the concentration of acetone was 19 at 4 h. Inhalation exposure with a plastic barrier between the soaked towel and the chest resulted in isopropyl alcohol and acetone blood levels of <10 mg/dl. The researchers concluded that isopropyl alcohol is absorbed by the dermal route but that prolonged dermal exposure (i.e. repeated sponging or soaking for several hours) would be required to produce significant toxicity. From CIR final report on Methyl Acetate181
Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity Fischer 344 rats and CD-1 mice (10/sex/group) were exposed via inhalation to 0, 100, 500, 1500, or 5000 ppm (0, 246, 1230, 3690, or 12,300 mg/m3) isopropyl alcohol for 6 h/day, 5 days/wk for 13 weeks.193 Ataxia, narcosis, hypoactivity and the lack of a startle reflex were observed during exposure at 5000 ppm. Hypoactivity was observed in animals exposed to 1500 ppm isopropyl alcohol. At 13 weeks, no gross lesions were observed. Microscopic examination of control and 5000 ppm exposed animal tissues showed hyaline droplets within the kidneys of male rats only. The size and frequency of the droplets was increased in the treated group. The authors concluded that the NOAEL for this study was 500 ppm and the lowest-observable adverse effect level (LOAEL) was 1500 ppm based upon clinical signs and changes in hematology at 6 weeks. To evaluate the neurobehavioral effects of isopropanol exposure, an additional 15 rats/sex were exposed (via inhalation) to 0, 500, 1500, or 5000 ppm (0, 1230, 3690, or 12,300 mg/m3) for 6 h/day, 5 days/wk for 13 weeks. Isopropyl alcohol did not produce any changes to the parameters of the functional observations battery which was conducted at 1, 2, 4, 9 and 13 weeks. Clinical signs observed in mice, during the exposure, included ataxia, narcosis, hypoactivity and lack of a startle reflex at 5000 ppm. Narcosis, ataxia and hypoactivity were observed in animals exposed to 1500 ppm isopropyl alcohol. At 5000 ppm, increased body weight and increased rate of weight gain were observed in female mice. At 13 weeks, no gross lesions were observed and no treatment-related microscopic changes were observed. A 10% and 21% increase in relative liver weight was observed in female mice at 1500 and 5000 ppm, respectively. The authors concluded that the NOAEL for this study was 500 ppm and the LOAEL was 1500 ppm based on clinical signs and increased liver weights. Ocular Irritation
Isopropyl alcohol has been labeled a severe ocular irritant based on rabbit ocular irritation tests.194 From CIR final report on Methyl Acetate181
Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity
Female Sprague-Dawley rats (25/group) were exposed to 0, 400, 800, or 1200 mg/kg/day isopropyl alcohol via gavage on gestational days (GD) 6 through 15.195 Female New Zealand white rabbits (15/group) were exposed to 0, 120, 240, or 480 mg/kg/day isopropyl alcohol via gavage on GD 6 through 18. Animals were observed for body weight, clinical effects and feed consumption and the fetuses examined for body weight, sex and visceral and skeletal alterations at GD 20 for rats and GD 30 for rabbits. In rats, 2 dams died at the 1200 mg/kg dose and 1 dam died at the 800 mg/kg dose. Maternal gestational weight gain was reduced at the highest dose tested. No other effects were observed on maternal reproductive health. Fetal body weights at the two highest doses were decreased statistically. No evidence of teratogenicity was observed at any dose. In rabbits, four does died at the 480 mg/kg dose. Treatment related clinical signs of toxicity were observed at the 480 mg/kg dose and included, cyanosis, lethargy, labored respiration and diarrhea. No treatment related findings were observed at GD 30. Decreased feed consumption and maternal body weights, at 480 mg/kg, were statistically significant. No other effects were observed on maternal reproductive health. No evidence of teratogenicity was observed in the rabbits at any dose. The authors determined NOAEL’s for both maternal and developmental toxicity of 400 mg/kg, each, in rats and 240 and 480 mg/kg, respectively, in rabbits. From CIR final report on Methyl Acetate181
Carcinogenicity
Fischer 344 rats and CD-1 mice (65/rats/sex/group; 55/mice/sex/group) were treated via inhalation with 0, 500, 2500, or 5000 ppm (0, 1230, 6150, or 12,300 mg/m3) isopropyl alcohol for 6 h/day, 5 days/wk for 104 weeks in rats and 78 weeks in mice.193 An additional 10/animals/sex/species were treated with these same concentrations of isopropyl alcohol for 6 h/day, 5 days/wk for 72 weeks in rats and 54 weeks in mice and underwent an interim evaluation. Another 10 mice/sex/group were treated according to the paradigm described above for 54 weeks and then allowed to recover before being killed at 78 weeks. Animals were observed and evaluated for body and organ weights, ophthalmology, and clinical and anatomic pathology. In rats, increased mortality due to chronic renal disease was observed at 5000 ppm (both sexes) and at 2500 ppm (males only). Hypoactivity and lack of startle reflex were observed in 2500 ppm treated rats and hypoactivity, lack of startle
CIR Panel Book Page 126
72
reflex and narcosis were observed in 5000 ppm treated rats. With the exception of the ataxia, the clinical signs were transient and ceased when the exposure ended. Increases in body weight, body weight gain, and liver weights were observed in 2500 and 5000 ppm treated rats. Chronic renal disease was exacerbated in rats treated with isopropyl alcohol. Male rats had a concentration related increase in absolute and relative testes weights. At the interim euthanasia (after 72 weeks) male rats treated with 5000 ppm had an increased frequency of testicular seminiferous tubule atrophy upon microscopic evaluation. At the terminal euthanasia (104 weeks), male rats had a concentration dependent increase in the incidence of interstitial (Leydig) cell adenomas of the testes at all administered doses. No other tumor types were increased in rats under these treatment conditions as compared to controls. In mice, no differences in mortality were observed between control and treated animals. Hypoactivity, lack of a startle reflex, narcosis, ataxia, and prostration were observed in 5000 ppm treated mice. Hypoactivity, lack of startle reflex and narcosis were observed in 2500 ppm treated mice. Increases in body weight, body weight gain, and liver weights were observed in 2500 and 5000 ppm treated mice. Male mice in all treatment groups had a decrease in relative testes weights, and female mice exposed to 5000 ppm isopropyl alcohol exhibited decreases in absolute and relative brain weights. At the terminal euthanasia (78 weeks) an increased incidence of minimal to mild renal tubular proteinosis was observed in males and females in all treatment groups. Male mice exposed to 2500 and 5000 ppm exhibited an increased incidence of dilation of the seminal vesicles. No neoplastic lesions were observed in male or female mice. The authors reported a NOAEL for toxic effects of 500 ppm for both rats and mice based on kidney and testicular effects.
IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) has determined that isopropyl alcohol is not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans (Group 3). From the CIR final report on Methyl Acetate181
Clinical Irritation and Sensitization
According to unpublished data, a 80.74% spray concentrate caused did not exhibit any potential for dermal sensitization in 9 human subjects.196 According to unpublished HRIPT study on 109 test subjects, a 2.85% hair dye base formulation of isopropyl alcohol and a 1.95% isopropyl acetate caused no dermal sensitization in humans.197 The applicability of fluorescence confocal laser scanning microscopy for in situ imaging of irritant contact dermatitis caused by pelargonic acid using 12 healthy individuals (8 males, 4 males; 18 to 64 years old) was studied.198 Using Finn chambers (occlusive patches), the flexor side of the right and left forearm was exposed to 60 µl of 10% (w/v) pelargonic acid in isopropanol solution and isopropanol vehicle. Isopropanol was used as a control. The Finn chambers were removed at 24 h post-application and reactions were scored according to the following scale: 0 (no visible reaction) to 4+ (intense erythema with bullous formation). Reactions were not observed at sites treated with isopropanol. From the CIR final report on Methyl Acetate181
Hexyl Alcohol – metabolite of Dihexyl Adipate Ocular Irritation Undiluted hexyl alcohol has been labeled as highly irritating on rabbit ocular irritation tests.199 Dermal Sensitization In a maximization test using guinea pigs, hexyl alcohol was not a sensitizer at 1% in petrolatum.199 Caprylic Alcohol – metabolite of Dicapryl Succinate, Dicapryl Adipate and Dicaprylyl/Capryl Sebacate Dermal Irritation – Animals Caprylic alcohol applied full strength to intact or abraded rabbit skin produced a mild irritation.177 Clinical Irritation and Sensitization Tested in at a concentration of 2% in petrolatum, caprylic alcohol produced no irritation in a 48 h closed-patch test in 25 human subjects.177
CIR Panel Book Page 127
73
Isobutyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisopropyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Sebacate Subchronic Inhalation Toxicity
Rats (10/sex/group) were exposed via inhalation to isobutyl alcohol vapor concentrations of approximately 0, 770, 3100, or 7700 mg/m3, for 6 h/day, 5 days/week, for 14 weeks.200 The functional observational battery was conducted along with endpoints of motor activity, neuropathology and scheduled-controlled operant behavior. A slight reduction in responsiveness to external stimuli was observed in all treated groups during exposure. This effect resolved upon cessation of exposure to isobutyl alcohol. From the CIR final report on Methyl Acetate181
Ethylhexyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diethylhexyl Succinate, Diethylhexyl Adipate and Diethylhexyl Sebacate Ocular Irritation Instillation of 20 µg of ethylhexyl alcohol into the conjunctival sac of rabbits caused moderately severe irritation of the cornea.199 Dermal Irritation – Animals Ethylhexyl alcohol was applied under occlusion to the skin of 3 male rabbits for 4 hours and found to be irritating.199 In another study with rabbits, 0.5 ml of ethylhexyl alcohol was applied under occlusion on intact skin for 1, 2, 4, and 24 hours. Irritation was considered high, and effects seen after 7 days were not reversible. Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity A group of female rats was exposed for 7 h per day to 850 mg/m3 of ethylhexyl alcohol on gestation days 1-19.199 Dams were sacrificed at day twenty. Ethylhexyl alcohol reduced maternal feed intake, but did not produce any malformations. The estrogenic activity of 2-ethylhexanoic acid was examined using an E-SCREEN assay using T47D human breast cancer cells.137 Weak estrogenic activity was observed. (Additional details were not provided.) Genotoxicity In vitro, ethylhexyl alcohol was negative in a number of Ames assays, a liquid suspension assay, mouse lymphoma assay, and unscheduled DNA synthesis assay.118,142,143,146,154 In a 3H-thymidine assay, there was a dose-dependent inhibition of 3H-thymi-dine into replicating DNA, with a dose-dependent increase in the ratio of acid-soluble DNA incorporated into the thymidine.143 The urine of rats dosed orally with 1000 mg/kg ethylhexyl alcohol was not mutagenic.153 In vivo, ethylhexyl alcohol was not genotoxic in a mouse micronucleus test or a transformation assay.154 MEHA, Mono-(2-Ethyl-5-Hydroxyhexyl)Adipate,Mono-(2-Ethyl-5-Oxohexyl)Adipate - metabolites of Diethylhexyl Adipate Genotoxicity MEHA was not mutagenic in an Ames assay at concentrations of ≤100084 or 10,000 µg/plate.142 Mono-2(ethyl-5- hydroxy-hexyl)adipate and mono-(2-ethyl-5-oxohexyl)adipate, were not mutagenic in an Ames assay at concentrations of ≤1000 µg/plate.84 Isooctyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisooctyl Adipate and Diisooctyl Sebacate Subchronic Oral Toxicity In a subchronic gavage toxicity study of a mixture of C7-9, branched alkyl alcohols in rats, a NOEL of 125 mg/kg/day and a lowest-observed effect level of 250 mg/kg/day were determined.118 Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity In an oral gavage developmental toxicity study of a mixture of C7-9, branched alkyl alcohols in rats, a maternal NOAEL of 500 mg/kg and a fetal NOAEL of 1000 mg/kg were reported.199 Genotoxicity A mixture of C7-9, branched alkyl alcohols were not mutagenic in in vitro bacterial and mammalian cell assays.199 Carcinogenicity
CIR Panel Book Page 128
74
Ethylhexyl alcohol was not oncogenic in rats dosed, via gavage, with 0, 50, 150, or 500 mg/kg, in an aqueous vehicle with 0.005% Cremophor EL.199 Nonyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisononyl Adipate Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity In an oral gavage developmental toxicity study of a mixture of C8-10, branched alkyl alcohols in rats, maternal and fetal NOAEL values were each reported to be 144 mg/kg. 199 Isodecyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisodecyl Adipate Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity In an oral gavage developmental toxicity study of a mixture of C9-11, branched alkyl alcohols in rats, a maternal NOAEL of 158 mg/kg and a fetal NOAEL of 790 mg/kg were reported. 199 Isostearyl Alcohol – metabolite of Diisostearyl Glutarate, Diisostearyl Adipate and Isostearyl Sebacate Clinical Irritation and Sensitization
The skin irritation potential of lsostearyl Alcohol was evaluated in 19 male and female subjects (18-65 years old) at a concentration of 25.0% in petrolatum. The test substance did not induce skin irritation in any of the subjects (Primary Irritation Index = 0.05). In three similar studies, three different lipstick products containing 25.0, 27.0, and 28.0% Isostearyl Alcohol, respectively, were tested according to the same protocol. The three products did not induce skin irritation. The irritation and sensitization potential of Isostearyl Alcohol (25% v/v in 95.0% isopropyl alcohol) was evaluated in 12 male subjects (21-60 years old). Challenge applications were made to original and adjacent sites 2 weeks after removal of the last induction patch. Three of 12 subjects had slight erythema during induction, and there was no evidence of sensitization. The sensitization potential of a pump spray antiperspirant containing 5.0% Isostearyl Alcohol was evaluated using 148 male and female subjects. The product was applied via an occlusive patch to the upper arm for a total of nine induction applications (3 times/week for 3 weeks). Each patch remained for 24 h, and sites were scored immediately before subsequent applications. During the challenge phase, a patch was applied to the induction site and to a new site on the opposite arm of each subject. Reactions were scored 48 and 96 h after application. Ten of the twelve subjects with reactions suggestive of sensitization were re-challenged with the product 2 months later. Patches remained for 24 h, and sites were scored at 48 and 96 h post-application. Six subjects had reactions during the re-challenge. Four of the six subjects were then tested with 5.0% Isostearyl Alcohol in solution with ethanol 6 weeks after scoring of the first rechallenge; all had positive responses. Negative responses were reported when the product (without lsostearyl Alcohol) and 100.0% ethanol each were tested. In a second study, the same product was applied to 60 male and female subjects (same protocol). Five of the subjects had positive responses after the first challenge. One of the five was re-challenged with 5.0% Isostearyl Alcohol in ethanol solution, and a positive reaction was observed. From the CIR final report on Isostearyl Alcohol191
Isopropanol Comedogencity An LDLo of 2-4 ml/kg of isopropyl alcohol has been reported in adults and 6 ml/kg (9 ml/kg 70% isopropyl alcohol) was reported to induce coma in children.
CIR Panel Book Page 129
Figure 1. Map of the ester ingredients in this assessment, and associated esterase metabolites.
CIR Panel Book Page 130
Figure 1. Map of the ester ingredients in this assessment, and associated esterase metabolites.
Adipic Acid
O
HO
HO CH3Methyl alcohol
HO CH3
Ethyl alcohol
Caprylic alcoholCH3HO
CH3OH Cetyl alcohol
OH
O
O
O O
OCH3H3C
Dimethyl Adipate
O
O O
ODiethyl Adipate
HO
Propyl alcohol
O
O O
ODipropyl Adipate
CH3
CH3H3C
H3C CH3
HOButyl alcohol
O
O O
ODibutyl AdipateCH3
H3C CH3
HOHexyl alcohol
O
O O
O(CH2)5CH3CH3(CH2)5
Dihexyl AdipateCH3
O
O O
O(CH2)7CH3CH3(CH2)7
Dicapryl Adipate
O
O O
O(CH2)15CH3CH3(CH2)15
Dicetyl Adipate
Lauryl alcoholHO
O
O O
O(CH2)nCH3CH3(CH2)n
Di-C12-15 Alkyl AdipateCH3
Tridecyl alcoholHO CH3
Myristyl alcoholHO CH3
HO CH3Heptadecyl alcohol
O
O O
O(CH2)12CH3CH3(CH2)12
Ditridecyl Adipate
n = 11-14
Methyl Adipate*
Ethyl Adipate*
Propyl Adipate*
Butyl Adipate*
Hexyl Adipate*
Caprylic Adipate*
C12-15 Alkyl Adipate*
Tridecyl Adipate*
Cetyl Adipate*
O
O OH
O
H3C
O
O OH
OH3C
O
O OH
O
H3C
O
O OH
OH3C
O
O OH
O
CH3(CH2)5
O
O OH
O
CH3(CH2)7
O
O OH
O
CH3(CH2)n n = 11-14
O
O OH
O
CH3(CH2)12
O
O OH
O
CH3(CH2)15
*
CIR Panel Book Page 131
Figure 1. Map of the ester ingredients in this assessment, and associated esterase metabolites.
H3C
CH3OH
Isobutyl alcohol *
Ethylhexyl alcohol
OH
H3C
H3C
O
O O
O
H3C
CH3CH3
CH3
Diisobutyl Adipate
H3C OH
CH3Isopropyl alcohol
O
O O
OH3C CH3
Diisopropyl AdipateCH3
CH3
O
O O
O
CH3(CH2)3(CH2)3CH3
Diethylhexyl Adipate (DEHA)H3C
CH3
Adipic Acid
O
HO OH
O
O
OO
O(CH2)5(CH2)5
H3C
H3C CH3
CH3
Diisooctyl AdipateIsooctanol
H3C OH
O
OO
O(CH2)6(CH2)6
H3C
H3C CH3
CH3
Diisononyl AdipateIsononyl alcohol *
OHH3C
CH3
O
OO
O(CH2)7(CH2)7
H3C
H3C CH3
CH3
Diisodecyl Adipate
H3C OH
CH3
CH3
Isodecyl alcohol *
O
OO
O (CH2)7CH3CH3(CH2)7
CH3(CH2)4
(CH2)4CH3
H3C OHH3C
Hexyldecanol Dihexyldecyl Adipate
O
OO
O (CH2)8CH3CH3(CH2)8
CH3(CH2)5
(CH2)5CH3
Diheptylundecyl AdipateHeptylundecanol
H3C OHH3C
O
OO
O (CH2)9CH3CH3(CH2)9
CH3(CH2)6
(CH2)6CH3
Dioctyldodecyl AdipateOctyldodecanolH3C OH
H3C
O
OO
O(CH2)13(CH2)13
H3C
H3C CH3
CH3
Diisocetyl Adipate
CH3OH Isocetyl alcohol
O
OO
O(CH2)15(CH2)15
H3C
H3C CH3
CH3
Diisostearyl Adipate
OHIsostearyl alcohol
CH3
Isopropyl Adipate*
Isobutyl Adipate*
monoester
*
Isooctyl Adipate*
Isononyl Adipate*
Isodecyl Adipate*
Hexyldecyl Adipate*
Heptylundecyl Adipate*
Octyldodecyl Adipate*
Isocetyl Adipate*
Isostearyl Adipate*
(Branched esters)
O
O OH
OH3C
CH3
O
O OH
O
H3C
CH3
O
O OH
O
CH3(CH2)3
H3CEthylhexyl Adipate
O
OO
OH(CH2)5H3C
H3C
*
O
OO
OH(CH2)6H3C
H3C
O
OO
OH(CH2)7H3C
H3C
O
OO
OHCH3(CH2)7
CH3(CH2)4
O
OO
OHCH3(CH2)8
CH3(CH2)5
O
OO
OHCH3(CH2)9
CH3(CH2)6
O
OO
OH(CH2)13H3C
H3C
O
OO
OH(CH2)15H3C
H3C
CH3
CH3
CIR Panel Book Page 132
Figure 1. Map of the ester ingredients in this assessment, and associated esterase metabolites.
HO CH3
Ethyl alcohol
Decyl alcoholCH3HO
HOButyl alcohol
CH3
HO
Caprylic alcohol
O
HO OH
OSebacic Acid
O
OO
OH3C CH3
O
OO
OCH3(CH2)3(CH2)3CH3
O
OO
OCH3(CH2)n(CH2)nCH3
O
HOO
O (CH2)15
CH3
CH3
O
OO
OH3C CH3CH3
CH3
O
OO
OCH3(CH2)3(CH2)3CH3
CH3
H3C
O
OO
OCH3(CH2)5(CH2)5CH3
(CH2)2CH3
CH3(CH2)2
O
OO
O (CH2)5
CH3
CH3(CH2)5
H3C
H3C
O
OO
OCH3(CH2)7(CH2)7CH3
(CH2)4CH3
CH3(CH2)4
O
OO
OCH3(CH2)9(CH2)9CH3
(CH2)6CH3
CH3(CH2)6
O
OO
O (CH2)15
CH3
CH3(CH2)15
H3C
H3C
Ethyl Sebacate*
Butyl Sebacate*
Caprylyl/Capryl Sebacate*
Diethyl Sebacate
Dibutyl Sebacate
n = 7 or 9
Dicaprylyl/Capryl Sebacate
Isostearyl Sebacate
Isopropyl Sebacate*
Ethylhexyl Sebacate*
Butyloctyl Sebacate*
Isooctyl Sebacate*
Hexyldecyl Sebacate*
Octyldodecyl Sebacate*
H3C OH
CH3Isopropyl alcohol
CH3
Ethylhexyl alcohol *
OH
H3C
H3C
H3C OH
H3C
Butyloctanol
H3C OHCH3
Isooctanol
H3C OHH3C
Hexyldecanol
OctyldodecanolH3C OH
H3C
H3C O H
CH3 Isostearyl alcohol
Diisopropyl Sebacate
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
Dibutyloctyl Sebacate
Diisooctyl Sebacate
Dihexyldecyl Sebacate
Dioctyldodecyl Sebacate
Diisostearyl Sebacate
O
OO
OHH3C
O
OO
OHCH3(CH2)3
O
OO
OHCH3(CH2)n
O
OO
OHH3C
CH3
O
OO
OHCH3(CH2)3
H3C
O
OO
OHCH3(CH2)5
CH3(CH2)2
O
OO
OH(CH2)5H3C
H3C
+
O
OO
OHCH3(CH2)7
CH3(CH2)4+
O
OO
OHCH3(CH2)9
CH3(CH2)6+
n = 7 or 9
CIR Panel Book Page 133
Table 1. Definitions, functions and structures of dicarboxylic acid, salt and ester ingredients in this safety assessment.
Ingredient CAS No.
Definition Function(s) Formula/structure
Dicarboxylic Acids and Metal Salts Malonic Acid 141-82-2
Malonic Acid is a three carbon, straight-chain alkyl dicarboxylic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; pH Adjusters
Succinic Acid 110-15-6
Succinic Acid is a four carbon, straight-chain alkyl dicarboxylic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; pH Adjusters
O
HOO
OH
Sodium Succinate 2922-54-5
Sodium Succinate is the monosodium salt of succinic acid.
Buffering Agents; pH Adjusters
Disodium Succinate 150-90-3
Disodium Succinate is the disodium salt of succinic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; Not Reported
Glutaric Acid 110-94-1
Glutaric Acid is a five carbon, straight-chain alkyl dicarboxylic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; pH Adjusters
Adipic Acid 124-04-9
Adipic Acid is a six carbon, straight-chain alkyl dicarboxylic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; pH Adjusters
Azelaic Acid 123-99-9
Azelaic Acid is an eight carbon, straight-chain alkyl dicarboxylic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; pH Adjusters
Disodium Azelate 17265-13-3
Disodium Azelate is the disodium salt of azelaic acid.
Not Reported
Dipotassium Azelate 19619-43-3
Dipotassium Azelate is the dipotassium salt of azelaic acid.
Not Reported
Sebacic Acid 111-20-6
Sebacic Acid is a ten carbon, straight-chain alkyl dicarboxylic acid.
pH Adjusters
Disodium Sebacate 17265-14-4
Disodium Sebacate is the disodium salt of sebacic acid.
Not Reported
Dodecanedioic Acid 693-23-2
Dodecanedioic Acid is a twelve carbon, straight-chain alkyl dicarboxylic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Miscellaneous
Malonic Diester Ingredient Diethyl Malonate 105-53-3
Diethyl Malonate is the diester of ethanol and malonic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients
Succinic Ester Ingredients Monoester Decyl Succinate 54482-22-3 (wrong CAS No. 2530-33-8)
Decyl Succinate is the monoester of decyl alcohol and succinic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient
Diesters Dimethyl Succinate 106-65-0
Dimethyl Succinate is the diester of methyl alcohol and succinic acid.
Nail Polish and Enamel Removers
Diethyl Succinate 123-25-1
Diethyl Succinate is the diester of ethyl alcohol and succinic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; Plasticizers; Solvents
CIR Panel Book Page 139
Table 1. Definitions, functions and structures of dicarboxylic acid, salt and ester ingredients in this safety assessment.
Ingredient CAS No.
Definition Function(s) Formula/structure
Dicapryl Succinate 14491-66-8
Dicapryl Succinate is the diester of caprylic alcohol and succinic acid.
Film Formers; Hair Conditioning Agents; Nail Conditioning Agents; Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient
Dicetearyl Succinate 93280-98-9
Dicetearyl Succinate is the diester of cetearyl alcohol and succinic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Miscellaneous wherein n=15 or 17
Branched Diisobutyl Succinate 925-06-4
Diisobutyl Succinate is the diester of isobutyl alcohol and succinic acid.
Plasticizers
Diethylhexyl Succinate 2915-57-3
Diethylhexyl Succinate is the diester of 2-ethylhexyl alcohol and succinic acid.
Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Glutaric Ester Ingredients Dimethyl Glutarate 1119-40-0
Dimethyl Glutarate is the diester of methyl alcohol and glutaric acid.
Nail Polish and Enamel Removers
Branched Diisobutyl Glutarate 71195-64-7
Diisobutyl Glutarate is the diester of isobutyl alcohol and glutaric acid.
Plasticizers
Diisostearyl Glutarate No CAS No.
Diisostearyl Glutarate is the diester of isostearyl alcohol and glutaric acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient
One example of an “iso”
Adipic Ester Ingredients Dimethyl Adipate 627-93-0
Dimethyl Adipate is the diester of methyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Diethyl Adipate 141-28-6
Diethyl Adipate is the diester of ethyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient
Dipropyl Adipate 106-19-4
Dipropyl Adipate is the diester of propyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Dibutyl Adipate 105-99-7
Dibutyl Adipate is the diester of butyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Nail Polish and Enamels; Suntan Gels, Creams, and Liquids
Dihexyl Adipate 110-33-8
Dihexyl Adipate is the diester of hexyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
CIR Panel Book Page 140
Table 1. Definitions, functions and structures of dicarboxylic acid, salt and ester ingredients in this safety assessment.
Ingredient CAS No.
Definition Function(s) Formula/structure
Dicapryl Adipate 105-97-5
Dicapryl Adipate is the diester of capryl alcohol and adipic acid.
Plasticizers
Di-C12-15 Alkyl Adipate No CAS No.
Di-C12-15 Alkyl Adipate is the diester of C12-15 alcohols and adipic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient wherein n=11, 12, 13 or 14
Ditridecyl Adipate 16958-92-2
Ditridecyl Adipate is the diester of tridecyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Dicetyl Adipate 26720-21-8
Dicetyl Adipate is the diester of cetyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient
Branched Diisopropyl Adipate 6938-94-9
Diisopropyl Adipate is the diester of isopropyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Diisobutyl Adipate 141-04-8
Diisobutyl Adipate is the diester of isobutyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Diethylhexyl Adipate 103-23-1
Diethylhexyl Adipate is the diester of a 2-ethylhexyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Diisooctyl Adipate 108-63-4
Diisooctyl Adipate is the diester of isooctyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
One example of an “iso”
Diisononyl Adipate 33703-08-1
Diisononyl Adipate is the diester of isononyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
One example of an “iso”
Diisodecyl Adipate 27178-16-1
Diisodecyl Adipate is the diester of isodecyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
One example of an “iso”
Dihexyldecyl Adipate 57533-90-1
Dihexyldecyl Adipate is the diester of hexyldecanol and adipic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Diheptylundecyl Adipate 155613-91-5
Diheptylundecyl Adipate is the diester of heptylundecanol and adipic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
CIR Panel Book Page 141
Table 1. Definitions, functions and structures of dicarboxylic acid, salt and ester ingredients in this safety assessment.
Ingredient CAS No.
Definition Function(s) Formula/structure
Dioctyldodecyl Adipate 85117-94-8
Dioctyldodecyl Adipate is the diester of octyldodecanol and adipic acid.
Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient
Diisocetyl Adipate 59686-69-0 sec: 58262-41-2
Diisocetyl Adipate is the diester of hexadecyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
One example of an “iso”
Diisostearyl Adipate 62479-36-1
Diisostearyl Adipate is the diester of isostearyl alcohol and adipic acid.
Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient
One example of an “iso”
Sebacic Ester Ingredients Diethyl Sebacate 110-40-7
Diethyl Sebacate is the diester of ethyl alcohol and sebacic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Dibutyl Sebacate 109-43-3
Dibutyl Sebacate is the diester of butyl alcohol and sebacic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Dicaprylyl/ Capryl Sebacate No CAS. No.
Dicaprylyl/Capryl Sebacate the diester of caprylic and capryl alcohol, and sebacic acid.
Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
wherein n=7 or 9
Branched Monoester Isostearyl Sebacate 478273-24-4
Isostearyl Sebacate is the monoester of isostearyl alcohol and sebacic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Miscellaneous
One example of an “iso”
Branched Disesters Diisopropyl Sebacate 7491-02-3
Diisopropyl Sebacate is the diester of isopropyl alcohol and sebacic acid.
Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Diethylhexyl Sebacate 122-62-3
Diethylhexyl Sebacate is the diester of 2-ethylhexyl alcohol and sebacic acid.
Fragrance Ingredients; Plasticizers; Solvents
Dibutyloctyl Sebacate 184706-97-6
Dibutyloctyl Sebacate is the diester of butyloctyl alcohol and sebacic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
CIR Panel Book Page 142
Table 1. Definitions, functions and structures of dicarboxylic acid, salt and ester ingredients in this safety assessment.
Ingredient CAS No.
Definition Function(s) Formula/structure
Diisooctyl Sebacate 10340-41-7
Diisooctyl Sebacate is the diester of isooctyl alcohol and sebacic acid.
Antioxidants; Plasticizers; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient
One example of an “iso”
Dihexyldecyl Sebacate 359073-59-9
Dihexyldecyl Sebacate is the diester of hexyldecyl alcohol and sebacic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Dioctyldodecyl Sebacate 69275-01-0
Dioctyldodecyl Sebacate is the diester of octyldodecanol and sebacic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Solvents
Diisostearyl Sebacate No CAS No.
Diisostearyl Sebacate is the diester of isostearyl alcohol and sebacic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient
One example of an “iso”
Dodecanoic Ester Ingredients Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate 129423-55-8
Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate is the diester of octyldodecanol and dodecanedioic acid.
Hair Conditioning Agents; Skin-Conditioning Agents - Miscellaneous
Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate 131252-83-0
Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate is the diester of octyldodecanol and dodecanedioic acid.
Skin-Conditioning Agents - Emollient; Surfactants - Emulsifying Agents
One example of an “iso”
CIR Panel Book Page 143
Table 2a. Physical and Chemical properties of the alkyl dicarboxylic acid and salt ingredients. INCI Name Malonic
Acid Succinic
Acid Sodium
Succinate Disodium Succinate
Glutaric Acid
Adipic Acid
Appearance small crystals
colorless prisms
crystalline crystalline large monoclinic
prisms
white, monoclinic
prisms
Molecular Weight (g/mol)
104.06 118.09 140.07 162.05 132.11 146.14
Melting/Boiling Point (°C)
135 (dec.)/ 264 (est.)
185-187/ 235
206 (est.)/ 486 (est.)
156 (est.)/ 426 (est.)
97.5-98/ 302-304
152/265
Density (g/cm3) 1.63 1.56 -- -- 1.429 1.360
Vapor pressure (mm Hg @ 25°C)
0.001 (est.) 0.0000002 7.3 E-10 (est.) 8.7 E-8 (est.)
0.000003 0.07
Solubility (g/L water @ 25°C)
1520 83 1000 (est.) 31 (est.) 639 30
Log Kow -0.81 -0.59 -3.98 (est.) -3.98 (est.) -0.29 0.08
INCI Name Azelaic Acid
Disodium Azelate
Dipotassium Azelate
Sebacic Acid
Disodium Sebacate
Dodecanedioic Acid
Appearance monoclinic prismatic needles
crystalline crystalline Monoclinic prismatic
tablets
crystalline --
Molecular Weight (g/mol)
188.22 238.18 264.40 202.25 246.21 230.31
Melting/Boiling Point (°C)
106.5/ 286.5
186 (est.)/ 484 (est.)
186 (est.)/ 484 (est.)
134.5/ 294.5
194/496 (est.)
128/383 (est.)
Density (g/cm3) 1.0291 -- -- 1.207 -- 1.16
Vapor pressure (mm Hg @ 25°C)
0.00002 (est.)
1.4 E-9 (est.)
1.4 E-9 (est.) 0.000007 (est.)
5.9 E-10 (est.)
0.000002 (est.)
Solubility (g/L water @ 20°C)
2.4 1000 (est.) 1000 (est.) 1.0 1000 (est.) 0.040
Log Kow 1.57 -3.56 (est.) -3.56 (est.) 2.19 (est.) -3.01 (est.) 3.17 (est.)
CIR Panel Book Page 144
Table 2b. Physical and Chemical properties of the mono- and di-carboxylic acid esters. INCI Name Diethyl
Malonate Decyl
Succinate Dimethyl Succinate
Diethyl Succinate
Dicapryl Succinate
Dicetearyl Succinate
Diisobutyl Succinate
Appearance colorless liquid
-- -- liquid -- -- liquid
Molecular Weight (g/mol)
160.17 258.35 146.14 174.19 342.51 566-623 230.30
Melting/Boiling Point (°C)
-50/ 198-199
96/377 (est.)
19.5/196.1 -21.3/217.7 14 (est.)/ 375 (est.)
--/-- -48 (est.)/ 216
Density (g/cm3) 1.055 1.002 (est.)
1.1 1.04 0.94 (est.) -- 0.967
Vapor pressure (mm Hg @ 25°C)
0.269 0.000001 (est.)
0.4 (est.) 0.126 0.000008 (est.)
-- 0.019 (est.)
Solubility (g/L water @ 25°C)
20 20 (est.) 50 (est.) 10 (est.) 0.0015 (est.)
-- 0.60 (est.)
Log Kow 0.96 4.57 (est.) 0.26 (est.) 1.28 (est.) 7.39 (est.) -- 3.00 (est.) INCI Name Diethylhexyl
Succinate Dimethyl Glutarate
Diisobutyl Glutarate
Diisostearyl Glutarate
Dimethyl Adipate
Diethyl Adipate
Dipropyl Adipate
Appearance -- liquid -- -- -- -- --
Molecular Weight (g/mol)
342.51 160.17 244.33 637.07 174.19 202.25 230.30
Melting/Boiling Point (°C)
-12 (est.)/ 359 (est.)
-42.5/ 214.2
-38 (est.)/ 237
212 (est.)/ 600 (est.)
210/229 (est.)
24-26/ 248-249
-15.7/ 274 (est.)
Density (g/cm3) 0.933 1.0876 0.97 (est.) -- 1.062 1.08 0.98
Vapor pressure (mm Hg @ 25°C)
0.00002 0.185 (est.)
0.008 (est.)
7.8 E-13 (est.)
0.073 (est.)
0.027 (est.)
0.0055 (est.)
Solubility (g/L water @ 25°C)
0.002 (est.) 27 (est.) 0.29 (est.) 1.16 E-16 (est.)
14 (est.) 2.8 (est.)
0.62 (est.)
Log Kow 7.08 (est.) 0.57 (est.) 3.44 (est.) 17.5 (est.) 0.95 (est.)
1.97 (est.)
2.99 (est.)
CIR Panel Book Page 145
INCI Name Dibutyl Adipate
Dihexyl Adipate
Dicapryl Adipate
Di-C12-15 Alkyl Adipate
Ditridecyl Adipate
Dicetyl Adipate
Diisopropyl Adipate
Appearance -- liquid -- -- -- -- liquid
Molecular Weight (g/mol)
258.35 314.46 426.67 482-567 510.83 594.99 230.30
Melting/Boiling Point (°C)
37.5/300 (est.)
-8/351 (est.)
26.5-27.1/ 442 (est.)
--/-- 45.9/503 (est.)
56.5-57/ 559 (est.)
-1.1/253 (est.)
Density (g/cm3) 0.96 0.95 (est.)
0.92 (est.) -- 0.91 (est.) 0.897 (est.) 0.982 (est.)
Vapor pressure (mm Hg @ 25°C)
0.0011 (est.)
0.00004 (est.)
0.00000005 (est.)
-- 3.0 E-10
(est.) 1.5 E-12 (est.)
0.0192 (est.)
Solubility (g/L water @ 25°C)
0.14 (est.) 0.0082 (est.)
0.000041 (est.)
-- 0.0000011 (est.)
0.00000005 (est.)
0.78 (est.)
Log Kow 4.0 (est.) 6.0 (est.) 10.1 (est.) -- 13.8 (est.) 17 (est.) 2.68 (est.)
INCI Name Diisobutyl
Adipate Diethylhexyl
Adipate Diisooctyl Adipate
Diisononyl Adipate
Diisodecyl Adipate
Dihexyldecyl Adipate
Appearance liquid liquid -- -- -- --
Molecular Weight (g/mol)
258.35 370.57 370.57 398.62 426.67 594.99
Melting/Boiling Point (°C)
-20/278-280 -67.8/390 9 (est.)/ 382 (est.)
56 (est.)/ 230
51 (est.)/ 426 (est.)
181 (est.)/ 548 (est.)
Density (g/cm3) 0.95 0.925 0.93 (est.) -- -- 0.896 (est.)
Vapor pressure (mm Hg @ 25°C)
0.0036 (est.)
0.0000009 0.000004 (est.)
3.3 E-6 (est.)
1.9 E-6 (est.)
4.6 E-12 (est.)
Solubility (g/L water @ 25°C)
0.18 0.00078 0.00067 (est.)
4.0 E-5 (est.)
5.2 E-6 (est.)
0.00000006 (est.)
Log Kow 3.70 (est.) 6.11 7.77 (est.) 9.24 (est.) 10.1 (est.) 16.6 (est.)
CIR Panel Book Page 146
INCI Name Diheptylundecyl Adipate
Dioctyldodecyl Adipate
Diisocetyl Adipate
Diisostearyl Adipate
Diethyl Sebacate
Dibutyl Sebacate
Appearance -- -- -- -- liquid liquid
Molecular Weight (g/mol)
651.10 707.20 594.99 651.10 258.35 314.46
Melting/Boiling Point (°C)
229 (est.)/ 584 (est.)
267 (est.)/ 619 (est.)
181 (est.)/ 565 (est.)
229 (est.)/ 611 (est.)
5/298 -10/ 344-345
Density (g/cm3) 0.892 (est.) 0.888 (est.) 0.896 (est.)
-- 0.969 (est.)
0.94
Vapor pressure (mm Hg @ 25°C)
1.26 E-13 (est.) 3.17 E-15 (est.) 1.4 E-11 (est.)
2.4 E-13 (est.)
0.00054 (est.)
0.00004 (est.)
Solubility (g/L water @ 25°C)
9.8 E-9 (est.) 2.1 E-9 (est.) 4.0 E-12 (est.)
3.6 E-14 (est.)
0.15 (est.)
0.0085 (est.)
Log Kow 18.7 (est.) 20.9 (est.) 16.0 (est.) 17.9 (est.) 3.92 (est.)
5.96 (est.)
INCI Name Dicaprylyl/
capryl Sebacate
Isostearyl Sebacate
Diisopropyl Sebacate
Diethylhexyl Sebacate
Dibutyloctyl Sebacate
Diisooctyl Sebacate
Appearance -- -- -- -- -- --
Molecular Weight (g/mol)
426-482 454.73 286.41 426.67 538.89 426.67
Melting/Boiling Point (°C)
--/-- 215 (est.)/ 545 (est.)
-7 (est.)/ 308 (est.)
-48/436 (est.)
135 (est.)/ 510 (est.)
51 (est.)/ 428 (est.)
Density (g/cm3) -- 0.929 (est.) 0.953 (est.) 0.91 0.901 (est.) 0.916 (est.)
Vapor pressure (mm Hg @ 25°C)
-- 2.5 E-13 (est.)
0.0007 (est.)
8.7 E-8 (est.) 1.6 E-10 (est.) 1.6 E-7 (est.)
Solubility (g/L water @ 25°C)
-- 0.0013 (est.)
0.046 0.00006 (est.)
0.0000006 (est.)
0.00006 (est.)
Log Kow -- 11.2 (est.) 4.63 (est.) 9.72 (est.) 14.1 (est.) 9.72 (est.)
CIR Panel Book Page 147
Table 2b. Physical and Chemical properties of the mono- and di-carboxylic acid esters. (continued)
INCI Name Dihexyldecyl Sebacate
Dioctyldodecyl Sebacate
Diisostearyl Sebacate
Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate
Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate
Appearance -- -- -- -- --
Molecular Weight (g/mol)
651.10 763.31 707.20 791.36 679.15
Melting/Boiling Point (°C)
229 (est.)/ 584 (est.)
299 (est.)/ 652 (est.)
268 (est.)/ 568 (est.)
314 (est.)/ 668 (est.)
247 (est.)/ 635 (est.)
Density (g/cm3) 0.892 (est.) 0.885 (est.) -- 0.884 (est.) --
Vapor pressure (mm Hg @ 25°C)
1.3 E-13 (est.) 7.4 E-17 (est.) 4.8 E-15 (est.)
1.1 E-17 (est.) 3.6 E-14 (est.)
Solubility (g/L water @ 25°C)
0.0000001 (est.)
6.8 E-10 (est.) 3.2 E-16 (est.)
3.6 E-10 (est.) 3.4 E-15 (est.)
Log Kow 18.4 (est.) 22.6 (est.) 19.9 (est.) 23.7 (est.) 18.9 (est.)
“(est.)” = estimated value by EPI Suite “(dec.)” = some decomposition occured “--“ = Value not found “E-13” = divided by 1013
CIR Panel Book Page 148
24
Table 3a. Frequency and concentration of use by duration and exposure - Dicarboxylic Acids and Their Salts
2010 Uses (VCRP)
2010 Conc. of Use (%) (Council)
2010 Uses (VCRP)
2010 Conc. of Use (%) (Council)
2010 Uses (VCRP)
2010 Conc. of Use (%) (Council)
Succinic Acid Sodium Succinate Disodium SuccinateTotals 4 0.001-26 7 NR 45 0.0005-0.4Duration of UseLeave-On 2 0.001-0.2 3 NR 38 0.005-0.4Rinse Off 2 0.001-26 4 NR 7 0.0005Exposure TypeEye Area NR NR NR NR 4 NRPossible Ingestion NR NR NR NR NR NRInhalation NR NR NR NR NR NRDermal Contact 2 0.01-26 5 NR 40 0.0005-0.4Deodorant (Underarm) NR NR NR NR NR NRHair, Non-Coloring 2 0.001-0.2 2 NR 5 NRHair, Coloring NR NR NR NR NR NRNail NR NR NR NR NR NRMucous Membrane NR 0.2 1 NR NR NRBath Products NR 26 1 NR NR NRBaby Products NR NR NR NR NR NR
Adipic Acid Azelaic Acid Sebacic AcidTotals 25 0.000001-18 9 0.007-10 12 0.0009-1Duration of UseLeave-On 2 0.000001 7 0.007-0.3 9 0.0009-0.03Rinse Off 23 0.5-18 2 10 3 0.001-1Exposure TypeEye Area NR 0.000001 NR NR NR NRPossible Ingestion NR 0.000001 NR NR NR NRInhalation NR NR NR NR NR NRDermal Contact 1 0.000001-18 25 0.007-10 12 0.0009-1Deodorant (Underarm) NR NR NR NR NR 0.0009H i N C l iHair, Non-Coloring 24 0 50.5 NRNR NRNR NRNR NRNRHair, Coloring NR NR NR NR NR NRNail NR NR NR NR NR NRMucous Membrane - NR NR NR 1 0.04Bath Products 1 15-18 NR NR NR NRBaby Products NR NR NR NR NR NR
CIR Panel Book Page 149
Dio
ctyl
dode
cyl A
dipa
te
Dim
ethy
l Adi
pate
1N
R38
NR
220
001
31
NR
NR
63
NR
Tab
le 3
b. F
requ
ency
and
con
cent
ratio
n of
use
by
dura
tion
and
expo
sure
- E
ster
s of D
icar
boxy
lic A
cids
2010
U(V
CR
ses
P)
2010
CU
se(C
ou
onc.
of
(%)
ncil)
2010
Use
s (V
CRP
)
2010
Con
c. o
fU
se (%
) (C
ounc
il)
20
10 U
ses
(VC
RP)
20
10 C
of U
se
(Cou
nonc.
(%
) ci
l)20
10 U
(VC
Rse
s P)
2010
U
s(C
oCon
c. o
f e
(%)
unci
l)20
10 U
ses
(VC
RP)
2010
Con
c. o
f U
se (%
) (C
ounc
il)20
10 U
ses
(VC
RP)
2010
Con
c.
of U
se (%
) (C
ounc
il)D
ieth
yl M
alon
aD
imet
hyl S
teuc
cina
teD
ieth
Dic
apry
l Suc
cina
teyl
hexy
l Suc
cina
teD
imet
hyl G
luta
rate
Tot
als
NR
0.00
4-0.
0212
0.00
2-5
12 N
R38
0.02
-613
0.5-
1512
0.2
Dur
atio
n of
Use
Leav
e-O
nN
R0.
02N
R0.
002
9N
R34
0.02
-6N
RN
RN
RN
RRi
nse
Off
NR
0.00
4-0.
0112
0.2-
5N
RN
R4
3-5
130.
5-15
120.
2E
xpos
ure
Type
Eye
Are
aN
RN
RN
R0.
002
NR
NR
1N
RN
RN
RN
RN
RPo
ssib
le In
gest
ion
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
3N
RN
RN
RN
RIn
hala
tion
NR
NR
NR
NR
1N
RN
R1
NR
NR
NR
NR
Der
mal
Con
tact
NR
0.00
4-0.
02N
R0.
002-
58
NR
341-
6N
R15
NR
NR
Deo
dora
nt (U
nder
arm
)N
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RH
air,
Non
-Col
orin
gN
RN
RN
RN
R1
NR
40.
02-5
NR
NR
NR
NR
Hai
r, C
olor
ing
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Nai
lN
RN
R12
0.2
NR
NR
NR
NR
130.
512
0.2
Muc
ous M
embr
ane
NR
NR
NR
NR
2N
R1
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Bat
h Pr
oduc
tsN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RB
aby
Prod
ucts
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Dih
exyl
Adi
pate
Diis
obu
Dic
apry
l Adi
pate
tyl A
dipa
teD
iisod
ecyl
Adi
pate
Dih
epty
lund
ecyl
Adi
pate
Tot
als
13
43N
R22
0.00
1-3
1N
RN
R6
3N
RD
urat
ion
of U
seLe
ave
On
Leav
e-O
n1
NR
38N
R22
000
1.
31
-N
RN
R6
3N
RRi
nse
Off
NR
35
NR
NR
0.00
2-0.
5N
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RE
xpos
ure
Type
Eye
Are
aN
R3
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Poss
ible
Inge
stio
nN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R3
NR
Inha
latio
nN
RN
R1
NR
50.
05-3
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Der
mal
Con
tact
13
43N
R8
0.00
2-3
1N
RN
R6
3N
RD
eodo
rant
(Und
erar
m)
NR
NR
30N
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RH
air,
Non
-Col
orin
gN
RN
RN
RN
R5
0.05
-0.2
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Hai
r, C
olor
ing
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Nai
lN
RN
RN
RN
R9
0.00
1-0.
7N
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RM
ucou
s Mem
bran
eN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R0.
009
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Bat
h Pr
oduc
tsN
RN
R5
NR
NR
0.5
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Bab
y Pr
oduc
tsN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R
CIR Panel Book Page 150
Diis
ooct
yl S
ebac
ate
Tab
le 3
b. F
requ
ency
and
con
cent
ratio
n of
use
by
dura
tion
and
expo
sure
- E
ster
s of D
icar
boxy
lic A
cids
(con
tinue
d)
2010
U(V
CR
ses
P)
2010
CU
se(C
ou
onc.
of
(%)
ncil)
2010
Use
s (V
CRP
)
2010
Con
c. o
fU
se (%
) (C
ounc
il)
20
10 U
ses
(VC
RP)
20
10 C
of U
se
(Cou
nonc.
(%
) ci
l)20
10 U
(VC
Rse
s P)
2010
U
s(C
oCon
c. o
f e
(%)
unci
l)20
10 U
ses
(VC
RP)
2010
Con
c. o
f U
se (%
) (C
ounc
il)20
10 U
ses
(VC
RP)
2010
Con
c.
of U
se (%
) (C
ounc
il)D
iisos
tear
yl A
diD
ieth
yl S
epa
teba
cate
Diis
Isos
tear
yl S
ebac
ate
opro
pyl S
ebac
ate
Die
thyl
hexy
l Seb
acat
eT
otal
s6
3-10
NR
1.5
NR
0.00
5-0.
730
0.06
-10
130.
5-5
NR
1-3
Dur
atio
n of
Use
Leav
e-O
n4
10N
R1.
5N
R0.
005-
0.7
290.
06-1
013
0.5-
5N
R1-
3Ri
nse
Off
23
NR
NR
NR
NR
12
NR
1N
RN
RE
xpos
ure
Type
Eye
Are
aN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R1
NR
4N
RN
RN
RPo
ssib
le In
gest
ion
410
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Inha
latio
nN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R1
NR
NR
1N
RN
RD
erm
al C
onta
ct6
3-10
NR
1.5
NR
0.00
5-0.
723
0.06
-10
110.
5-5
NR
1-3
Deo
dora
nt (U
nder
arm
)N
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R4
1N
R0.
5N
RN
RH
air,
Non
-Col
orin
gN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R6
82
NR
NR
NR
Hai
r, C
olor
ing
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Nai
lN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R1
0.08
NR
NR
NR
NR
Muc
ous M
embr
ane
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Bat
h Pr
oduc
tsN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RB
aby
Prod
ucts
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Dio
ctyl
dode
cyl S
ebac
ate
Dio
ctyl
doD
odec
ane
Diis
ocet
yl
decy
l di
oate
Dod
ecan
edio
ate
Tot
als
NR
3-8
56
20.
9-7
Dur
atio
n of
Use
Leav
e-O
nN
R3-
85
62
0.9-
7Ri
nse
Off
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Exp
osur
e Ty
peEy
e A
rea
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Poss
ible
Inge
stio
nN
R8
16
NR
NR
Inha
latio
nN
R3-
52
NR
NR
0.9-
3D
erm
al C
onta
ctN
R3-
85
62
0.9-
7D
eodo
rant
(Und
erar
m)
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Hai
r, N
on-C
olor
ing
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Hai
r, C
olor
ing
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Nai
lN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RM
ucou
s Mem
bran
eN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RB
ath
Prod
ucts
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Bab
y Pr
oduc
tsN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R
NR
- no
ne re
porte
d
CIR Panel Book Page 151
Tabl
e 3c
. C
urre
nt a
nd h
isto
rical
freq
uenc
y an
d co
ncen
tratio
n of
use
acc
ordi
ng to
dur
atio
n an
d ty
pe o
f exp
osur
e -
prev
ious
ly re
view
ed e
ster
s
# of
Use
sC
onc.
of U
se (%
)#
of U
ses
Con
c. o
f Use
(%)
# of
Use
sC
onc.
of U
se (%
)D
ibut
yl A
dipa
teD
iisop
ropy
l Adi
pate
Die
thyl
hexy
l Adi
pate
data
yea
r20
0220
1020
0220
1019
8120
1019
8120
1019
8120
1019
8120
10T
otal
sN
R6
5-8
NR
112
70≤0
.1-2
50.
005-
827
48≤0
.1-2
50.
6-14
Dur
atio
n of
Use
Leav
e-O
nN
R6
5-8
NR
9264
≤0.1
-25
0.00
5-8
2139
≤0.1
-10
0.9-
14Ri
nse
Off
NR
0N
RN
R20
6≤0
.1-2
62-
76
91-
250.
6Ex
posu
re T
ype
Eye
Are
aN
R2
NR
NR
22
1-25
1N
R3
NR
NR
Poss
ible
Inge
stio
nN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R1
NR
NR
51
1-5
NR
Inha
latio
nN
R2
NR
NR
4721
0.1-
250.
005-
86
51-
5N
RD
erm
al C
onta
ctN
R3
8N
R10
250
≤0.1
-25
0.00
5-8
2543
≤0.1
-25
0.6-
14D
eodo
rant
(und
erar
m)
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
6N
RN
R1
NR
0.1-
10.
9H
air -
Non
-Col
orin
gN
RN
RN
RN
R10
17≤0
.1-5
0.5-
3N
R1
NR
NR
Hai
r-C
olor
ing
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Nai
lN
R1
5N
RN
RN
RN
RN
R2
41-
52-
3M
ucou
s Mem
bran
eN
RN
RN
RN
R1
NR
0.1-
1N
RN
R1
NR
NR
Bat
h Pr
oduc
tsN
RN
RN
RN
R8
11-
252
4N
R10
-25
NR
Bab
y Pr
oduc
tsN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
RN
R1
NR
NR
NR
- no
t rep
orte
d to
the
VC
RP
or th
e C
ounc
il
CIR Panel Book Page 152
Table 3d. Ingredients not reported to be used Dicarboxylic Acids and Their Salts Malonic Acid Glutaric Acid Disodium Azelate Dipotassium Azelate Disodium Sebacate Dodecanedioic Acid Esters of Dicarboxylic Acids Decyl Succinate Diethyl Succinate Dicetearyl Succinate Diisobutyl Succinate Diisobutyl Glutarate Diisostearyl Glutarate Diethyl Glutarate Dipropyl Glutarate Di-C 12-15 Alkyl Adipate Ditridecyl Adipate Dicetyl Adipate Diisooctyl Adipate Diisononyl Adipate Dihexyldecyl Adipate Diisocetyl Adipate Dibutyl Sebacate Dicaprylyl/Capryl Sebacate Dibutyloctyl Sebacate Dihexyldecyl Sebacate Diisostearyl Sebacate
CIR Panel Book Page 153
Animals No./Gender/Group Dose median lethal dose/conc. Reference
Succinic Acidrats not specified not specified 2750 mg/kg EPA 2001rats not specified not specified 2260 mg/kg OECD 2003Sodium Succinaterats 4 males, 4 females 0.5-8 g/kg 8000 mg/kg Maekawa et al 1990Glutaric Acidrats not specified not specified 2260 mg/kg EPA 2001
mice 13 males 1500-2500 mg/kg of a 6% suspension in 0.5% methyl cellulose
1900 mg/kg OECD 2006
mice not specified not specified 4175 mg/kg OECD 2006mice not specified not specified 4200 mg/kg OECD 2006rats not specified not specified 5050 mg/kg EPA 2001rats 5 or 10 males 100-3000 mg/kg (n=5) or 5000 mg/kg (n=10) adipic
acid in 0.85% saline940 mg/kg OECD 2006
Wistar rats not specified not specified approx. 3600 mg/kg OECD 2006rats 10 males 5000 mg/kg of a 33.3% suspension in 0.85% saline >5000 mg/kg OECD 2006
rats 5 males, 5 females 14.7-10,000 mg/kg as a 14.7-50% suspension in carboxymethyl cellulose (CMC)
5560 mg/kg OECD 2006
rats not specified 10,000 mg/kg >10,000 mg/kg OECD 2006rat and rabbit not specified not specified >11,000 mg/kg OECD 2006rabbits not specified 2430 or 4860 mg/kg of a 20% partially neutralized
soln (75% sodium adipate)>2430 and <4860 mg/kg OECD 2006
Adipic/Glutaric/Succinic Mixture (percentages not given)rats not specified not specified 6829 mg/kg EPA 2001
Wistar rats 6 males 6 females 500-4000 mg/kg ≥4000 mg/kg Mingrone et al 1983New Zealand rabbits
6 males 6 females 500-4000 mg/kg ≥4000 mg/kg Mingrone et al 1983
Disodium Sebacate
Table 4. Acute toxicity - Dicarboxylic Acids and Their Salts
Adipic Acid
ORAL
Azelaic Acid
Wistar rats 4 males, 4 females 0-5000 mg/kg >5000 mg/kg Greco et al 1990New Zealand rabbits
4 males, 4 females 0-6000 mg/kg >6000 mg/kg Greco et al 1990
Dodecanedioic Acidrats m/f; no. not specified not specified >3000 mg/kg OECD 1994
rabbits not specified not specified >10,000 mg/kg EPA 2001Adipic Acidrabbits 1- 2/group; male and
female5010 (n=1) or 7940 mg/kg (n=2) 40% adipic acid in corn oil, with occlusion
>7940 mg/kg OECD 2006
Adipic/Glutaric/Succinic Mixture (percentages not given)rabbits not specified not specified >7940 mg/kg EPA 2001Dodecanedioic Acidalbino rabbits males; no. not specified not specified >6000 mg/kg OECD 1994
Adipic Acidrats 20/group; males and
females5.4 or 7.7 mg/l; head/nose-only exposure; MMAD50
<3.5 µm>7700 mg/m3 OECD 2004
Adipic/Glutaric/Succinic Mixture (percentages not given)rats not specified not specified >0.03 mg/l EPA 2001
Disodium Succinatemice not specified i.v. 4500 mg/kg OECD 2003Adipic Acidmouse not specified i.p., 0.681-50% solution in 0.5% CMC approx. 170 mg/kg OECD 2006
mouse not specified i.p., 600 and 900 mg/kg aq. 600 mg/kg OECD 2006mouse not specified i.p. admin 4000 mg/kg OECD 2006rats 7 males i.p., 200-350 mg/kg 275 mg/kg OECD 2006
PARENTERAL
INHALATION
Glutaric AcidDERMAL
CIR Panel Book Page 154
Animals No./Gender/Group Dose median lethal dose/conc. Reference
Table 4. Acute toxicity - Dicarboxylic Acids and Their Salts
mouse not specified i.v., 650-700 mg/kg 2% solution 680 mg/kg OECD 2006rabbit not specified i.v., 2430 mg/kg 20% soln, partially neutralized 2430 mg/kg OECD 2006
Disodium Azelaterats 6 males, 6 females i.p., 0-1198 mg/kg >1198 mg/kg Mingrone et al 1983rabbits 6 males, 6 females i.p., 0-1198 mg/kg >1198 mg/kg Mingrone et al 1983Disodium SebacateWistar rats 4 males, 4 females i.p., 0-7000 mg/kg 5500 mg/kg; dehydration and
ascites formation was notedGreco et al. 1990
New Zealand rabbits
4 males, 4 females i.p., 0-8000 mg/kg 6000 mg/kg; dehydration and ascites formation was noted
Greco et al 1990
Wistar rats 10 i.v. , 0-1000 mg/kg 560 mg/kg; dehydration and ascites formation was noted
Greco et al 1990
New Zealand rabbits
10 i.v., 0-1800 mg/kg 1400 mg/kg; dehydration and ascites formation was noted
Greco et al 1990
CIR Panel Book Page 155
Con
cent
ratio
nA
nim
als
Proc
edur
eR
esul
tsR
efer
ence
not s
peci
fied
not s
peci
fied
ocul
ar ir
ritat
ion
stud
y (d
etai
ls n
ot sp
ecifi
ed)
seve
re o
cula
r irri
tant
EPA
200
1
not s
peci
fied
not s
peci
fied
ocul
ar ir
ritat
ion
stud
y (d
etai
ls n
ot sp
ecifi
ed)
mod
erat
e oc
ular
irrit
ant
EPA
200
1A
dipi
c A
cid
undi
lute
d2
albi
no ra
bbits
10 o
r 57.
1 m
g pl
aced
in e
ye; e
ye o
f 1 a
nim
al ri
nsed
10 m
g: n
o irr
itatio
n in
rins
ed e
ye, m
inim
al in
unr
inse
d ey
e;
57.1
mg:
mild
to m
oder
ate
irrita
tion
in ri
nsed
and
unr
inse
d ey
es
EPA
200
1
undi
lute
d6
rabb
its; g
ende
r not
spec
ified
0.1
ml i
nstil
led
into
the
eye;
eye
s wer
e no
t rin
sed
seve
rely
irrit
atin
g - p
rimar
y irr
itatio
n in
dex
of 4
1.5/
110;
irr
itate
d co
njun
ctiv
a an
d sc
ar fo
rmat
ion,
incr
ease
d co
rnea
l op
acity
and
irid
al in
flam
mat
ion;
not
cle
ared
by
day
8
OEC
D 2
006
undi
lute
d3
rabb
its; g
ende
r not
spec
ified
100m
g in
still
ed fo
llow
ing
GLP
; acu
te e
ye
irrita
tion/
corr
osio
n te
stse
vere
irrit
atio
n; c
orne
al o
paci
ty a
nd ir
idal
irrit
atio
n; c
lear
ed
with
in 1
6 da
ysO
ECD
200
6
undi
lute
d2
rabb
its; g
ende
r not
spec
ified
50 m
g pl
aced
in e
ye; e
yes w
ere
not r
inse
dse
vere
ly ir
ritat
ing;
cor
neal
opa
city
still
pre
sent
at d
ay 8
OEC
D 2
006
Dod
ecan
edio
ic A
cid
not s
peci
fied
mal
e ra
bbits
, no.
not
spec
ified
ocul
ar ir
ritat
ion
stud
y (G
LP; d
etai
ls n
ot p
rovi
ded)
slig
ht ir
ritan
t; irr
itatio
n in
dex
11.9
6/11
0O
ECD
199
4no
t spe
cifie
dra
bbits
; no.
/gen
der n
ot sp
ecifi
edoc
ular
irrit
atio
n st
udy
(det
ails
not
pro
vide
d)sm
all a
rea
of c
orne
al o
paci
ty a
nd m
ild c
onju
nctiv
al ir
ritat
ion;
cl
eare
d w
ithin
7 d
ays
OEC
D 1
994
Tabl
e 5.
Ocu
lar I
rrita
tion
- Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
d an
d Th
eir E
ster
s
Succ
inic
Aci
d
Glu
tari
c A
cid
CIR Panel Book Page 156
Dos
e/C
onc.
.A
nim
als
Proc
edur
eR
esul
tsR
efer
ence
not s
peci
fied
rabb
its, n
o./g
ende
r not
spec
ified
irrita
tion
stud
ies (
deta
ils n
ot p
rovi
ded)
slig
ht to
mild
irrit
atio
nEP
A 2
001
Glu
tari
c A
cid
not s
peci
fied
rabb
its, n
o./g
ende
r not
spec
ified
irrita
tion
stud
ies (
deta
ils n
ot p
rovi
ded)
slig
ht ir
ritat
ion
EPA
200
1A
dipi
c A
cid
500
mg
of 5
0% a
q.6
rabb
itsoc
clus
ive
appl
icat
ion
to a
5 c
m x
5 c
m a
rea
of
abra
ded
or in
tact
skin
for 2
4 h
inta
ct sk
in: e
ryth
ema
(sco
re 2
-3/4
), cl
eare
dby
day
3; a
brad
ed sk
in:
mild
to se
vere
ery
them
a an
d ed
ema
(2/4
at 2
4 h;
0-2
at 7
2 h)
, cl
eare
d by
day
7
OEC
D 2
006
undi
lute
d or
80%
aq.
pas
te2
rabb
its/g
roup
occl
usiv
e ap
plic
atio
n to
inta
ct sk
in o
n th
e ba
ck a
nd
the
ear f
or 2
0 h
no ir
ritat
ion
on th
e ba
ck; e
ryth
ema
on th
e ea
r at 2
4 h
(sco
re o
f 2/4
), w
ith c
lear
ing
by 7
2 h
OEC
D 2
006
not s
peci
fied
rabb
its, n
o./g
ende
r not
spec
ified
occl
usiv
e ap
plic
atio
n fo
r 24
hno
t irri
tatin
gO
ECD
200
6
undi
lute
d or
50%
pas
te in
pr
opyl
ene
glyc
ol (P
G)
6 ra
bbits
sem
i-occ
lusi
ve a
pplic
atio
n of
500
mg
for 2
4 h
slig
ht to
mild
irrit
atio
n in
3/6
rabb
its w
ith 5
0%; n
o co
rrosi
on w
ith
undi
lute
d te
st m
ater
ial
OEC
D 2
006
50%
in P
G10
gui
nea
pigs
, gen
der n
ot sp
ecifi
edap
plie
d to
inta
ct sk
inno
irrit
atio
nO
ECD
200
6Su
ccin
ic/G
luta
ric/
Adi
pic
Aci
ds M
ixtu
re (p
erce
ntag
es n
ot sp
ecifi
ed)
not g
iven
guin
ea p
igs,
no./g
ende
r not
spec
ified
irrita
tion
stud
y (d
etai
ls n
ot p
rovi
ded)
no to
mild
irrit
atio
nO
ECD
200
4D
odec
aned
ioic
Aci
dno
t spe
cifie
dm
ale
rabb
its, n
o. n
ot sp
ecifi
edirr
itatio
n st
udy;
4 h
exp
osur
e (G
LP; d
etai
ls n
ot
prov
ided
)no
t an
irrita
nt; i
rrita
tion
inde
x 0/
8O
ECD
199
4
0.5
gm
ale
rabb
its, n
o. n
ot sp
ecifi
edFH
SA p
roce
dure
sno
t an
irrita
ntO
ECD
199
4
Succ
inic
Aci
d
Tabl
e 6.
Der
mal
irrit
atio
n an
d se
nsiti
zatio
n - D
icar
boxy
lic A
cids
and
The
ir Sa
lts
IRR
ITA
TIO
N
SEN
SIT
IZA
TIO
NA
dipi
c A
cid
indu
ctio
n: 0
.1 m
l of 1
.0%
aq.
so
ln; c
halle
nge:
0.0
5 m
l of 5
0 an
d 25
% in
PG
10 g
uine
a pi
gs/g
roup
indu
ctio
n: 4
sacr
al in
trade
rmal
inje
ctio
ns, 1
/wk;
ch
alle
nge:
der
mal
app
licat
ion
afte
r a 2
wk
rest
per
iod
very
mild
to n
o irr
itatio
n; n
o se
nsiti
zatio
n O
ECD
200
6
Succ
inic
/Glu
tari
c/A
dipi
c A
cids
Mix
ture
(per
cent
ages
not
spec
ified
)no
t giv
engu
inea
pig
s, no
./gen
der n
ot sp
ecifi
edse
nsiti
zatio
n st
udy
(det
ails
not
pro
vide
d)no
t a se
nsiti
zer
OEC
D 2
004
Dod
ecan
edio
ic A
cid
indu
ctio
n: 0
.5%
; cha
lleng
e: 2
5 an
d 50
%fe
mal
e gu
inea
pig
s, no
. not
spec
ified
Mag
nuss
on-K
ligm
an m
axim
izat
ion
test
(in
tracu
tane
ous a
dmin
at i
nduc
tion;
der
mal
adm
in a
t ch
alle
nge)
not a
sens
itize
rO
ECD
199
4
SEN
SIT
IZA
TIO
N
CIR Panel Book Page 157
Tabl
e 7.
Gen
otox
icity
stud
ies -
Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
ds a
nd T
heir
Salts
Con
cent
ratio
nV
ehic
lePr
oced
ure
Tes
t Sys
tem
Res
ults
Ref
eren
ce
Mal
onic
Aci
d≤3
333
µg/p
late
wat
erN
TP p
rein
cuba
tion
assa
y, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A100
, TA1
535,
TA9
7, T
A98
nega
tive
NTP
198
9 ID
: 228
078
Succ
inic
Aci
d≤5
mg/
plat
eph
osph
ate
buff
erA
mes
test
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A92
, TA
1535
, TA
100,
TA
1537
, TA
94, T
A98
nega
tive
Ishi
date
et a
l. 19
84
≤1.0
mg/
ml
salin
ech
rom
osom
al a
berr
atio
n as
say
Chi
nese
ham
ster
fibr
obla
sts c
ells
nega
tive
Ishi
date
et a
l. 19
84So
dium
Suc
cina
te≤1
0 µg
/pla
tedi
still
ed w
ater
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A97,
TA1
02ne
gativ
eTO
XN
ET 1
997
Dis
odiu
m S
ucci
nate
≤5 m
g/pl
ate
phos
phat
e bu
ffer
Am
es te
stS.
typh
imur
ium
TA9
2, T
A153
5, T
A100
, TA1
537,
TA9
4, T
A98
nega
tive
Ishi
date
et a
l. 19
84≤1
0,00
0 µg
/pla
tedi
still
ed w
ater
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A97
, TA
102
nega
tive
OEC
D 2
003
≤15.
0 m
g/m
lsa
line
chro
mos
omal
abe
rrat
ion
assa
yC
hine
se h
amst
er fi
brob
last
s cel
lseq
uivo
cal
Ishi
date
et a
l. 19
84G
luta
ric
Aci
dno
t spe
cifie
dno
t spe
cifie
dA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
, stra
ins n
ot sp
ecifi
edne
gativ
eB
radf
ord
1984
not s
peci
fied
not s
peci
fied
mou
se ly
mph
oma
assa
y, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
L517
8Y/T
K ±
cel
ls
depe
nden
t on
cultu
re p
HB
radf
ord
1984
not s
peci
fied
not s
peci
fied
trans
form
atio
n as
say,
+/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
n B
alb/
c-3T
3 ce
llspo
sitiv
e, +
/- ac
tivat
ion
Bra
dfor
d 19
84
≤10,
000
µg/p
late
wat
erN
TP p
rein
cuba
tion
assa
y, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A100
, TA1
535,
TA9
7, T
A98
nega
tive
NTP
198
9 ID
: 994
718
Adi
pic
Aci
d≤1
0,00
0 µg
/pla
teD
MSO
NTP
pre
incu
batio
n as
say,
+/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA1
00, T
A153
5, T
A97,
TA9
8ne
gativ
eN
TP 1
997
ID: A
8676
7
≤10
mg/
plat
eno
t spe
cifie
dA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA
1535
, TA
1537
, TA
1538
, TA
98, T
A10
0;
E.
coli
WP2
nega
tive
OEC
D 2
006
IN V
ITR
O
coli
WP2
≤5 m
g/pl
ate
not s
peci
fied
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A15
35, T
A15
37, T
A15
38, T
A98
, TA
100;
E.
co
li W
P2uv
rAne
gativ
eO
ECD
200
6
≤200
mg/
lno
t spe
cifie
dA
mes
test
, with
out m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A15
30, G
-46
nega
tive
OEC
D 2
006
≤200
mg/
lno
t spe
cifie
dye
ast g
ene
mut
atio
n as
say,
with
out m
etab
olic
ac
tivat
ion
S. c
erev
isia
e D
-3ne
gativ
eO
ECD
200
6
≤200
0 µg
/pla
teD
MSO
mou
se ly
mph
oma
assa
y, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
L517
8Y/T
K ±
cel
ls
nega
tive
TOX
NET
200
9≤2
00 m
g/l
not s
peci
fied
cyto
gene
tic a
ssay
, with
out m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
hum
an e
mbr
yoni
c lu
ng fi
brob
last
sne
gativ
eO
ECD
200
6≤1
000
µg/m
lno
t spe
cifie
dvi
ral e
nhan
ced
cell
trans
form
atio
n as
say
Syria
n ha
mst
er o
vary
cel
lsne
gativ
eO
ECD
200
6A
zela
ic A
cid
20%
crea
mA
mes
test
; no
deta
ilsno
t spe
cifie
dne
gativ
eA
llega
n 20
0420
%cr
eam
HG
RPT
test
; no
deta
ilsC
hine
se h
amst
er o
vary
cel
lsne
gativ
eA
llega
n 20
0420
%cr
eam
hum
an ly
mph
ocyt
e te
st, n
o de
tails
hum
an ly
mph
ocyt
esne
gativ
eA
llega
n 20
04Se
baci
c A
cid
≤500
0 µg
/pla
teD
MSO
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A15
35, T
A15
37, T
A15
38, T
A98
, TA
100;
E.
co
li W
P2ne
gativ
eTO
XN
ET 1
990
Dod
ecan
edio
ic A
cid
10-5
000
µg/p
late
not s
peci
fied
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A15
35, T
A15
37, T
A15
38, T
A98
, TA
100
nega
tive
OEC
D 1
994
CIR Panel Book Page 158
Tabl
e 7.
Gen
otox
icity
stud
ies -
Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
ds a
nd T
heir
Salts
Con
cent
ratio
nV
ehic
lePr
oced
ure
Tes
t Sys
tem
Res
ults
Ref
eren
ce
Glu
tari
c A
cid
not s
peci
fied
not s
peci
fied
mic
ronu
cleu
s ass
aym
ice
nega
tive
Bra
dfor
d 19
84A
dipi
c A
cid
≤375
mg/
kg; 1
or 5
dos
esno
t spe
cifie
dcy
toge
netic
ass
ay; a
nim
als d
osed
ora
lly b
y ga
vage
mal
e ra
tsne
gativ
eO
ECD
200
6
5000
mg/
kg (1
dos
e);
2500
mg/
kg (5
dos
es)
not s
peci
fied
cyto
gene
tic a
ssay
; ani
mal
s dos
ed o
rally
by
gava
gem
ale
rats
nega
tive
OEC
D 2
006
≤375
mg/
kg; 1
or 5
dos
esno
t spe
cifie
ddo
min
ant l
etha
l ass
ay; a
nim
als d
osed
ora
lly b
y ga
vage
mal
e ra
tsne
gativ
eO
ECD
200
6
5000
mg/
kg (1
dos
e);
2500
mg/
kg (5
dos
es)
not s
peci
fied
dom
inan
t let
hal a
ssay
; ani
mal
s dos
ed o
rally
by
gava
gem
ale
rats
nega
tive
OEC
D 2
006
Aze
laic
Aci
d20
%cr
eam
dom
inan
t let
hal a
ssay
mic
ene
gativ
eA
llerg
an 2
004
Dod
ecan
edio
ic A
cid
≤500
0 m
g/kg
not s
peci
fied
mic
ronu
cleu
s ass
ayC
rl:C
D-1
(CR
)BR
mic
ene
gativ
eO
ECD
199
4
IN V
IVO
CIR Panel Book Page 159
Animals No./Gender/Group Dose median lethal dose/concentration, or result Reference
Diethyl Malonaterats not specified not specified 15,000 mg/kg OECD 2005Dimethyl Malonaterats not specified not specified >2000 mg/kg OECD 2005Diethyl Succinaterats not specified not specified 8530 mg/kg Smyth et al.1949
rats not specified 20% dispersion 11,260-12,900 mg/kg Andersen 2006rats not specified undiluted 1520 mg/kg Andersen 2006rats not specified not specified 1290 mg/kg OECD1996rats not specified undiluted 12,900 mg/kg EPA 2010Di-C7-9 Branched and Linear Alkyl Esters of Adipic AcidSprague-Dawley 5-10; males/females 2000-15,800 mg/kg, undiluted >15,800 mg/kg EPA 2010Ditridecyl AdipateSherman Wistar 5/gender 16,000 mg/kg >16,000 mg/kg EPA 2010Wistar rats 5/gender 15,000 mg/kg >15,000 mg/kg EPA 2010Diisopropyl AdipateSprague-Dawley 5 males/5 females formulation containing 1.08% 1 female died Elder 1984Sprague-Dawley 5 males/5 females formulation containing 1.08% no animals died Elder 1984Sprague-Dawley 5 males/5 females formulation containing 5% no animals died Elder 1984rats 5 males/f5 females formulation containing 0.7% >76,800 mg/kg Elder 1984rats not specified formulation containing 20.75% >15,ooo mg/kg Elder 1984Diisobutyl AdipateNMRI mice 5 males 2000 mg/kg >2000 mg/kg EvicCEBA 1998Diethylhexyl Adipatemice 5 males/5 females ≤20,000 mg/kg in corn oil males: 15,000 mg/kg; females: 24,600 mg/kg Elder 1984rats 5 males/5 females ≤20,000 mg/kg, undiluted 2 males of the 10,000 mg/kg group died; 1 male and 1
female of the 20,000 mg/kg group diedElder 1984
albino rats 5 males/5 femals 7400 mg/kg 1 animal died Elder 1984
rats not specified not specified single oral toxic dose - 9.11 g/kg Elder 1984rats not specified not specified no-effect dose: 6000 mg/kg; central nervous system
ff hi h iElder 1984
Table 8. Acute toxicity - Esters of Dicarboxylic Acids
Dibutyl Adipate
ORAL
effects seen at higher concentrationsHarlan-Wistar rats 5 males/5 females formulations containing 0.175% >6500 mg/kg Elder 1984
rats not specified not specified 9110 mg/kg OECD 2000
rats 5 males/females 7380 mg/kg, undiluted >7300 mg/kg EPA 2010rats not specified not specified 9.1 g/kg EPA 2010Diisooctyl Adipaterats 5/group 2000-64,000 mg/kg, undiluted >64,000 mg/kg EPA 2010guinea pigs not specified not specified >5 ml/kg EPA 2010Diisononyl Adipaterats 5/group 0.0346-10 g/kg, undiluted >10,000 mg/kg EPA 2010Diisodecyl AdipateNMRI mice 5 male 2000 mg/kg >2000 mg/kg EviC-CEBA 1994rats not specified undiluted 20,500 mg/kg EPA 2010Dioctyldodecyl AdipateNMRI mice 5 female 2000 mg/kg >2000 mg/kg EvicC-CEBA1994rats not specified not specified NOAEL <4000 mg/kg Mochida et al 1996Diisocetyl AdipateNMRI mice 5 males 2000 mg/kg >2000 mg/kg EviC-CEBA 1994Diisopropyl SebacateNMRI mice 5 female 2000 mg/kg >2000 mg/kg EvicC-CEBA1994Diethylhexyl SebacateNMRI mice 5 female 2000 mg/kg >2000 mg/kg EviC-CEBA 1994mice not specified undiluted 9.5 g/kg EPA 2010rats not specified undiluted 5.0 cc/kg EPA 2010rats not specified undiluted 12.8 g/kg EPA 2010rats not specified undiluted 17 g/kg EPA 2010Dioctyldodecyl DodecanedioateWistar rats 5 male/5 female 5000 mg/kg >5000 mg/kg AMA 1990
CIR Panel Book Page 160
Animals No./Gender/Group Dose median lethal dose/concentration, or result Reference
Table 8. Acute toxicity - Esters of Dicarboxylic Acids
Diisocetyl DodecanedioateWistar rats 5 male/5 female 5000 mg/kg >5000 mg/kg AMA 1991Esterase MetabolitesEthylhexyl Alcohol (metabolite of diethylhexyl succinate, diethylhexyl adipate, and diethylhexyl sebacate)rats 1516-7000 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002mice 2500-3768 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002Hexyl Alcohol (metabolite of diehexyl adipate)rats 3131-4900 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002mice 103-1950 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002Butyloctanol (metabolite of dibutyloctyl sebacate)rats 12,900 mg/kg Smyth et al 1949Decyl Alcohol (metabolite of decyl succinate )rats 9800 mg/kg Smyth et al 1949Isooctyl Alcohol (metabolite of diisooctyl adipate and diisoctyl sebacate)rats mixture of C7-9 branched alkyl >2000 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002Nonyl Alcohol (metabolite of diisononyl adipate)rats mixture of C8-10 branched alkyl 3000 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002Isodecyl Alcohol (metabolite of diisodecyl adipate)rats mixture of C9-11 branched alkyl 4600 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002
Diethyl Malonaterabbits not specified not specified 16,700 mg/kg OECD 2005Dibutyl Adipaterabbits not specified 96% 20 ml/kg Andersen 2006rats not specified i.m. NOAEL >8000 mg/kg Smith 1953Ditridecyl Adipaterabbits 3 2000 mg/kg >2000 mg/kg EPA 2010rabbits 10 5000 m/kg to abraded skin; semi-
occlusive>5000 mg/kg EPA 2010
Diethylhexyl Adipaterabbits 8 ≤8700 m/kg to abraded skin;
occlusivemild irritation; no systemic toxic effects Elder 1984
rabbits 1 male/1 female ≤8660 mg/kg for 24 h occcluded 1 >8670 mg/kg OECD 2000
DERMAL
rabbits 1 male/1 female ≤8660 mg/kg for 24 h, occcluded, 1 intact and 1 abraded site
>8670 mg/kg OECD 2000
Diisononyl Adipate
rabbits 4/group 50-3160 mg/kg to abraded skin >3160 mg/kg EPA 2010
Diethylhexyl Sebacateguinea pigs not specified not specified <10,000 mg/kg BIBRA 1996Dioctyldodecyl DodecanedioateNZW rabbits 5 male/5 female 2000 mg/kg, intact skin, 24 h >2000 mg/kg AMA 1993
Esterase MetabolitesEthylhexyl Alcohol (metabolite of diethylhexyl succinate, diethylhexyl adipate, and diethylhexyl sebacate)rats >3000 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002rabbits 1980-2600 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002Hexyl Alcohol (metabolite of diehexyl adipate)rats 1500 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002rabbits 1500 - >500 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002Butyloctanol (metabolite of dibutyloctyl sebacate)rabbits 3.36 ml/kg Smyth et al 1949Decyl Alcohol (metabolite of decyl succinate )rabbits 3.5 ml/kg Smyth et al 1949Isooctyl Alcohol (metabolite of diisooctyl adipate and diisoctyl sebacate)rats mixture of C7-9 branched alkyl >2600 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002Nonyl Alcohol (metabolite of diisononyl adipate)rats mixture of C8-10 branched alkyl 3160 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002Isodecyl Alcohol (metabolite of diisodecyl adipate)rats mixture of C9-11 branched alkyl >2600 mg/kg ExxonMobil 2002
CIR Panel Book Page 161
Animals No./Gender/Group Dose median lethal dose/concentration, or result Reference
Table 8. Acute toxicity - Esters of Dicarboxylic Acids
Diethyl Malonaterats not specified concentrated vapors for 8 h no deaths OECD 2005Diethyl Succinaterats not specified concentrated vapors for 8 h no deaths Smyth et al.1949Dibutyl Adipatealbino rats 6 male flowing stream of saturated air, 8 h no mortality Elder 1984Dethylhexyl Adipaterats not specified concentrated vapors for 8 h no deaths Smyth et al.1949Diethylhexyl Sebacaterats not specified 250 mg/m3 for 4 h no effect on lung or liver BIBRA 1996rats 3 saturated vapor, 6 h no lung toxicity BIBRA 1996rats 4 940 mg/m3, 7 h 3 rats died, may be attributable to thermal decomp BIBRA 1996guinea pigs 2 940 mg/m3, 7 h no animals died BIBRA 1996rabbits 4 940 mg/m3, 7 h 2 rabbits died, may be attributable to thermal decomp BIBRA 1996
Esterase MetabolitesEthylhexyl Alcohol (metabolite of diethylhexyl succinate, diethylhexyl adipate, and diethylhexyl sebacate)rats 3 males/3 females vapor conc. of 0.89 mg/l or aerosol/
vapor conc of 5.3 mg/l, 4 h0.89 mg/l: all animals survived; 5.3 mg/l: all animals died ExxonMobil 2002
mice, rats, and guinea pigs
10 227 ppm, 6 h all animals survived ExxonMobil 2002
Hexyl Alcohol (metabolite of diehexyl adipate)rats 21 mg/l, 1 h >21 mg/l ExxonMobil 2002Butyloctanol (metabolite of dibutyloctyl sebacate)rats concentrated vapors for 8 h no deaths Smyth et al 1949Decyl Alcohol (metabolite of decyl succinate )rats concentrated vapors for 8 h no deaths Smyth et al 1949
Dimethyl AdipateSprague-Dawley not specified i.p. 1.8 ml/kg Singh et al 1973Diethyl AdipateSprague-Dawley not specified i.p. 2.5 ml/kg Singh et al 1973
PARENTERAL
INHALATION
Sprague Dawley not specified i.p. 2.5 ml/kg Singh et al 1973Dipropyl AdipateSprague-Dawley not specified i.p. 3.8 ml/kg Singh et al 1973Dibutyl Adipaterats not specified i.p. 5.2 ml/kg Andersen 2006Diisopropyl Adipaterats not specified i.v. 640 mg/kg Elder 1984Diethylhexyl Adipaterats not specified i.v. 900 mg/kg Elder 1984rabbits not specified i.v. 540 mg/kg Elder 1984Sprague-Dawley not specified i.p. >50 ml/kg Singh et al 1973
CIR Panel Book Page 162
Concentration Animals Procedure Results Reference
Diethyl Malonateundiluted rabbits, no./gender not specified 0.1 ml slight to moderate irritation OECD 2005Dimethyl Malonateundiluted rabbits, no./gender not specified 0.1 ml ,unrinsed slight to moderate irritation;
cleared by day 8OECD 2005
Dibutyl Adipateundiluted rabbits, no. not specified unrinsed minimally irritating Andersen 2006undiluted 2 New Zealand rabbits unrinsed slight irritation Andersen 20060.1% in olive oil rabbits unrinsed non-irritating Andersen 2006
Diisopropyl Adipateundiluted 6 albino rabbits 0.1 ml, unrinsed negligible irritation Elder 1984
undiluted 6 albino rabbits 0.1 ml, unrinsed non-irritating Elder 19840.7% in formulation 9 albino rabbits 0.1 mi, undiluted, rinsed some corneal stippling Elder 1984
5% in formulation 6 albino rabbits not specified non-irritating Elder 198420.75% in formulation 6 albino rabbits not specified non-irritating Elder 1984undiluted 3 albino rabbits 0.1 ml, unrinsed non-irritating EviC-CEBA 1998
Diethylhexyl Adipateundiluted 6 albino rabbits 0.1 ml, unrinsed non-irritating Elder 19840.01% in formulation 6 albino rabbits 0.1 ml, unrinsed non-irritating Elder 19840.175% in formulation 6 albino rabbits 0.1 ml, unrinsed mild transient irritant Elder 1984
Diisopropyl Sebacate6 rabbits 0.1 ml, unrinsed minimally irritating Consumer Product Testing Co 1991
Diethylhexyl Sebacate1.2% in formulation undiluted EpiOcular MTT viability
assaynon-irritating MB Research Laboratories 2003
Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioateundiluted 6 rabbits 0.1 ml, unrinsed MMTS = 0.0; non-irritating AMA 1990
Diisocetyl Dodecanedioatedil t d 6 bbit 0 1 l i d MMTS 0 0 i it ti AMA 1990
Table 9. Ocular Irritation - Esters of Dicarboxylic Acids
undiluted 6 rabbits 0.1 ml, unrinsed MMTS = 0.0; non-irritating AMA 1990Esterase MetabolitesEthylhexyl Alcohol (metabolite of diethylhexyl succinate, diethylhexyl adipate, and diethylhexyl sebacate)
rabbits 20 μg moderately severe corneal irritation
ExxonMobil 2002
Isopropyl Alcohol (metabolite of diisopropyl adipate and diisopropyl sebacate)rabbits severely irritatiting Inchem 2009
Hexyl Alcohol (metabolite of dihexyl adipate)rabbits highly irritative ExxonMobli 2002
CIR Panel Book Page 163
Dos
e/C
onc.
Ani
mal
sPr
oced
ure
Res
ults
Ref
eren
ce
Die
thyl
Mal
onat
eno
t spe
cifie
dra
bbits
occl
usiv
e ap
plic
atio
n; 4
hsl
ight
ly ir
ritat
ing
OEC
D 2
005
Dim
ethy
l Mal
onat
eno
t spe
cifie
dra
bbits
sem
i-occ
lusi
ve a
pplic
atio
n; 4
hno
t irri
tatin
g; sl
ight
ery
them
a at
30-
60 m
in a
fter p
atch
rem
oval
OEC
D 2
005
Dib
utyl
Adi
pate
undi
lute
dra
bbits
appl
ied
to b
elly
PII o
f 2/8
Ande
rsen
200
6un
dilu
ted
5 al
bino
rabb
its0.
1 m
l, ap
plie
d 8x
in 4
hm
oder
ate
eryt
hem
a at
24
h
undi
lute
d3
rabb
itsim
preg
nate
d ba
nds,
3 d
appl
icat
ion,
3 w
ksm
oder
ate
eryt
hem
aAn
ders
en 2
006
undi
lute
d5
rabb
itsim
preg
nate
d ba
nds,
appl
ied
2w/w
k fo
r 6
liti
no p
rogr
essi
ve sk
in d
amag
eAn
ders
en 2
006
undi
lute
d3
rabb
its0.
025
ml t
o in
tact
and
abr
aded
skin
, 3
appl
icat
ions
at 3
h in
terv
als f
or 3
day
ser
ythe
ma
and
capi
llary
inje
ctio
n du
ring
the
stud
y; d
esqu
amat
ion
was
obs
erve
dAn
ders
en 2
006
10%
in a
ceto
ne5
hair
less
mic
eap
plie
d to
ear
, 1x/
day,
10
days
no a
dver
se e
ffect
Ande
rsen
200
610
% in
ace
tone
mic
eap
plic
atio
n to
bac
ks, 2
x/da
y, 1
4 da
ysno
adv
erse
effe
ctAn
ders
en 2
006
Diis
opro
pyl A
dipa
teun
dilu
ted
9 al
bino
rabb
its24
h, 0
.1 m
l, oc
clus
ive
PII o
f 1.6
/4; m
ild ir
rita
ntEl
der 1
984
undi
lute
d9
albi
no ra
bbits
24 h
, 0.1
ml,
occl
usiv
ePI
I of 1
.3/4
; mild
irri
tant
Elde
r 198
4
undi
lute
d9
albi
no ra
bbits
24 h
, 0.1
ml,
occl
usiv
ePI
I of 0
.06/
4; m
inim
ally
irri
tatin
gEl
der 1
984
5% in
form
ulat
ion
9 al
bino
rabb
its24
h, 0
.1 m
l, oc
clus
ive
PII o
f 0.3
3; m
inim
ally
irri
tatin
gEl
der 1
984
20.7
5% in
form
ulat
ion
9 al
bino
rabb
its24
h, 0
.1 m
l, oc
clus
ive
PII o
f 0.1
1; m
inim
ally
irri
tatin
gEl
der 1
984
undi
lute
d3
albi
no ra
bbits
sem
i-occ
lusi
ve a
pplic
atio
n; 4
h, u
ndilu
ted
non-
irrita
ting
EviC
-CEB
A 1
998
Die
thyl
hexy
l Adi
pate
DE
RM
AL
IRR
ITA
TIO
N
Tabl
e 10
. Der
mal
irrit
atio
n an
d se
nsiti
zatio
n - E
ster
s of D
icar
boxy
lic A
cids
Die
thyl
hexy
l Adi
pate
undi
lute
d6
albi
no ra
bbits
inta
ct a
nd a
brad
ed sk
in, 0
.5 m
l, 24
h, o
cclu
sive
very
mild
irri
tant
Elde
r 198
4
0.17
5% in
form
ulat
ion
3 al
bino
rabb
its4,
0.5
ml a
pplic
atio
nsir
rita
tion
inde
x of
1.6
/4El
der 1
984
Diis
odec
yl A
dipa
teun
dilu
ted
3 al
bino
rabb
itsse
mi-o
cclu
sive
app
licat
ion,
4 h
, und
ilute
dno
n-irr
itatin
g; sc
ores
of 0
-1 fo
r ery
them
a an
d 0
for e
dem
a at
1-7
2 h;
reve
rsib
leEv
iC-C
EBA
199
4D
ioct
yldo
decy
l Adi
pate
undi
lute
d3
albi
no ra
bbits
sem
i-occ
lusi
ve a
pplic
atio
n, 4
h, u
ndilu
ted
non-
irrita
ting;
scor
es o
f 0-1
for e
ryth
ema
and
0 or
1 fo
r ede
ma
at 2
4-72
h; r
ever
sibl
eEv
iC-C
EBA
199
4D
iisoc
etyl
Adi
pate
undi
lute
d3
albi
no ra
bbits
sem
i-occ
lusi
ve a
pplic
atio
n, 4
h, u
ndilu
ted
non-
irrita
ting;
scor
es o
f 0-2
for e
ryth
ema
and
0 or
1 fo
r ede
ma
at 1
-72
h; re
vers
ible
EviC
-CEB
A 1
994
Die
thyl
Seb
acat
eun
dilu
ted
8 ra
bbits
inta
ct a
nd a
brad
ed sk
in, o
cclu
sive
, 0.3
ml
PII o
f 0.0
Cou
ncil
1989
30%
in e
than
ol8
rabb
itsin
tact
and
abr
aded
skin
, occ
lusi
ve, 0
.3 m
lPI
I of 0
.3
Cou
ncil
1989
Diis
opro
pyl
Seba
cate
undi
lute
d6
rabb
itsin
tact
and
abr
aded
skin
, occ
lusi
ve, 0
.5 m
lPI
I of 2
.88;
not
a p
rimar
y irr
itant
Con
sum
er P
rodu
ct
Test
ing
1991
undi
lute
d3
albi
no ra
bbits
sem
i-occ
lusi
ve a
pplic
atio
n, 4
h, u
ndilu
ted
non-
irrita
ting;
scor
es o
f 1 fo
r ery
them
a, w
ith a
2 a
t 24
h, a
nd 0
or 1
for e
dem
a at
1-7
2 h;
re
vers
ible
EviC
-CEB
A 1
994
CIR Panel Book Page 164
Dos
e/C
onc.
Ani
mal
sPr
oced
ure
Res
ults
Ref
eren
ceTa
ble
10. D
erm
al ir
ritat
ion
and
sens
itiza
tion
- Est
ers o
f Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
ds
Die
thyl
hexy
l Seb
acat
eun
dilu
ted
3 al
bino
rabb
itsse
mi-o
cclu
sive
app
licat
ion,
4 h
, und
ilute
dno
n-irr
itatin
g; sc
ores
of 1
for e
ryth
ema
and
0 fo
r ede
ma
at 1
-72
h; re
vers
ible
EviC
-CEB
A 1
994
undi
lute
d2-
4 ra
bbits
occl
usiv
e ap
plic
atio
n; 4
8 h
not i
rrita
ting
BIB
RA
199
6D
ioct
yldo
decy
l Dod
ecan
edio
ate
undi
lute
d6
NZW
rabb
itsoc
clus
ive
appl
icat
ion,
24
h, 0
.5 m
lPI
I = 0
; not
a p
rimar
y irr
itant
AM
A 1
990
Diis
ocet
yl D
odec
aned
ioat
eun
dilu
ted
6 N
ZW ra
bbits
occl
usiv
e ap
plic
atio
n, 2
4 h,
0.5
ml
PII =
0; n
ot a
prim
ary
irrita
ntA
MA
199
0E
ster
ase
Met
abol
ites
Ethy
lhex
yl A
lcoh
ol (m
etab
olite
of d
ieth
ylhe
xyl a
dipa
te a
nd d
ieth
ylhe
xyl s
ebac
ate)
3 m
ale
rabb
itsoc
clui
sion
, 4 h
irrita
ting
Exxo
nMob
il 20
02ra
bbits
occl
usiv
e, 0
.5 m
lhi
ghly
irrit
atin
g; n
ot re
vers
ible
Exxo
nMob
il 20
02C
apry
lic A
lcoh
ol (m
etab
olite
of d
icap
ryl s
ucci
nate
, dic
apry
l adi
pate
, and
dic
apry
lyl/c
apry
l seb
acat
e)un
dilu
ted
rabb
itsm
ild ir
ritat
ion
Dim
ethy
l Mal
onat
eno
t spe
cifie
dgu
inea
pig
sB
uehl
er m
etho
dno
t sen
sitiz
ing
OEC
D 2
005
Dib
utyl
Adi
pate
25%
5 gu
inea
pig
sm
axim
izat
ion
test
not s
ensi
tizin
gAn
ders
en 2
006
Die
thyl
hexy
l Adi
pate
0.1%
in o
live
oil
10 m
ale
guin
ea
pigs
indu
ctio
n: 1
0 in
ject
ions
; 2 w
k no
n-tr
eatm
ent
pd; c
halle
nge:
0.0
5 m
l inj
ectio
nno
t sen
sitiz
ing
Elde
r 198
4
Die
thyl
hexy
l Seb
acat
eun
dilu
ted
rabb
itsoc
clus
ive
patc
hes,
deta
ils n
ot p
rovi
ded
no re
actio
nsB
IBR
A 1
996
Di
tld
dlD
ddi
t
SEN
SIT
IZA
TIO
N
Dio
ctyl
dode
cyl D
odec
aned
ioat
e0.
1 m
l for
intra
derm
in
duct
ion;
0.5
ml t
op.
indu
ctio
n /c
halle
nge
10 fe
mal
e gu
inea
pi
gsm
axim
izat
ion
test
not s
ensi
tizin
g; sl
ight
ery
them
a at
indu
ctio
nA
MA
199
3
Est
eras
e M
etab
olite
sH
exyl
Alc
ohol
(met
abol
ite o
f dih
exyl
adi
pate
)1%
in p
etro
latu
mgu
inea
pig
sm
axim
izat
ion
test
not s
ensi
tizin
gEx
xonM
obil
2002
CIR Panel Book Page 165
Tabl
e 11
. Gen
otox
icity
stud
ies -
Est
ers o
f Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
ds
Con
cent
ratio
nV
ehic
lePr
oced
ure
Tes
t Sys
tem
Res
ults
Ref
eren
ce
Die
thyl
Mal
onat
e≤5
000
µg/p
late
not s
peci
fied
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A15
35, T
A15
37, T
A98
, TA
100
nega
tive
OEC
D 2
005
≤500
0 µg
/pla
teno
t spe
cifie
dcy
toge
netic
ass
ay, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
hum
an p
erip
hera
l lym
phoc
ytes
nega
tive;
cyt
otox
ic a
t 500
0 µg
/pla
teO
ECD
200
5
Dim
ethy
l Mal
onat
e≤5
000
µg/p
late
not s
peci
fied
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A15
35, T
A15
37, T
A98
, TA
100
nega
tive;
cyt
otox
ic a
t ≥10
00
µg/p
late
OEC
D 2
005
Dim
ethy
l Suc
cina
te20
,000
µg/
plat
eD
MSO
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A15
35, T
A15
37, T
A98
, TA
100
nega
tive
And
erse
n an
d Je
nsen
198
4
≤10,
000
µg/p
late
wat
erN
TP p
rein
cuba
tion
assa
y, +
/- m
etab
olic
ac
tivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A100
, TA1
535,
TA9
7, T
A98
nega
tive
NTP
1988
ID: 9
4773
8
Dim
ethy
l Glu
tara
te
≤10,
000
µg/p
late
DM
SON
TP p
rein
cuba
tion
assa
y, +
/- m
etab
olic
ac
tivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A100
, TA1
535,
TA9
7, T
A98
nega
tive
NTP
1995
ID: A
2034
8
Dim
ethy
l Adi
pate
≤10,
000
µg/p
late
DM
SON
TP p
rein
cuba
tion
assa
y, +
/- m
etab
olic
ac
tivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A100
, TA1
535,
TA9
7, T
A98
nega
tive
NTP
1994
ID: A
4533
0
Dib
utyl
Adi
pate
≤500
0 µg
/pla
teAm
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A98,
TA1
00, T
A153
5, T
A153
7,
TA15
38ne
gativ
eAn
ders
en 2
006
Di-C
7-9
Bra
nche
d an
d Li
near
Alk
yl E
ster
s of A
dipi
c A
cid
≤10.
0 µl
/pla
teno
t spe
cifie
dA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA15
35, T
A15
37, T
A98
, TA
100
nega
tive
EPA
201
0
IN V
ITR
O
≤10.
0 µl
/pla
teno
t spe
cifie
dA
mes
test
, +/
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA15
35, T
A15
37, T
A98
, TA
100
nega
tive
EPA
201
0D
itrid
ecyl
Adi
pate
≤10
µl/p
late
DM
SOA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA
1535
, TA
1537
, TA
1538
, TA
98,
TA10
0ne
gativ
eEP
A 2
010
Diis
obut
yl A
dipa
te≤1
0,00
0 µg
/pla
teD
MSO
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A98
, TA
100,
TA
102,
TA
97, T
A98
, E.
col
i w
p2ne
gativ
eTO
XN
ET 2
001
Die
thyl
hexy
l Adi
pate
≤5 m
g/pl
ate
not s
peci
fied
Ames
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA1
535,
TA1
537,
TA1
538,
TA9
8,
TA10
0ne
gativ
eEl
der 1
984
5000
µg/
plat
eno
t spe
cifie
dA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA
1535
, TA
1537
, TA
1538
, TA
98,
TA10
0ne
gativ
eSi
mm
on e
t al 1
977
≤0.0
1 M
not s
peci
fied
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
mTA
98, T
A10
0ne
gativ
eW
arre
n et
al 1
982
10,0
00 µ
g/pl
ate
DM
SOA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA
1535
, TA
1537
,. TA
98, T
A10
0ne
gativ
eZe
iger
et a
l 198
510
,000
µg/
plat
e95
% e
than
olA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA
1535
, TA
1537
,. TA
98, T
A10
0ne
gativ
eZe
iger
et a
l 198
510
,000
µg/
plat
eac
eton
eN
TP p
rein
cuba
tion
assa
y, +
/- m
etab
olic
ac
tivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A100
, TA1
535,
TA9
7, T
A98
nega
tive
NTP
1988
ID: 9
6393
5
≤150
µg/
plat
eno
t spe
cifie
dA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA
1535
, TA
1537
, TA
1538
, TA
98,
nega
tive
EPA
201
0no
t spe
cifie
dD
MSO
liqui
d su
spen
sion
ass
ayS.
typh
imur
ium
TA1
00ne
gativ
eSe
ed 1
982
CIR Panel Book Page 166
Tabl
e 11
. Gen
otox
icity
stud
ies -
Est
ers o
f Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
ds
Con
cent
ratio
nV
ehic
lePr
oced
ure
Tes
t Sys
tem
Res
ults
Ref
eren
ce≤4
00 µ
g/m
lno
t spe
cifie
dsi
ster
chr
omat
id e
xcha
nge
assa
y, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
Chi
nese
ham
ster
ova
ry c
ells
nega
tive
w/o
ut a
ctiv
atio
n;
equi
voca
l w/a
ctiv
atio
nG
allo
way
et a
l 198
7
≤200
µg/p
late
, 3 o
r 51
hD
MSO
sist
er c
hrom
atid
exc
hang
e as
say
fem
ale
F344
rat h
epat
ocyt
esne
gativ
eR
eise
nbic
hler
and
Eck
l 199
3≤4
00 µ
g/m
lno
t spe
cifie
dch
rom
osom
al a
berr
atio
n as
say,
+/-
met
abol
ic
activ
atio
nC
hine
se h
amst
er o
vary
cel
lsso
me
evid
ence
w/o
ut a
ctiv
atio
n;
nega
tive
w/a
ctiv
atio
nG
allo
way
et a
l 198
7
≤200
µg/p
late
, 3 o
r 51
hD
MSO
chro
mos
omal
abe
rratio
n as
say
fem
ale
F344
rat h
epat
ocyt
esne
gativ
eR
eise
nbic
hler
and
Eck
l 199
3≤0
.01
Mno
t spe
cifie
d3 H
-thym
idin
e as
say,
+/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nsp
leni
c ly
mph
oid
cells
dose
-dep
ende
nt in
hibi
tion
of 3 H
-th
ymid
ine
into
repl
icat
ing
DN
A, w
/a d
ose-
depe
nden
t in
crea
se in
the
ratio
of a
cid-
solu
ble
to D
NA
-inco
rpor
ated
3 H-
thym
idin
e
War
ren
et a
l 198
2
≤100
0 µg
/pla
tefo
rwar
d m
utat
ion
assa
y, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
.L5
178Y
cel
lsne
gativ
eM
cGre
gor e
t al 1
988
urin
e of
rats
dos
ed w
ith 2
000
mg/
kg d
ieth
ylhe
xyl a
dipa
te
corn
oil
Am
es te
stne
gativ
eD
iVin
cenz
o et
al 1
986
Diis
onon
yl A
dipa
te≤1
000
µg/p
late
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A98
, TA
100,
TA
1535
, TA
1537
, TA
1538
nega
tive
McK
ee e
t al 1
986
≤100
µg/
ml
lym
phom
a as
say,
+/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nm
ouse
lym
phom
a L5
178Y
cel
lsne
gativ
eM
cKee
et a
l 198
6
≤100
0 µg
/ml
trans
form
atio
n as
say
Syria
n ha
mst
er e
mbr
yo c
ells
nega
tive
McK
ee e
t al 1
986
≤1.3
µ/m
lB
ALB
/3T3
ass
ayne
gativ
eM
cKee
et a
l 198
6D
ieth
yl S
ebac
ate
yre
vers
ion
assa
yE.
col
i Sd
-4-7
3ne
gativ
eSz
ybal
ski 1
958
Dib
utyl
Seb
acat
eno
t spe
cifie
dno
t spe
cifie
dA
mes
test
S, ty
phim
uriu
m T
A98
, TA
100,
TA
1535
, TA
1537
, TA
1538
nega
tive
Wild
et a
l 198
3
≤10,
000
µg/p
late
DM
SO &
Tw
een
80A
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA
98, T
A10
0, T
A15
35, T
A15
37;
E. c
oli w
p2 u
vrA
nega
tive
TOX
NET
200
1
Die
thyl
hexy
l Seb
acat
e≤1
0,00
0 µg
/pla
teD
MSO
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
S. ty
phim
uriu
m T
A98,
TA1
00, T
A153
5, T
A153
7ne
gativ
eZe
iger
et a
l 198
5≤5
000
µg/p
late
DM
SOA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA
98, T
A10
0, T
A15
35, T
A15
37;
E. c
oli w
p2 u
vrA
nega
tive
TOX
NET
201
0
Est
eras
e M
etab
olite
sEt
hylh
exyl
Alc
ohol
(met
abol
ite o
f die
thyl
hexy
l suc
cina
te, d
ieth
ylhe
xyl a
dipa
te, a
nd d
ieth
ylhe
xyl s
ebac
ate)
10,0
00 µ
g/pl
ate
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
nega
tive
Zeig
er e
t al 1
985
Am
es te
stne
gativ
eM
cKee
et a
l 198
6≤0
.01
Mno
t spe
cifie
dA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nS.
typh
imur
ium
TA98
, TA
100
nega
tive
War
ren
et a
l 198
2≤5
000 μg
/pla
teno
t spe
cifie
dA
mes
test
, +/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nne
gativ
eEx
xonM
obil
2002
0-1.
5 m
MD
MSO
liqui
d su
spen
sion
ass
ayS,
. typ
him
uriu
m T
A10
0ne
gativ
eSe
ed 1
982
not s
peci
fied
not s
peci
fied
mou
se ly
mph
oma
assa
yne
gativ
eM
cKee
et a
l 198
6no
t spe
cifie
dno
t spe
cifie
dun
sche
dule
d D
NA
synt
hesi
sne
gativ
eM
cKee
et a
l 198
6
CIR Panel Book Page 167
Tabl
e 11
. Gen
otox
icity
stud
ies -
Est
ers o
f Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
ds
Con
cent
ratio
nV
ehic
lePr
oced
ure
Tes
t Sys
tem
Res
ults
Ref
eren
ce≤0
.01
Mno
t spe
cifie
d3 H
-thym
idin
e as
say,
+/-
met
abol
ic a
ctiv
atio
nsp
leni
c ly
mph
oid
cells
dose
-dep
ende
nt in
hibi
tion
of 3 H
-th
ymid
ine
into
repl
icat
ing
DN
A, w
/a d
ose-
depe
nden
t in
crea
se in
the
ratio
of a
cid-
solu
ble
to D
NA
-inco
rpor
ated
3 H-
thym
idin
e
War
ren
et a
l 198
2
1000
mg/
kgco
rn o
ilA
mes
test
per
form
ed o
n ur
ine
from
rats
do
sed
oral
ly fo
r 15
days
nega
tive
DiV
ince
nzo
et a
l 198
6
MEH
A (m
etab
olite
of d
ieth
ylhe
xyl a
dipa
te)
10,0
00 µ
g/pl
ate
Am
es te
st, +
/- m
etab
olic
act
ivat
ion
nega
tive
Zeig
er e
t al 1
985
≤100
0 µg
/pla
teA
mes
test
nega
tive
Dirv
en e
t al 1
991
Mon
o-(2
-Eth
yl-5
-Hyd
roxy
hexy
l)Adi
pate
(met
abol
ite o
f die
thyl
hexy
l adi
pate
)≤1
000
µg/p
late
Am
es te
stne
gativ
eD
irven
et a
l 199
1M
ono-
(2-E
thyl
-5-O
xohe
xyl)A
dipa
te (m
etab
olite
of d
ieth
ylhe
xyl a
dipa
te)
≤100
0 µg
/pla
teA
mes
test
nega
tive
Dirv
en e
t al 1
991
Prop
yl a
nd Is
opro
pyl A
lcoh
ol (m
etab
olite
of d
ipro
pyl a
dipa
te, d
iisop
ropy
l adi
pate
, and
diis
opro
pyl s
ebac
ate)
bact
eria
l and
mam
mal
ian
cell
assa
ysne
gativ
eH
eldr
eth
2010
Isoo
ctyl
Alc
ohol
(met
abol
ite o
f diis
ooct
yl a
dipa
te a
nd d
iisoo
ctyl
seba
cate
)C
7-9
bran
ched
alk
yl
bact
eria
l and
mam
mal
ian
cell
assa
ysne
gativ
eEx
xonM
obil
2002
Dim
ethy
l Suc
cina
te≥1
250
mg/
kgco
rn o
ilm
icro
nucl
eus t
est,
i.p.
mal
e F3
44 ra
tsne
gativ
eN
TP 1
996
ID:A
7100
6D
imet
hyl G
luta
rate
≥125
0 m
g/kg
corn
oil
mic
ronu
cleu
s tes
t, i.p
.m
ale
F344
rats
nega
tive
NTP
199
5 ID
: A36
863
IN V
IVO
≥125
0 m
g/kg
corn
oil
mic
ronu
cleu
s tes
t, i.p
.m
ale
F344
rats
nega
tive
NTP
199
5 ID
: A36
863
Dib
utyl
Adi
pate
≤200
0 m
g/kg
oliv
e oi
lm
ouse
mic
ronu
cleu
s tes
tm
ice
nega
tive
Ande
rsen
200
6≥7
24 m
g/kg
corn
oil
mic
ronu
cleu
s tes
t, i.p
.m
ale
F344
rats
nega
tive
NTP
199
4 ID
: A86
146
Ditr
idec
yl A
dipa
te≤2
000
mg/
kgno
nem
icro
nucl
eus t
est;
dose
d de
rmal
ly fo
r 13
wks
grou
ps o
f 10
mal
e an
d 10
fem
ale
Spra
gue
Daw
ley
rats
nega
tive
EPA
201
0
Die
thyl
hexy
l Adi
pate
2000
mg/
kgco
rn o
ilm
icro
nucl
eus t
est;
dose
d i.p
. for
3 d
ays
5 m
ale
B3C
3F1 m
ice
nega
tive
Shel
by e
t al 1
993
≤500
0 m
g/kg
corn
oil
chro
mos
omal
abe
rratio
n as
say
8 m
ale
B3C
3F1 m
ice
nega
tive
NTP
198
8 ID
:959
525
not s
peci
fied
corn
oil
chr
omos
omal
abe
rratio
n as
say
8 B
6C3F
1 mic
ene
gativ
eSh
elby
and
Witt
199
550
00 m
g/kg
corn
oil
mic
ronu
cleu
s tes
t sin
gle
i.p. d
ose
6 m
ale/
6 fe
mal
e B
3C3F
1 m
ice
nega
tive
EPA
201
0D
ibut
yl S
ebac
ate
943-
2829
mg/
kgol
ive
oil
mic
ronu
cleu
s tes
t, i.p
.m
icro
nucl
eus t
est
nega
tive
Wild
et a
l 198
3D
ieth
ylhe
xyl S
ebac
ate
500
mg/
kgno
t spe
cifie
dra
t liv
er fo
ci te
stsi
ngle
dos
e of
kno
wn
carc
inog
en, t
he d
osin
g 3x
/wk
for 1
1 w
ksno
act
ivity
Ost
erle
and
Dem
l 198
8
CIR Panel Book Page 168
Tabl
e 11
. Gen
otox
icity
stud
ies -
Est
ers o
f Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
ds
Con
cent
ratio
nV
ehic
lePr
oced
ure
Tes
t Sys
tem
Res
ults
Ref
eren
ceE
ster
ase
Met
abol
ites
Ethy
lhex
yl A
lcoh
ol (m
etab
olite
of d
ieth
ylhe
xyl s
ucci
nate
, die
thyl
hexy
l adi
pate
, and
die
thyl
hexy
l seb
acat
e)no
t spe
cifie
dno
t spe
cifie
dm
icro
nucl
eus t
est
mic
ene
gativ
eM
cKee
et a
l 198
6no
t spe
cifie
dno
t spe
cifie
dtra
nsfo
rmat
ion
assa
yB
ALB
/3T3
nega
tive
McK
ee e
t al 1
986
Prop
yl a
nd Is
opro
pyl A
lcoh
ol (m
etab
olite
of d
ipro
pyl a
dipa
te, d
iisop
ropy
l adi
pate
, and
diis
opro
pyl s
ebac
ate)
C7-
9 br
anch
ed a
lkyl
m
icro
nucl
eus t
est
nega
tive
Hel
dret
h 20
10
CIR Panel Book Page 169
Tabl
e 12
. C
linic
al d
erm
al ir
ritat
ion
and
sens
itiza
tion
- Est
ers o
f Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
ds
Tes
t Mat
eria
lN
o. o
f Su
b jec
tsPr
oced
ure
Res
ults
Ref
eren
ce
Dim
ethy
l Mal
onat
e8%
in p
etro
latu
m25
max
imiz
atio
n te
stno
t a se
nsiti
zer
OEC
D 2
005
Dib
utyl
Adi
pate
undi
lute
d10
24 h
pat
ch te
stno
irri
tatio
n at
24
or 4
8 h
Ande
rsen
200
620
% in
alc
ohol
1024
h o
cclu
sive
pat
ch te
stsl
ight
reac
tions
in 4
subj
ects
Ande
rsen
200
6D
iisop
ropy
l Adi
pate
undi
lute
d19
24 h
occ
lusi
ve p
atch
, 0.1
ml
no ir
rita
tion
Elde
r 198
4un
dilu
ted
1924
h o
cclu
sive
pat
ch, 0
.1 m
lno
irri
tatio
nEl
der 1
984
undi
lute
d15
24 h
occ
lusi
ve p
atch
, 0.1
ml
no ir
rita
tion
Elde
r 198
4un
dilu
ted
1524
h o
cclu
sive
pat
ch, 0
.1 m
lno
irri
tatio
nEl
der 1
984
undi
lute
d16
cum
ulat
ive
irri
tanc
y te
st m
oder
atel
y ir
rita
ting;
scor
e of
395
/945
; irr
itatio
n in
14/
16 su
bjec
ts
Elde
r 198
40.
7% in
form
ulat
ion
13cu
mul
ativ
e ir
rita
ncy
test
non-
irri
tatin
g; sc
ore
of 2
/630
Elde
r 198
41.
1% in
form
ulat
ion
17cu
mul
ativ
e ir
rita
ncy
test
low
pot
entia
l for
haz
ard
to c
onsu
mer
; sco
re o
f 0.2
9/84
Elde
r 198
41.
1% in
form
ulat
ion
17cu
mul
ativ
e ir
rita
ncy
test
low
pot
entia
l for
haz
ard
to c
onsu
mer
; sco
re o
f 0.2
4/84
Elde
r 198
420
.75%
in a
bat
h oi
l7
cum
ulat
ive
irri
tanc
y te
stsc
ore
of 8
/84
Elde
r 198
420
.75%
in fo
rmul
atio
n di
lute
d to
1.2
5%19
24 h
occ
lusi
ve p
atch
, 0.1
ml
min
imal
irri
tatio
nEl
der 1
984
5.0%
in fo
rmul
atio
n19
24 h
occ
lusi
ve p
atch
, 0.1
ml
no ir
rita
tion
Elde
r 198
41.
08%
in fo
rmul
atio
n23
5H
RIPT
no se
nsiti
zatio
n; sl
ight
hyp
erpi
gmen
tatio
nEl
der 1
984
3.0%
in fo
rmul
atio
n50
HRI
PTno
irri
tatio
n or
sens
itiza
tion
Elde
r 198
45.
0% in
form
ulat
ion
108
HRI
PTno
irri
tatio
n or
sens
itiza
tion
Elde
r 198
45.
0% a
q. d
ispe
rsio
n of
a p
rodu
ct
cont
aini
ng 2
0.75
%11
6H
RIPT
min
imal
, fai
nt e
ryth
ema
prod
uced
thro
ugho
ut th
e st
udy
Elde
r 198
4
0.7%
in fo
rmul
atio
n25
max
imiz
atio
n te
stno
con
tact
sens
itiza
tion
pote
ntia
lEl
der 1
984
Di
hlh
lAdi
Die
thyl
hexy
l Adi
pate
0.17
5% in
form
ulat
ion
11cu
mul
ativ
e ir
rita
ncy
test
slig
htly
irri
tatin
g; sc
ore
of 7
2/63
0El
der 1
984
0.01
% in
form
ulat
ion
100
Schw
artz
-Pec
k pr
ophe
tic p
atch
test
not a
n ir
rita
nt o
r a se
nsiti
zer
Elde
r 198
40.
01%
in fo
rmul
atio
n49
Shel
ansk
i and
She
lans
ki H
RIPT
wea
k re
actio
ns in
up
to 4
subj
ects
and
stro
ng re
actio
ns in
1 su
bjec
tEl
der 1
984
9.0%
in fo
rmul
atio
n20
9m
odifi
ed D
raiz
e-Sh
elan
ski p
atch
test
3 st
rong
reac
tions
and
1 fa
int r
eact
ion
at 2
nd c
halle
nge
Elde
r 198
49.
0% in
form
ulat
ion
151
mod
ified
Dra
ize-
Shel
ansk
i pat
ch te
stir
rita
nt re
actio
ns in
2 su
bjec
ts; n
o se
nsiti
zatio
nEl
der 1
984
prod
uct c
onta
inin
g 0.
7% o
f a 2
5%
not g
iven
Shel
ansk
i-Jor
dan
RIPT
1-2
subj
ects
had
reac
tions
dur
ing
the
stud
yEl
der 1
984
Diis
oste
aryl
Adi
pate
undi
lute
d50
HR
IPT
not a
prim
ary
irrita
nt o
r sen
sitiz
erA
MA
Lab
orat
orie
s 199
61.
5% in
form
ulat
ion
20SI
OPT
not i
rrita
ting
Ano
nym
ous 2
003
1.5%
in fo
rmul
atio
n25
max
imiz
atio
n te
stno
con
tact
sens
itiza
tion
pote
ntia
lK
GL
Inc
2003
Diis
opro
pyl S
ebac
ate
1.8%
in fo
rmul
atio
n20
SIO
PTno
t irr
itatin
gA
nony
mou
s 200
0un
dilu
ted
105
patc
h te
stno
irrit
atio
n or
sens
itiza
tion
Prod
uct I
nves
tigat
ions
Inc.
200
52.
2% in
form
ulat
ion
27m
axim
izat
ion
test
no ir
ritat
ion
or se
nsiti
zatio
nK
GL
Inc
2006
1% in
form
ulat
ion
110
mod
ified
HR
IPT,
sem
i-occ
lusi
veno
t an
irrita
nt o
r a se
nsiti
zer
Rel
ianc
e C
linic
al T
estin
g 20
071%
in fo
rmul
atio
n11
0m
odifi
ed H
RIP
T, se
mi-o
cclu
sive
not a
n irr
itant
or a
sens
itize
rR
elia
nce
Clin
ical
Tes
ting
2007
7.2%
in fo
rmul
atio
n51
HR
IPT,
sem
i-occ
lusi
veno
skin
reac
tivity
obs
erve
dEs
sex
Test
ing
Clin
ic 2
007
Die
thyl
hexy
l Seb
acat
eun
dilu
ted
15-3
0oc
clus
ive
patc
hes
no re
actio
nsB
IBR
A 1
996
Dio
ctyl
dode
cyl D
odec
aned
ioat
eun
dilu
ted
50H
RIP
Tno
t a p
rimar
y irr
itant
or s
ensi
tizer
AM
A L
abor
ator
ies 1
996
CIR Panel Book Page 170
Tabl
e 12
. C
linic
al d
erm
al ir
ritat
ion
and
sens
itiza
tion
- Est
ers o
f Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
ds
Tes
t Mat
eria
lN
o. o
f Su
b jec
tsPr
oced
ure
Res
ults
Ref
eren
ce
Diis
ocet
yl D
odec
aned
ioat
eun
dilu
ted
50H
RIP
Tno
t a p
rimar
y irr
itant
or s
ensi
tizer
AM
A L
abor
ator
ies 1
996
Est
eras
e M
etab
olite
sM
etha
nol (
met
abol
ite o
f dim
ethy
l suc
cina
te, d
imet
hyl g
luta
rate
, and
dim
ethy
l adi
pate
prim
ary
irrita
tion
of th
e sk
inA
nder
sen
2001
3.2%
274
prov
ocat
ive
occu
patio
nal s
tudy
posi
tive
resu
ltsA
nder
sen
2001
5%cl
osed
pat
ch te
stsl
ight
pos
itive
reac
tion
(+)
And
erse
n 20
017
and
70%
clos
ed p
atch
test
+++
reac
tions
And
erse
n 20
01Pr
opyl
Alc
ohol
undi
lute
d20
24 h
pat
ch te
stno
reac
tions
Still
man
et a
l. 19
75un
dilu
ted
116
48 h
pat
ch te
stno
reac
tions
Wah
lber
g an
d M
aiba
ch 1
980
undi
lute
d16
24 h
pat
ch te
stno
reac
tions
Agn
er a
nd S
erup
198
7un
dilu
ted
4248
h p
atch
test
no re
actio
nsW
illis
et a
l 198
8un
dilu
ted
1624
h p
atch
test
no re
actio
nsA
gner
and
Set
up 1
988
undi
lute
d7
24 h
pat
ch te
stno
reac
tions
Agn
er a
nd S
etup
201
0Is
opro
pyl A
lcoh
ol (m
etab
olite
of d
iisop
ropy
l alc
ohol
and
diis
opro
pyl s
ebac
ate)
80.7
4% sp
ray
conc
entra
tion
9no
sens
itiza
tion
pote
ntia
lD
amat
o et
al 1
979
2.85
% in
form
ulat
ion
109
HR
IPT
no se
nsiti
zatio
nA
nony
mou
s 201
0un
dilu
ted
1224
h p
atch
test
no re
actio
nsSu
ihko
and
Ser
up 2
008
Cet
yl A
lcoh
ol (m
etab
olite
of d
icet
yl su
ccin
ate
and
dice
tyl a
dipa
te)
11.5
% in
form
ulat
ion
80to
pica
l tol
eran
ce st
udy
reac
tion
in 1
subj
ect
Elde
r 198
86.
0% in
form
ulat
ion
12cu
mul
ativ
e irr
itanc
y te
stm
ild c
umul
ativ
e irr
itatio
nEl
der 1
988
8.4%
in fo
rmul
atio
n11
0H
RIP
Tno
t a p
rimar
y irr
itant
or s
ensi
tizer
Elde
r 198
83
0%in
form
ulat
ion
25H
RIP
Tno
tase
nsiti
zer
Elde
r198
83.
0% in
form
ulat
ion
25H
RIP
Tno
t a se
nsiti
zer
Elde
r 198
8M
yris
tyl A
lcoh
ol (m
etab
olite
of d
imyr
isty
l adi
pate
)0.
80%
in fo
rmul
atio
n53
4 w
k ap
plic
atio
nno
irrit
atio
nEl
der 1
988
0.25
% in
form
ulat
ion
514
wk
appl
icat
ion
1 re
actio
n by
1 su
bjec
tEl
der 1
988
0.25
% in
form
ulat
ion
229
10 -
24 h
occ
lusi
ve p
atch
not a
n irr
itant
or a
n al
lerg
enEl
der 1
988
Stea
ryl A
lcoh
ol ((
met
abol
ite o
f dis
tear
yl su
ccin
ate)
undi
lute
dSI
OPT
mild
irrit
atio
nEl
der 1
985
Isos
tear
yl A
lcoh
ol (m
etab
olite
of d
iisos
tear
yl g
luta
rate
, diis
oste
aryl
adi
pate
, or d
iisos
tear
yl se
baca
te)
25%
in p
etro
latu
m19
no ir
ritat
ion
Elde
r 198
825
.0%
in fo
rmul
atio
nno
irrit
atio
nEl
der 1
988
27.0
% in
form
ulat
ion
no ir
ritat
ion
Elde
r 198
828
.0%
in fo
rmul
atio
nno
irrit
atio
nEl
der 1
988
25%
in 9
5% is
opro
pyl a
lcoh
ol12
HR
IPT
3 su
bjec
t slig
ht e
ryth
ema
at in
duct
ion;
no
sens
itiza
tion
Elde
r 198
85%
in fo
rmul
atio
n14
8H
RIP
T, w
ith re
chal
leng
e fo
r rea
ctor
s;
add'
l cha
lleng
e w
ith 5
% in
eth
anol
12 su
bjec
ts h
ad p
ossi
ble
sens
itiza
tion
reac
tions
at 1
st c
halle
nge;
6
reac
ted
at re
chal
leng
e; a
ll 6
had
posi
tive
reac
tions
to 5
% in
alc
ohol
Elde
r 198
8
5% in
form
ulat
ion
60H
RIP
T, re
chal
leng
e of
5%
in e
than
ol
for r
eact
ors
5 su
bjec
ts re
acte
d at
1 c
halle
nge1
/5 re
chal
leng
ed re
acte
dEl
der 1
988
Cap
rylic
Alc
ohol
(met
abol
ite o
f dic
apry
l suc
cina
te, d
icap
ryl a
dipa
te, a
nd d
icap
ryly
l/cap
ryl s
ebac
ate)
2% in
pet
rola
tum
2548
h c
lose
d pa
tch
no ir
ritat
ion
Opd
yke
1973
Dec
yl A
lcoh
ol (m
etab
olite
of d
ecyl
succ
inat
e an
d di
decy
l seb
acat
e)3%
in p
etro
latu
m25
48 h
clo
sed
patc
hno
irrit
atio
nO
pdyk
e 19
73
CIR Panel Book Page 171
Tabl
e 13
. Cas
e re
port
- Est
ers o
f Dic
arbo
xylic
Aci
ds
Sub j
ect
Pres
enta
tion
Follo
w-U
p T
estin
g/D
iscu
ssio
nR
efer
ence
Die
thyl
Seb
acat
e1
subj
ect
seve
re c
onta
ct d
erm
atiti
s afte
r 7 d
ays o
f tre
atm
ent w
ith a
dru
g pa
tch
test
with
20%
die
thyl
seba
cate
in e
than
olSc
hnei
der 1
980
1 su
bjec
tqu
ick
onse
t of c
onta
ct d
erm
atiti
s afte
r use
of d
rug
oint
men
tpa
tch
test
with
20%
die
thyl
seba
cate
in e
than
olSc
hnei
der 1
980
24 y
r old
fem
ale
swel
ling
and
eryt
hem
a w
ith 3
mos
of u
se o
f a c
ream
seba
cate
was
in th
e ve
hicl
e; d
ieth
yl
patc
h te
st re
sults
wer
e po
sitiv
e to
the
crea
m c
onta
inin
g di
ethy
llo
tion
that
did
not
; pat
ch te
stin
g w
ith 3
0 ad
d'l s
ubje
cts w
as n
eg se
baca
te a
nd n
egat
ive
to th
e at
ive
Sasa
ki e
t al 1
997
28 y
r old
fem
ale
eryt
hem
a de
velo
ped
with
use
of a
n oi
ntm
ent;
did
noa
new
oin
tmen
t was
use
dt s
ubsi
de w
hen
posi
tive
parc
h te
st to
1st
, but
not
2nd
oin
tmen
t; up
on p
atch
test
incl
udin
g di
ethy
l seb
acat
e, o
nly
diet
hyl s
ebac
ate
had
a po
sitiv
epe
t, an
d on
day
3, w
ith 1
and
d10
% in
pet
; fur
ther
pat
ch te
stin
posi
tive
for t
his p
atie
nt b
ut n
egat
ive
for o
ther
s
ing
with
a p
anel
of i
tem
s, re
spon
se a
t day
2, a
s 10%
in
g w
as w
ith d
ieth
yl se
baca
te w
as
Kim
ura
and
Kaw
asa
1999
39 y
r old
mal
e1
mo
hist
ory
of ti
nea
crur
is a
fter u
se o
f a c
ream
; he
cont
act d
erm
atiti
sde
velo
ped
patc
h te
stin
g w
ith th
e cr
eam
in 5
% d
ieth
yl se
baca
te w
as p
ositi
veTa
naka
et a
l 200
0
60 y
r old
mal
ede
velo
ped
prur
itic
ecze
mat
oid
erup
tions
afte
r 1 y
r use
of a
cre
ampo
sitiv
e pa
tch
test
with
5%
die
thyl
seba
cate
in p
etro
latu
m, t
o th
e cr
eam
, and
to c
etyl
alc
ohol
Soga
et a
l 200
449
yr -
old
fem
ale
cont
act d
erm
atiti
s to
a ha
nd c
ream
posi
tive
patc
h te
st t
crea
m; f
urth
er te
stin
g re
veal
ed o
nly
diet
hyl s
ebac
ate
gave
a p
ositi
ve
Nar
ita e
t al 2
006
Diis
opro
pyl S
ebac
ate
22 y
r old
mal
ere
actio
n af
ter 2
mos
use
of a
cre
am c
onta
inin
g 27
%
seba
cate
di
isop
ropy
l po
sitiv
e pa
tch
test
ing
to d
iisop
ropy
l seb
acat
e, a
lone
and
in c
omte
st o
n th
e fo
rear
m w
ith d
iisop
ropy
l seb
acat
e pr
oduc
ed re
d pa
pbina
tion,
was
repo
rted;
an
open
ul
es a
t 48
hD
oom
s-G
ooss
en e
t al
1996
Die
thyl
hexy
l Seb
acat
e patie
nt w
as se
nsiti
zed
to 3
oth
er se
baca
te e
ster
s10
% in
pet
rola
tum
was
not
irrit
atin
gde
Gro
ot e
t al 1
991
Est
eras
e M
etab
olite
sSt
eary
l Alc
ohol
(met
abol
ite o
f dis
tear
yl su
ccin
ate)
3 in
divi
dual
s2
had
urtic
aria
l-typ
e re
actio
ns1
reac
tion
was
thou
ght d
ue to
impu
ritie
s in
stea
ryl a
lcoh
olEl
der 1
985
CIR Panel Book Page 172
Personal Care Products CouncilCommitted to Safety,Quality & Innovation
Memorandum
TO: F. Alan Andersen, Ph.D.Director - COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW (CR)
FROM: John Bailey, Ph.D.Industry Liaison to the CR Expert Panel
DATE: February 25, 2010
SUBJECT: Concentration of Use Dicarboxylic Acid and their Salts and Esters
Updated concentration of use table on Sebacic Acid and related ingredients
Concentration of use additions to the Sebacic Acid report
11011 7th Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20036-4702 202.331.1770 202.331.1969 (fax) www.personalcarecouncil.org CIR Panel Book Page 173
Concentration of Use - Additions to the Sebacic Acid and Related Ingredients ReportMalonic Acid, Diethyl Malonate, Succinic Acid, Decyl Succinate, Dicapryl Succinate,Dicetearyl Succinate, Diethyihexyl Succinate, Diethyl Succinate, Dimethyl Succinate,
Disodium Succinate, Sodium Succinate, Glutaric Acid, Diisostearyl Glutarate, DimethylGlutarate, Adipic Acid, Dibutyl Adipate, Di-C12-15 Alkyl Adipate, Dicapryl Adipate,
Dicetyl Adipate, Diethyl Adipate, Diethyihexyl Adipate, Diheptylundecyl Adipate, DihexylAdipate, Dihexyldecyl Adipate, Dilsobutyl Adipate, Diisocetyl Adipate, Dhlsodecyl Adipate,
Diisononyl Adipate, Dihsooctyl Adipate, Dhlsopropyl Adipate, Diisostearyl Adipate,Dimethyl Adipate, Dioctyldodecyl Adipate, Dipropyl Adipate and Ditridecyl Adipate*
Ingredient Product Category Concentrationof Use
Diethyl Malonate Skin cleansing (cold creams, cleansing 0.0 1%lotions, liquids and pads)
Diethyl Malonate Night creams, lotions and powders 0.02%
Diethyl Malonate Other skin care products 0.004%
Succinic Acid Bath oils, tablets and salts 26%
Succinic Acid Hair conditioners 0.2%
Succinic Acid Hair straighteners 0.001%
Succinic Acid Rinses (noncoloring) 0.01%
Succinic Acid Foundations 0.01%
Succinic Acid Makeup bases 0.01%
Succinic Acid Bath soaps and detergents 0.2%
Succinic Acid Face and neck creams, lotions and powders 0.2%
Succinic Acid Moisturizing creams, lotions and powders 0.1%
Diethyihexyl Succinate Colognes and toilet waters 1%
Diethyihexyl Succinate Hair conditioners 5%
Diethyihexyl Succinate Hair sprays (aerosol fixatives 0.02-0.3%
Diethyihexyl Succinate Permanent waves 3%
Diethylhexyl Succinate Tonics, dressings and other hair grooming 4%aids
Page 1 of 4
CIR Panel Book Page 174
Diethyihexyl Succinate Face powders 3%
Diethyihexyl Succinate Foundations 3%
Diethyihexyl Succinate Lipstick 3%
Diethyihexyl Succinate Preshave lotions (all types) 4%
Diethyihexyl Succinate Face and neck creams, lotions and powders 4-5%
Diethylhexyl Succinate Body and hand creams, lotions and 4-6%powders
Diethylhexyl Succinate Moisturizing creams, lotions and powders 3%
Diethylhexyl Succinate Other skincare preparations 4%
Diethylhexyl Succinate Suntan gels, creams and liquids 3-4%
Diethylhexyl Succinate Indoor tanning preparations 4%
Dimethyl Succinate Nail polish and enamel removers 0.2%
Dimethyl Succinate Skin cleansing (cold creams, cleansing 5%lotions, liquids and pads)
Dimethyl Succinate Eye lotion 0.002%
Disodium Succinate Foundations 0.0005%
Disodium Succinate Skin cleansing (cold creams, cleansing 0.0005%lotions liquids and pads)
Disodium Succinate Face and neck creams, lotions and powders 0.0 1-0.4%
Disodium Succinate Night creams, lotions and powders 0.02%
Disodium Succinate Skin fresheners 0.0005%
Dimethyl Glutarate Nail polish and enamel removers 0.5%
Dimethyl Glutarate Skin cleansing (cold creams, cleansing 15%lotions, liquids and pads)
Adipic Acid Bath oils, tablets and salts 15-18%
Adipic Acid Mascara 0.000001%
Adipic Acid Permanent waves 0.5%
Adipic Acid Lipstick 0.000001%
Page 2 of 4
CIR Panel Book Page 175
Diethyihexyl Adipate Blushers (all types) 14%
Diethylhexyl Adipate Foundations 0.9%
Diethylhexyl Adipate Makeup bases 1%
Diethylhexyl Adipate Nail extenders 3%
Diethyihexyl Adipate Nail polish and enamel 2%
Diethyihexyl Adipate Deodorants (underarm) 0.9%
Diethyihexyl Adipate Aftershave lotions 4%
Diethylhexyl Adipate Shaving cream (aerosol, brushless and 0.6%lather)
Diethylhexyl Adipate Face and neck creams, lotions and powders 3%
Diheptylundecyl Adipate Moisturizing creams, lotions and powders 6%
Dihexyl Adipate Eye makeup remover 3%
Diisobutyl Adipate Bath oils, tablets and salts 0.5%
Diisobutyl Adipate Colognes and toilet waters 0.6%
Diisobutyl Adipate Perfumes 3%
Diisobutyl Adipate Hair conditioners 0.2%
Diisobutyl Adipate Hair sprays (aerosol fixatives) 0.05-0.2%
Diisobutyl Adipate Tonics, dressings and other hair grooming 0.2%aids
Diisobutyl Adipate Basecoats and undercoats (manicuring 0.001-0.7%preparations)
Diisobutyl Adipate Cuticle softeners 0.5%
Diisobutyl Adipate Nail polish and enamel 0.009-0.7%
Diisobutyl Adipate Bath soaps and detergents 0.009%
Diisobutyl Adipate Face and neck creams, lotions and powders 0.003%
Diisobutyl Adipate Body and hand creams, lotions and 0.8%powders
Diisobutyl Adipate Moisturizing creams, lotions and powders 0.03%
Page 3 of 4
CIR Panel Book Page 176
Diisobutyl Adipate Paste masks (mud packs) 0.002%
Diisobutyl Adipate Suntan gels, creams and liquids 0.003%
Diisopropyl Adipate Bubble baths 2%
Diisopropyl Adipate Mascara 1%
Diisopropyl Adipate Perfumes 0.005-8%
Diisopropyl Adipate Other fragrance preparations 0.07-7%
Diisopropyl Adipate Tonics, dressings and other hair grooming 0.5-3%aids
Diisopropyl Adipate Blushers (all types) 0.02%
Diisopropyl Adipate Foundations 0.02%
Diisopropyl Adipate Aftershave lotions 0.009%
Diisopropyl Adipate Skin cleansing (cold creams, cleansing 7%lotions, liquids and pads)
Diisopropyl Adipate Face and neck creams, lotions and powders 3%
Diisopropyl Adipate Body and hand creams, lotions and 2%powders
Diisopropyl Adipate Body and hand sprays 2%
Diisopropyl Adipate Skin fresheners 1%
Diisostearyl Adipate Lipstick 10%
Diisostearyl Adipate Skin cleansing (cold creams, cleansing 3%lotions, liquids and pads)
Dimethyl Adipate Nail polish and enamel removers 0.2%*Ingredients found in the title of the table but not found in the table were included in theconcentration of use survey, but no uses were reported.
Information collected in 2010Table prepared February 24, 2010
Page 4 of 4
CIR Panel Book Page 177
Personal Care Products CouncilCommitted to Safety,Quality & Innovation
Memorandum
TO: F. Alan Andersen, Ph.D.Director - COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW (CIR)
FROM: John Bailey, Ph.D.Industry Liaison to the CIR Expert Panel
DATE: January 15, 2010 (revised summaries submitted July 26, 2010)
SUBJECT: Unpublished data on Diisostearyl Adipate, Diisocetyl Dodecandedioate andDioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate
For each ingredient there is a toxicological summary sheet (signed by Lisa Bouldin), followed by thestudies on that compound. Please note that the AMA Laboratories, Inc. (1996) HRIPT includes allthree compounds, and that a copy of this study is included following each summary sheet.
Bouldin L. Toxicological summary Liquiwax DISA (Diisostearyl Adipate)
AMA Laboratories, Inc. 1996. 50 human subject repeat insult patch test skin irritation/sensitizationevaluation of several substances (including Liquiwax DISA [Diisostearyl Adipate]).
Bouldin L. Toxicological summary Liquiwax DICDD (Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate)
AMA Laboratories, Inc. 1996. 50 human subject repeat insult patch test skin irritation/sensitizationevaluation of several substances (including Liquiwax DICDD [Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate]).
AMA Laboratories, Inc. 1991. Acute oral toxicity Liquiwax DICDD (Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate).
AMA Laboratories, Inc. 1990. Primary skin irritation Liquiwax DICDD (Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate).
AMA Laboratories, Inc. 1990. Primary eye irritation Liquiwax DICDD (Diisocetyl Dodecanedioate).
Bouldin L. Toxicological summary Liquiwax DIADD (Dioctyldodecyl Dodecanedioate)
AMA Laboratories, Inc. 1996. 50 human subject repeat insult patch test skin irritationlsensitizationevaluation of several substances (including Liquiwax DIADD [DioctyldodecylDodecanedioate]).
1101 17th Street, N.W., Suite 3OO Washington, D.C. 20036-4702 202.331.1770 I 202.331.1969 (fax) www.personalcarecouncil.org CIR Panel Book Page 197
AMA Laboratories, Inc. 1990. Acute oral toxicity Liquiwax DIADD (DioctyldodecylDodecanedioate).
AMA Laboratories, Inc. 1990. Primary skin irritation Liquiwax DLkDD (DioctyldodecylDodecanedioate).
AMA Laboratories, Inc. 1990. Primary eye irritation Liquiwax DJADD (DioctyldodecylDodecandioate).
AMA Laboratories, Inc. 1993. Guinea pig maximization test Liquiwax DIADD (DioctyldodecylDodecanedioate).
2
CIR Panel Book Page 198
Persona Care Products CounciCommitted to Safety,Quality & Innovation
Memorandum
TO: F. Alan Andersen, Ph.D.Director - COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW (CW)
FROM: John I}(OIndustry Liaison to the CIR Expert Panel
DATE: February 15, 2010
SUBJECT: Physical Chemical Properties Sebacates
Hokoku Corporation. 2010. Physical/Chemical Properties Dibutyl Octyl Sebacate, DihexyldecylSebacate and Dioctyldodecyl Sebacate.
Another supplier reports that the expected impurities in Diisopropyl Sebacate are the starting materialsSebacic Acid <0.3% and Isopropyl Alcohol <0.2%.
11011 7th Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20036-4702 202.331.1770 202.331.1969 (fax) www.personalcarecouncfl.org CIR Panel Book Page 260
Physi
cal/
Chem
ical
Pro
per
ties
Feb
ruar
y6,
2010
.HO
KOKU
Corp
ora
tio
n
Che
mic
alna
me
IDib
uty
loct
yl
Seb
acat
elD
ihex
yld
ecyl
Seb
acat
elD
ioct
yld
odec
yl
Seb
acat
eP
hv
sica
oro
ner
teis
Den
sity
(20
C)g/
ml
0.90
0.89
0.87
Vis
cosi
ty(
25C)
mm
2/s
4158
83F
lash
po
int
(C.0
.C)
C23
626
027
0P
our
poin
tC
—62
.5
—42
.5
17.
5O
ctan
ol/W
ater
Nod
ata
No
dat
aNo
dat
aoar
tit
ion
Wat
erso
lubil
ity
Inso
lub
leIn
solu
ble
Inso
lub
le
Che
mic
alp
rop
erti
esA
cid
Val
uem
gKO
H/g
0.1
0.1
0.1
Sap
onif
icat
ion
Val
uem
gKO
H/g
209
173
147
Hyd
orox
ylV
alue
mgK
OH
/g0.
51.
02.
0Io
din
eV
alue
12g/
lOO
g0.
10.
40.
4
Irri
tati
on
Dat
aNo
dat
aNo
dat
aNo
dat
a
CIR Panel Book Page 261
SEBACIC ACID 11A - Aftershave Lotion 1
SEBACIC ACID 12A - Cleansing 3
SEBACIC ACID 12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 1
SEBACIC ACID 12F - Moisturizing 7
DIETHYLHEXYL SEBACATE 03F - Mascara 4
DIETHYLHEXYL SEBACATE 05I - Other Hair Preparations 2
DIETHYLHEXYL SEBACATE 11A - Aftershave Lotion 7
DIMETHYL SEBACATE 10B - Deodorants (underarm) 1 ??
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 03D - Eye Lotion 1
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 04A - Cologne and Toilet waters 1
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 05A - Hair Conditioner 1
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 05G - Tonics, Dressings, and Other Hair Grooming Aids5
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 07I - Other Makeup Preparations 1
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 08A - Basecoats and Undercoats 1
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 10B - Deodorants (underarm) 4
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 11A - Aftershave Lotion 1
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 12C - Face and Neck (exc shave) 3
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 2
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 12F - Moisturizing 3
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 12J - Other Skin Care Preps 2
DIISOPROPYL SEBACATE 13B - Indoor Tanning Preparations 5
DIMETHYL SEBACATE 10B - Deodorants (underarm) 1 ??
SUCCINIC ACID 05C - Hair Straighteners 2
SUCCINIC ACID 12F - Moisturizing 2
SODIUM SUCCINATE 02B - Bubble Baths 1
SODIUM SUCCINATE 05F - Shampoos (non-coloring) 2
SODIUM SUCCINATE 10A - Bath Soaps and Detergents 1
SODIUM SUCCINATE 12F - Moisturizing 3
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 03D - Eye Lotion 2
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 03G - Other Eye Makeup Preparations 2
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 05A - Hair Conditioner 1
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 05E - Rinses (non-coloring) 1
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 05F - Shampoos (non-coloring) 1
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 05I - Other Hair Preparations 2
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 07C - Foundations 1
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 07F - Makeup Bases 1
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 12A - Cleansing 4
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 12C - Face and Neck (exc shave) 9
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 2
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 12F - Moisturizing 9
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 12G - Night 5
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 12I - Skin Fresheners 1
DISODIUM SUCCINATE 12J - Other Skin Care Preps 4
DIMETHYL SUCCINATE 08F - Nail Polish and Enamel Removers 12
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 03D - Eye Lotion 1
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 05A - Hair Conditioner 1
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 05G - Tonics, Dressings, and Other Hair Grooming Aids2
CIR Panel Book Page 262
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 05I - Other Hair Preparations 1
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 07A - Blushers (all types) 1
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 07C - Foundations 1
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 10E - Other Personal Cleanliness Products1
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 11A - Aftershave Lotion 1
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 12A - Cleansing 2
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 12C - Face and Neck (exc shave) 2
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 9
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 12F - Moisturizing 8
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 12G - Night 2
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 12J - Other Skin Care Preps 3
DIETHYLHEXYL SUCCINATE 13B - Indoor Tanning Preparations 3
DIOCTYL SUCCINATE 05B - Hair Spray (aerosol fixatives) 1 actually Dicapryl
DIOCTYL SUCCINATE 12C - Face and Neck (exc shave) 2
DIOCTYL SUCCINATE 12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 1
DIOCTYL SUCCINATE 12F - Moisturizing 3
DIOCTYL SUCCINATE 12G - Night 1
DIOCTYL SUCCINATE 13C - Other Suntan Preparations 1
DIMETHYL GLUTARATE 08F - Nail Polish and Enamel Removers 13
ADIPIC ACID 02A - Bath Oils, Tablets, and Salts 1
ADIPIC ACID 05A - Hair Conditioner 8
ADIPIC ACID 05D - Permanent Waves 6
ADIPIC ACID 05F - Shampoos (non-coloring) 8
ADIPIC ACID 05G - Tonics, Dressings, and Other Hair Grooming Aids2
DIMETHYL ADIPATE 08F - Nail Polish and Enamel Removers 12
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 01B - Baby Lotions, Oils, Powders, and Creams1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 03C - Eye Shadow 1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 03D - Eye Lotion 1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 03G - Other Eye Makeup Preparations 1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 04E - Other Fragrance Preparation 5
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 05G - Tonics, Dressings, and Other Hair Grooming Aids1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 07A - Blushers (all types) 1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 07C - Foundations 5
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 07E - Lipstick 1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 07F - Makeup Bases 3
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 07I - Other Makeup Preparations 1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 08A - Basecoats and Undercoats 1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 08E - Nail Polish and Enamel 3
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 10E - Other Personal Cleanliness Products1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 11E - Shaving Cream 4
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 12A - Cleansing 2
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 12C - Face and Neck (exc shave) 6
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 1
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 12F - Moisturizing 2
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 12G - Night 2
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 12H - Paste Masks (mud packs) 2
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 12J - Other Skin Care Preps 2
DIETHYLHEXYL ADIPATE 13A - Suntan Gels, Creams, and Liquids 1
DIBUTYL ADIPATE 03F - Mascara 2
DIBUTYL ADIPATE 04E - Other Fragrance Preparation 2
DIBUTYL ADIPATE 08E - Nail Polish and Enamel 1
DIBUTYL ADIPATE 12F - Moisturizing 1
CIR Panel Book Page 263
DICAPRYL ADIPATE 02A - Bath Oils, Tablets, and Salts 5
DICAPRYL ADIPATE 04E - Other Fragrance Preparation 1
DICAPRYL ADIPATE 10B - Deodorants (underarm) 30
DICAPRYL ADIPATE 12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 7
DIHEXYL ADIPATE 12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 1
DIISOBUTYL ADIPATE 05B - Hair Spray (aerosol fixatives) 5
DIISOBUTYL ADIPATE 08A - Basecoats and Undercoats 2
DIISOBUTYL ADIPATE 08E - Nail Polish and Enamel 7
DIISOBUTYL ADIPATE 11A - Aftershave Lotion 2
DIISOBUTYL ADIPATE 12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 5
DIISOBUTYL ADIPATE 12F - Moisturizing 1
DIISODECYL ADIPATE 12G - Night 1
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 02A - Bath Oils, Tablets, and Salts 1
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 02D - Other Bath Preparations 1
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 03F - Mascara 2
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 04A - Cologne and Toilet waters 8
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 04B - Perfumes 6
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 04E - Other Fragrance Preparation 7
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 05G - Tonics, Dressings, and Other Hair Grooming Aids10
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 05H - Wave Sets 2
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 05I - Other Hair Preparations 5
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 07E - Lipstick 1
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 08F - Nail Polish and Enamel Removers 1
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 10B - Deodorants (underarm) 6
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 11A - Aftershave Lotion 11
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 12A - Cleansing 1
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 2
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 12F - Moisturizing 2
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 12J - Other Skin Care Preps 2
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 13A - Suntan Gels, Creams, and Liquids 1
DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 13C - Other Suntan Preparations 1
DIISOSTEARYL ADIPATE 07E - Lipstick 4
DIISOSTEARYL ADIPATE 12A - Cleansing 2
DIOCTYLDODECYL ADIPATE 07E - Lipstick 3
DI-N-OCTYL ADIPATE 07C - Foundations 2 ???
DI-N-OCTYL ADIPATE 10E - Other Personal Cleanliness Products1
OCTYL ADIPATE 12C - Face and Neck (exc shave) 1 ??
AZELAIC ACID 11G - Other Shaving Preparation Products1
AZELAIC ACID 12C - Face and Neck (exc shave) 6
AZELAIC ACID 12H - Paste Masks (mud packs) 1
AZELAIC ACID 12J - Other Skin Care Preps 1
DIISOCETYL DODECANEDIOATE07I - Other Makeup Preparations 1
DIISOCETYL DODECANEDIOATE13B - Indoor Tanning Preparations 1
CIR Panel Book Page 264
DIOCTYLDODECYL DODECANEDIOATE04E - Other Fragrance Preparation 2
DIOCTYLDODECYL DODECANEDIOATE07E - Lipstick 1
DIOCTYLDODECYL DODECANEDIOATE12D - Body and Hand (exc shave) 2
CIR Panel Book Page 265
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF TOXICOLOGY
Volume 3, Number 3, 19&Q Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., Publishers
3
Final Report on the Safety
Assessment of Dioctyl Adipate and
Diisopropyl Adipate
Dioctyl Adipate, the diester of octyl alcohol and adipic acid, and Diisopropyl Adipate, the diester of isopropyl alcohol, are used in cosmetics as emollients and bases. These two ingredients have a low acute oral and percutaneous tox- icity. Undiluted Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate were, at most, only very mild, transient eye irritants. Primary dermal irritation tests indicated that Dioctyl Adipate was a very mild irritant and Diisopropyl Adipate was minimally irritating. Dioctyl Adipate was not a skin sensitizer in guinea pigs.
An Ames test for the mutagenic potential of Dioctyl Adipate was negative. An assay of the carcinogenic potential of Dioctyl Adipate produced no un- toward effects and was noncarcinogenic to rats. Mice studies indicated a dose- related body weight reduction and a higher incidence of hepatocellular adenoma and carcinoma than controls. In a lifetime study Dioctyl Adipate caused no skin tumors when 10 mg was applied weekly to the back skin of mice. The teratogenicity potential of Dioctyl Adipate is reviewed.
Clinical assessment of Dioctyl Adipate in formulations showed, at most, minimal erythema and papules when applied under occlusion. No UV sen- sitization occurred. Undiluted Diisopropyl Adipate produced no irritation in 24 h patch tests, but was moderately irritating in a 21-day cumulative irritancy test. Formulations containing up to 20°h Diisopropyl Adipate caused minimal to mild irritation, no sensitization and no photosensitization. On the basis of available data, it is concluded that Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate are safe as presently used in cosmetics.
INTRODUCTION
D ioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate are common plasticizers and emol- lient esters. In cosmetics they are used as emollients and as the base of many
different types of products.“-3)
CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
Structure
1. Dioctyl Adipate is the diester of octyl alcohol and adipic acid. It conforms generally to the formula:
101
CIR Panel Book Page 266
102 COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
0 II y2H5
HgCa-CH-CH2-0-C-(CH2)4-C-0-CH2-CH-C4Hg
CAS Number: 103-23-l Synonyms include: Di-(2-Ethylhexyl)Adipate and Wickenol 1 58.(3)
2. Diispropyl Adipate is the diester of isopropyl alcohol and adipic acid. It conforms generally to the formula:
0 0 II II
(CHj)2CH-O-C-(CH2),-C-O-CH(CH3)2
CAS Number 6938-94-9 Other names include:
Beta DIA Ceraphyl 230 Crodamol DA I so-Ad i pate 2/043 700 Prod i pate Schercemol DIA Standamul DIPA Tegester 504-D Wickenol 11 6.(3’
Production
Dioctyl Adipate is produced by the reaction of adipic acid and 2-ethylhexanol in the presence of an esterification catalyst such as sulfuric acid, p-toluenesulfonic acid or a proprietary catalyst. Purification of the reaction product includes re- moval of the catalyst, alkali refining and stripping. (4.5) Diisopropyl Adipate is pro- duced by esterification of adipic acid with an excess of isopropanol. The excess alcohol is removed by vacuum stripping and the ester is then alkali-refined and filtered.(6)
Properties
Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate are clear, colorless to light yellow viscous liquids with an aromatic odor. They are soluble in most organic solvents and insoluble in water. For other properties, see Table 1.
Analytical Methods
Diisopropyl Adipate and Dioctyl Adipate can be identified through standard Infrared (IR) spectroscopy. (‘I Gas-liquid chromatography, liquid-liquid extrac- tion, mass spectrometry, and high-pressure liquid chromatography are also methods of analysis for the Adipates.“-lo)
Reactivity/Stability
Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate are considered stable; however,
CIR Panel Book Page 267
ASSESSMENT: DIOCTYL ADIPATE AND DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 103
TABLE 1. Properties of Dioctyl and Diisopropyl Adipate.
Dioctyl Property Adipate Ref.
Diisopropyl
Adipate Ref.
Form Oily liquid 2 Oily liquid 7 Color Colorless to 2,4 Colorless, clear 7
light yellow Boiling point (“C) 417 2 - -
Specific gravity 0.9268 2 0.950 to 0.965 7
(20/20%) Flash point, T, (“F) 204.4 (400) 11 - - Melting point (“C) -67.8 4 - -
Molecular weight 370.56 11 230.34 4 Refractive index at 20°C 1.4474 11 1.4200-l .4245 7 Acid value 1 .O (max.) 5 2.0 (max.) 7 Saponification value 298-308 5 465-500 7 Iodine value 0.5 (max.) 5 1 .O (max.) 5 Viscosity (20°C) 13.7 cps - - Vapor pressure 0 200% 2.4 mm Hg - - - Soluble in: Alcohol 4 - -
Ether
Acetone
Acetic acid
Most organic solvents Insoluble in: Water 2,4 - -
Glycerin and glycols
hydrolysis of the ester groupings may occur in the presence of aqueous acids or bases.‘5a6)
Impurities
No known minor impurities occur in either Dioctyl Adipate or Diisopropyl Adipate, although the acid values imply the presence of adipic acid or of the monoester in both.(5*6)
USE
Non-Cosmetic Uses
The Adipates are used primarily as plasticizers in food wraps, vinyl blood bags and hemodialysis bags. Adipates are also used as solvents and aircraft Iubes.(‘.2.4,‘2.13) Dioctyl Adipate has Indirect Food Additive (IFA) Status for use in food wrapping.(14)
Cosmetic Use
The Adipates are used as components of cosmetic bases and as solvents and emollients in other cream-type skin preparations. (I) They are also used to modify the tactile and flow properties of emollient blends, especially in bath products.(‘5)
The cosmetic product formulation computer printout which is made available by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is compiled through volun- tary filing of such data in accordance with Title 21 part 720.4 of the Code of
CIR Panel Book Page 268
104 COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
Federal Regulations. (14) Ingredients are listed in prescribed concentration ranges under specific product type categories. Since certain cosmetic ingredients are supplied by the manufacturer at less than 100% concentration, the value re- ported by the cosmetic formulator may not necessarily reflect the true, actual concentration found in the finished product; the actual concentration in such a case would be a fraction of that reported to the FDA. Since data are submitted only within the framework of preset concentration ranges; this presents the oppor- tunity for overestimation of the actual concentration of an ingredient in a par- ticular product. An entry at the lowest end of a concentration range is considered the same as one entered at the highest end of that range, thus, introducing the possibility of a two- to lo-fold error in the assumed ingredient concentration.
According to the industry’s 1981 submission of product formulation data to the FDA, Dioctyl Adipate was used in 27 products in concentrations of I 0.1 Oh-1 % in some facial makeup, and up to lo%-25% in bath preparations(16) (see Table 2).
Diisopropyl Adipate was used in 112 cosmetic formulations according to the 1981 FDA product formulation data. Its concentrations of use ranged from less than 0.1% up to 25%‘16) (see Table 2).
Surfaces to Which Commonly Applied and Frequency of Application
Dioctyl and Diisopropyl Adipates are found in cosmetics which may come in contact with the skin of the face, hands, and the general body surface, the mucous membranes, nails, scalp, and hair. Thus, cosmetics containing Adipates may be applied to the body once every few days to several times daily(16) (see Table 2).
TABLE 2. Product Formulation Data.a
Product categoryb
Total no. No. of product formulations within each concentration
containing range (% j b
ingredient >JO-25 >5-10 >J-5 >O. J-J s0.J
Dioctyl Adipate
Bath oils, tablets, and salts
Colognes and toilet waters
Blushers (all types)
Makeup foundations
Lipstick
Other makeup preparations
(not eye)
Nail polish and enamel
remover
Deodorants (underarm)
Aftershave lotions
Face, body, and hand skin
1
2
1
1
4 - - - -
- - 6 - -
- - - - 1
- 2 1 1 -
- - 5 - -
- - 1 - -
- - 2 - - - - - 1 - - - 1 - -
care preparations (excluding
shaving preparations) 1 - - 1 - -
Other suntan preparations 1 - - - 1 -
198 1 TOTALS 27 4 2 17 3 1
CIR Panel Book Page 269
ASSESSMENT: DIOCTYL ADIPATE AND DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE
TABLE 2. (Continued.)
105
Product categoryb
Total no.
containing
ingredient
No. of product formulations within each concentration
range (%) b
> JO-25 >5-JO >J-5 >O.J-7 s0.J
Diisopropyl Adipate
Bath oils, tablets, and salts
Bubble baths
Eyeliner
Eye shadow
Colognes and toilet waters
Perfumes
Sachets
Other fragrance preparations
Hair conditioners
Hair sprays (aerosol fixatives)
Tonics, dressings, and other
hair grooming aids
Wave sets
Blushers (all types)
Face powders
Makeup foundations
Other personal cleanliness
products
Aftershave lotions
Preshave lotions (all types)
Skin cleansing preparations
(cold creams, lotions,
liquids, and pads)
Foot powders and sprays
Moisturizing skin care
preparations
Night skin care preparations
Skin fresheners
Other skin care preparations
Suntan gels, creams, and
liquids
Indoor tanning preparations
7
1
1
1
15
20
1
9
3
1
1
16 1
5
1
2
1
11
2
2
2
1 - - -
- - -
-
- -
- -
- -
-
- - 1
- -
-
1
3
1
2 -
1 - 1 - 1 -
- - 12 3
4 -
- -
6 1 - 1
1 -
4
1
1
1 -
-
9 -
-
-
1 -
-
1
-
2
-
1 -
-
1
1
7 -
5
1
1 -
6 -
-
-
- - - - - - -
2 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
2 -
-
-
1981 TOTALS 112 11 23 46 28 4
a Data from Ref. 16.
bPreset product categories and concentration ranges in accordance with federal filing regulations (21 CFR
720.4).
BIOLOGICAL PROPERTIES
General Studies
Subcellular and Enzyme Effects
Dioctyl Adipate was fed to male rats in a dietary concentration of 2% for three weeks. Effects included hepatic peroxisome proliferation, increased size of the liver, and increase in the hepatic activities of the peroxisome-associated enzymes catalase and carnitine acetyl transferase. Hypolipidemia and a decrease
CIR Panel Book Page 270
106 COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
in serum lipids were also observed in Dioctyl Adipate-treated animals. The authors postulated that the active portion of the compound, in the induction of hepatic peroxisome proliferation, may be the metabolite 2-ethylhexyl alcohol.(“)
Effect on Cultured Cells
When contracting chick embryo heart cells were maintained in tissue culture and exposed to Dioctyl Adipate at a level of 1.5 pglml (4 km), the number of car- diac contracting cells was reduced to 50% of control levels.(18) In cultures of human diploid cells of the WI38 strain, the IDso (dose that inhibits cell growth to 50% of the control culture) for Dioctyl Adipate was 32 pM.‘l’)
Animal Toxicology
Acute Toxicity
Oral
Dioctyl Adipate was administered by gavage to nine groups of five male and five female F344 rats at doses of 0.08, 0.16, 0.31, 0.63, 1.25, 2.5, 5.0, 10, or 20 g/kg of the substance in corn oil. Two of five males of the 10 g/kg group died and one male and one female of the 20 g/kg group died.(‘O)
Five groups of five male and five female mice were given Dioctyl Adipate in corn oil in single doses of 1.25, 2.5, 5.0, 10.0, or 20.0 g/kg. Mortality observations were: one male of the 1.25 g/kg group died “accidentally,” two males of the 10.0 g/kg group, three at the 20.0 g/kg group, one female of the 20 g/kg group. The estimated LDso for male mice was 15.0 g/kg, and for females it was 24.6 g/kg.(‘O)
In an acute oral toxicity study using rats, Andreeva(z1) reported a no effect dose of Dioctyl Adipate in rats of 6 g/kg. Doses greater than this resulted in cen- tral nervous system (CNS) stimulation followed by depression which lasted for the five- to seven-day observation period.
The single oral toxic dose of Dioctyl Adipate for the rat over an observation period of 14 days was 9.11 g/kg.(22)
A group of five male and five female albino rats was fasted overnight, in- tubated with a dose of 7.4 g/kg Dioctyl Adipate, and then observed daily for 14 days. One animal died on Day 14, but other observations were not recorded.(23)
A product containing 0.175% Dioctyl Adipate was administered in a single undiluted 6.5 g/kg dose to five male and five female Harlan Wistar rats. During the seven observation days, no signs of toxicity were observed and body weight gains were normal.(24)
A face cream containing 0.7% Diisopropyl Adipate was intubated into groups of five male and five female Wistar rats per dose concentration. Animals were observed for 14 days; one male rat of the highest dose group (76.8 g/kg of the formulation) died on Day 4 of observation. At necropsy of this animal, the findings included urinary staining of the abdomen, prominent serosal blood vessels in the stomach, cecum and intestines, and red fluid in the intestines. No other deaths or abnormal findings were reported.‘25)
A perfume containing 1.08% Diisopropyl Adipate was administered in a single 5 g/kg dose of the preparation to five male and five female Sprague- Dawley rats. The animals were observed for 14 days; one female died on Day 2.
CIR Panel Book Page 271
ASSESSMENT: DIOCTYLADIPATE AND DIISOPROPYLADIPATE 107
Necropsy findings of this animal were dark and mottled lungs and liver, reddened pylorus, and gas-filled GI tract. Other surviving animals showed signs of decreased activity, ataxia, diarrhea, gasping, and urinary incontinence.(26)
In a similar study a perfume. containing 1.08% Diisopropyl Adipate was studied. Five male and five female Sprague-Dawley rats were given by oral in- tubation a single 5 g/kg dose of the formulation; animals were observed for 14 days. No animals died, but three males and five females had decreased activity and ataxia.r2”
A product containing 5% Diisopropyl Adipate was administered as a single 5 g/kg dose of the formulation by intubation to five female albino rats; the animals were observed for seven days. No deaths or abnormal behavior were observed.‘2*)
A dose of 15 g/kg of a product containing 20.75% Diisopropyl Adipate was administered orally by stomach tube to five female rats. After seven observation days, no deaths or abnormal responses were observed and the LDso was > 15 g/kg dose’29) (see Table 3).
74-day oral study
A 14-day repeated dose study of Dioctyl Adipate was conducted using six groups of five male and five female F344 rats and of the same number of B6C3Fl mice. Dosages of 0 (control), 3,100, 6,300, 12,500, 25,000, and 50,000 ppm in the diet were fed to male rats and mice for 14 days. Female rats and mice were fed 0 (control), 6,300, 12,500, 25,000, 50,000, and 100,000 ppm Dioctyl Adipate in the diet. Weight gain was depressed in male rats fed 50,000 ppm and in female rats fed 25,000 ppm or more. Females fed 100,000 ppm lost weight and one died. All female mice receiving 100,000 ppm died, and males at 50,000 ppm and females at 25,000 or more lost weight.‘20’
Intravenous
The intravenous LDso of Dioctyl Adipate to rats and rabbits was 900 mglkg and 540 mglkg, respectively.‘30)
The acute intravenous LDso of Diisopropyl Adipate to rats was 640 mg/kg.‘30)
Percutaneous
The acute dermal toxicity of Dioctyl Adipate was tested using eight albino rabbits. The trunk of each animal was clipped of all hair and half of the rabbits received longitudinal epidermal abrasions over the clipped area. The rabbits were immobilized and plastic sleeves were slipped over the shaved areas. The animals were placed into groups of two each and received doses of 0 (control), 3.6, 5.6, and 8.7 g/kg of pure Dioctyl Adipate under the sleeve. After 24 h, the sleeves were removed, the volume of unabsorbed material was cleaned from each animal and measured, and skin reactions were evaluated. The animals were observed for signs of toxicity for two weeks. Daily observation included body weights, food consumption, and behavior. Urinalysis, hematologic features, and skin changes were also observed and skin changes were rated according to stan- dard Draize scores. The animals had only slight erythema which increased in duration with increasing concentration. However, all irritation disappeared several days before the end of the observation period. Weight gain, feed con- sumption, urine and hematologic values, as well as behavior were normal in all animals. Dioctyl Adipate produced mild irritation, but no systemic toxic ef- fects. (23)
-
CIR Panel Book Page 272
TAB
LE
3.
Ac
ute
O
ral
Toxi
city
.
Ing
red
ient
Spe
cies
an
d N
o.
Ing.
C
ont.
of
An
ima
ls 66
) D
ose/
kg
L D
sdkg
Ob
serv
atio
n
perio
d C
omm
ents
R
ef.
Dio
cty
l A
dip
ate
Ing
red
ient
F3
44
rats
-
0.08
-20.
0 g
45
ma
le,
45
fem
ale
B6C
3Fl
mic
e
25
ma
le,
25
fem
ale
- 1.
25-2
0.0
g
rats
-
6g
5 m
ale
ra
ts
- -
5 m
ale
, 5
fem
ale
ra
ts
- 7.
4 g
45.0
g
fo
r
ma
le9
26.0
g
fo
r
fem
ale
?
15.0
g
fo
r
ma
le9
24.6
g
fo
r
fem
ale
9
-
9.11
g
(7.2
8-l
1.4)
-
14
da
ys
15 d
ays
7 d
ays
14 d
ays
14
da
ys
2 o
f 5
ma
les
die
d
in t
he
10
g/k
g d
ose
gro
up;
1 o
f 5
ma
les
an
d
1 o
f
5 fe
ma
les
die
d
in t
he
20
g/k
g d
ose
gro
up.
2 o
f 5
ma
les
die
d
in t
he
10
g/k
g d
ose
gro
up;
3 m
ale
s a
nd
1 o
f 5
fem
ale
s
die
d
in t
he
20
g/k
g g
roup
.
6 g
/kg
=
“N
o
eff
ec
t le
vel.”
G
rea
ter
do
ses
ca
use
CN
S d
istur
ba
nce
. -
On
e
an
ima
l d
ied
on
Da
y 14
.
20
20
21
22
23
6.5
g
- 7
da
ys
No
o
f w
eig
ht
signs
to
xic
ity;
ga
ins
24
norm
al.
up
to
76
.8
g
- 14
d
ays
O
ne
m
ale
ra
t a
t th
e
80
ml/
kg
leve
l 25
die
d
on
Da
y 4
of
ob
serv
atio
n.
5.0
g
- 14
da
ys
On
D
ay
2 o
f o
bse
rva
tion,
o
ne
26
an
ima
l d
ied
. N
ec
rop
sy
sho
we
d
red
, m
ott
led
lu
ngs
an
d l
ive
r, g
as-
fille
d
C.1
. tr
ac
t.
5.0
g
14 d
ays
3
ma
les
an
d 5
fe
ma
les
sho
we
d
27
de
cre
ase
d
ac
tivity
a
nd
ata
xia
.
No
d
ea
ths.
15.0
g
-
7 d
ays
N
o
de
ath
s o
cc
urre
d
an
d a
ll a
nim
als
28
ap
pe
are
d
norm
al.
15.0
g
-
7 d
ays
N
o
de
ath
s o
cc
urre
d
an
d a
ll a
nim
als
29
ap
pe
are
d
norm
al.
Form
ula
tion
5
ma
le,
5 fe
ma
le
Wist
ar
rats
Diis
op
rop
yl
Ad
ipa
te
Form
ula
tion
5
ma
le,
5 fe
ma
le
Wist
ar
alb
ino
rats
p
er
do
sag
e
5 m
ale
, 5
fem
ale
Sp
rag
ue
-Da
wle
y
rats
5 m
ale
, 5
fem
ale
Sp
rag
ue
-Da
wle
y
rats
5 fe
ma
le
alb
ino
ra
ts
5 fe
ma
le
alb
ino
ra
ts
(0.1
75)
0.7
1.08
1.08
5.0
20.7
5
a Ex
tra
po
late
d
by
aut
hor.
CIR Panel Book Page 273
ASSESSMENT: DIOCTYL ADIPATE AND DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 109
Immersion test
A product containing 20.75% Diisopropyl Adipate was tested for dermal ir- ritation and percutaneous toxicity- in a whole-body immersion test using six albino guinea pigs. The product was diluted to 0.5% w/v with water so that the actual concentration of the Adipate was 0.10%. The animals were clipped of all abdominal hair and placed in restraining cylinders. The lower parts of the body were immersed in the 37°C test solution for 4 h per day for three consecutive days. Forty-eight hours after the last exposure, the skin of the abdomen was graded according to a scale from 10 (normal) to 1 (moribund as determined by skin in- juries). Clinical signs were recorded daily, and products with a score less than seven are considered potential irritants. On observation, four animals were nor- mal (score = 10) and two had a “first hint of scaling” (score = 9). There were no signs of systemic toxicity and the degree of skin irritation was considered minimal.(31r
Ocular
Undiluted Dioctyl Adipate (0.1 ml) was instilled into one eye of each of six albino rabbits. The untreated eye served as control. The eyes were graded at 24, 48, and 72 h on a scale of 0 (normal) to 4 (cornea1 opacity, iridial destruction, red conjunctivae, and swelling). No irritation (all scores = 0) was found at any of the observation periods.(23)
Each of six albino rabbits was treated in one eye with 0.1 ml of a cosmetic moisturizer containing 0.175% Dioctyl Adipate. The animals were observed up to seven days following instillation. After 1 h, slight conjunctival redness was observed, but it had disappeared after 24 h. No other effects were noted.‘24)
A 0.1 ml sample of a rouge product containing 0.01% Dioctyl Adipate was instilled into one eye of each of six albino rabbits. The untreated eye served as the control and all eyes were graded after 24,48, and 72 h. This product produced no conjunctival redness or chemosis, keratitis, or iritis and it was considered nonirritating.(32)
Two lots of undiluted Diisopropyl Adipate were tested for ocular irritation us- ing six albino rabbits per lot. One eye of each animal received 0.1 ml of the ingre- dient and examinations for irritation were made daily until all scores were negative or up to seven days. One lot caused neligible irritation on Day 1, which disappeared by Day 2. No irritation was caused by the second lot.(33’
A face cream formulation containing 0.7% Diisopropyl Adipate was tested on nine albino rabbits for ocular irritation. One-tenth milliliter of the undiluted test material was placed in one eye of each animal; the other eye served as the control. Thirty seconds after instillation, the treated eyes of three rabbits were rinsed with 20 ml of deionized water. Observations for ocular reactions were made at 24, 48, and 72 h, and four and seven days after administration. In rabbits with unwashed eyes, two had conjunctival redness for 72 h and one had some presence of cornea1 stippling for 48 h. No other reactions were noted. The washed eyes of two rabbits had some cornea1 stippling up to Day 4; no other reactions were noted.(34)
Two products, one containing 5.0% Diisopropyl Adipate and one containing 20.75%, were each tested for ocular irritation using six albino rabbits. The prod- ucts were instilled into one eye of each animal; the untreated eye served as the control. Observations were made until all eyes were negative for up to seven
CIR Panel Book Page 274
110 COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
days. The 5.0% product produced minimal irritation (score = 6 out of 110) on Day 1 and the irritation had disappeared by Day 2.(35’ The second product pro- duced minimal irritation (score = 2 out of 110) on Day 1 and the irritation had disappeared by Day 2(36) (see Table 4).
Primary skin irritation
The primary cutaneous irritation of undiluted Dioctyl Adipate was studied using six albino rabbits. An intact and an abraded site on each rabbit received 0.5 ml of the Adipate under an occluded patch. After 24 h of exposure, the patches were removed and the sites evaluated for irritation according to the Draize method. A second observation was made 48 h after patch removal. Only very slight, barely perceptible erythema was observed in all animals at 24 h. After 72 h, the irritation had decreased in severity in all animals and had disappeared in one. The Primary Irritation Index (PII) was 0.83, indicating that Dioctyl Adipate was a very mild irritant.‘13’
The primary skin irritation of a moisturizing cream containing 0.175% Dioc- tyl Adipate was tested using three albino rabbits. The formulation was applied in four single daily 0.5 ml applications to the shaved backs of the animals and obser- vations were made for seven days. After 24 h, slight erythema was observed which persisted throughout the seven-day period. One animal had well defined erythema with edema, and mild desquamation was seen on day seven. The irrita- tion index was 1 .6.(24)
The primary skin irritation of three lots of Diisopropyl Adipate was in- vestigated according to the Draize method. In each experiment, 0.1 ml of the un- diluted product was applied under occlusion to the clipped back skin of nine albino rabbits. After 24 h of contact, the dressing was removed and the sites scored on a Primary Skin Irritation (PSI) scale of 0 (no effect) to 4 (severe erythema with or without edema). The PII was the average score of the total number of test subjects. The first lot had a PII of 1.6 and the second, 1.3. These scores indicated that the material was a mild irritant.“‘) The third lot caused no irritation in eight rabbits and only barely perceptible erythema in one. The PII score of 0.06 indicated that this compound was minimally irritating.(3B1
Two products containing Diisopropyl Adipate at 5.0% and 20.75% were tested by the Draize technique. The undiluted product (0.1 ml) was applied under occlusion to the shaved skin of nine albino rabbits for 24 h. Observations were made 24 and 72 h after contact. The product with 5.0% Diisopropyl Adipate had a PII of 0.33, indicating that the product was minimally irritating.(39) The product with 20.75% Diisopropyl Adipate had a PII of 0.11 and was minimally ir- ritatingC40) (see Table 5).
Sensitization
The skin sensitizing potential of Dioctyl Adipate was studied using 10 white male guinea pigs. An area on the backs and flanks, clipped free from hair, was in- jected intracutaneously with 0.1% Dioctyl Adipate in olive oil. Injections were made every other day, three times weekly, until 10 had been given. The first in- jection was 0.05 ml and all subsequent ones were 0.1 ml each. Two weeks after the last injection, a challenge dose of 0.05 ml was injected. Observations were made 24 h after each injection as to area, height, and color of reaction. The retest or challenge injection reaction was compared with an average of-the scores taken after the original 10 doses. The area and height of the retest area was
CIR Panel Book Page 275
TABL
E 4.
O
cul
ar
Irrita
tion
.
ingr
edie
nt
Spe
cie
s a
nd
no.
C
ont.
of
anim
als
(%)
Ap
plie
d
am
oun
t
(ml)
Ob
serv
atio
n
pe
riod
irrita
tion
sc
ore
Ma
x.
scor
e C
omm
ents
R
ef.
Dio
ctyl
A
dipa
te
Ing
red
ient
6
alb
ino
ra
bb
its
100
0.1
72
h
o/4
N
oni
rrita
ting
to
ra
bb
it e
ves.
23
Form
ula
tion
Form
ula
tion
6 a
lbin
o
rab
bits
0.
175
0.1
7 d
ays
-
Slig
ht
co
nju
nc
tiva
l re
dne
ss
aft
er
1 h;
24
cle
are
d
aft
er
24
h.
6 a
lbin
o
rab
bits
0.
01
0.1
72
h
- N
o
irrita
tion.
32
Diis
opro
pyl
Adi
pate
Ing
red
ient
Lot
75
6 a
lbin
o
rab
bits
Lot
76
6 a
lbin
o
rab
bits
Form
ula
tion
9
alb
ino
ra
bb
its
(6 u
nw
ash
ed
e
yes)
(3 w
ash
ed
e
yes)
6 a
lbin
o
rab
bits
6 a
lbin
o
rab
bits
100
100
0.1
0.1
72
h
72
h
l/11
0
O/l
10
Ne
glig
ibly
irr
itatin
g
on
Da
y 1.
Irr
itatio
n
disa
pp
ea
red
o
n D
ay
2.
No
nirri
tatin
g.
33
33
0.7
0.1
7 d
ays
-
5.0
0.1
2 d
ays
6/
l 10
20.7
5 0.
1 2
da
ys
2/l
10
Un
wa
she
d
eye
s;
2 sh
ow
ed
c
on
jun
ctiv
al
red
ness
fo
r 72
h,
1
ha
d c
orn
ea
1
stip
plin
g
for
48
h. W
ash
ed
e
yes;
2
sho
we
d
co
rne
a1
stip
plin
g
to
Da
y 4.
M
inim
al
irrita
tion
o
cc
urre
d
on
Da
y 1
an
d d
isap
pe
are
d
on
Da
y 2.
M
inim
al
irrita
tion
o
cc
urre
d
on
Da
y 1
an
d d
isap
pe
are
d
on
Da
y 2.
34
35
36
CIR Panel Book Page 276
TAB
LE
5.
Prim
ary
D
erm
al
Irrita
tion.
App
lied
Tim
e In
gr.
Con
t. a
mo
unt
Spe
cie
s a
nd
no.
Ingr
edie
nt
6)
(ml)
of
anim
als
Con
tact
O
bser
v.
P///
Max
. C
omm
ents
R
ef.
Dio
ctyl
A
dipa
te
Ing
red
ient
10
0 0.
5 6
alb
ino
ra
bb
its
24
h
48 h
0.
83ia
.o
Ve
ry
slig
ht,
ba
rely
p
erc
ep
tible
23
ery
the
ma
in
all
an
ima
ls.
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
----
Pro
duc
t-m
oist
uriz
er
0.17
5 0.
5 3
alb
ino
ra
bb
its
4 d
ays
7
da
ys
1.61
40
Aft
er
24
h,
slig
ht
ery
the
ma
24
pe
rsist
ing
to
D
ay
7 w
ith
de
squa
ma
tion.
Diis
opro
pyl
Adi
pate
Ing
red
ient
10
0 0.
1 9
alb
ino
ra
bb
its
24h
- 1.
6l4.
0 M
ild
irrita
nt.
37
100
0.1
9 a
lbin
o
rab
bits
24
h -
1.31
4.0
Mild
irr
itant
. 37
loo
0.
1 9
alb
ino
ra
bb
its
24h
- 0.
06/4
.0
Min
ima
lly
irrita
ting
. 38
Pro
duc
ts
5.0
0.1
9 a
lbin
o
rab
bits
24
h
72
h
0.
3314
.0
Min
ima
lly
irrita
ting
. 39
20.7
5 0.
1 9
alb
ino
ra
bb
its
24
h
72
h
0.11
/4.0
M
inim
ally
irr
itatin
g.
40
CIR Panel Book Page 277
ASSESSMENT: DIOCTYL ADIPATE AND DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 113
smaller and lower than the average induction reactions; therefore, Dioctyl Adipate was not a sensitizer.(23)
P hototoxici ty
Primary dermal phototoxic irritation studies were conducted on two per- fumes both containing 1.1% Diisopropyl Adipate. Four male and three female New Zealand white rabbits were clipped of all back hair and 200 mg of the un- diluted product was applied to gauze patches which were then affixed to the shaved areas. Six patches were applied to the back of each test rabbit and one rabbit received two positive control patches. After a 2 h exposure, the patches on the right-hand side of each animal were removed and the skin irradiated for 15 min with four F40BLB bulbs (wavelength of 320-420 nm, peaking at approx- imately 360 nm), 24 in from the skin. The left-hand side was not irradiated. The patches were replaced on the right side and sealed with an occlusive wrap. All patches were removed 48 h after the initial application and 1 h after removal, sites were scored according to the Draize criteria. Scores were again recorded 72 and 96 h postdose. Both perfumes scored 0 (no irritation) for primary dermal ir- ritation as well as primary dermal phototoxic irritation.(41’42)
Mucous membrane irritation
Six female albino rabbits were used to test the mucous membrane irritancy of a product containing 0.175% Dioctyl Adipate. The animals were given a single 0.1 ml topical application of the product to the genital mucosa. During the seven- day observation period, no irritation was noted.(24’
Subchronic Toxicity
Oral
Diets containing 0, 1,600, 3,100, 6,300, 12,500, or 25,000 ppm Dioctyl Adipate were fed for 13 weeks to six groups of ten F344 rats and ten B6C3Fl mice of both sexes. Observations were made twice daily and animals were weighed weekly. After 91 days, all survivors were sacrificed, necropsy was performed, and tissues were examined histopathologically. Weight gain was depressed for male rats at the 12,500 and 25,000 ppm dosage levels. No other compound-related abnor- malities were found. Weight gain depression occurred in male mice fed 3,100 ppm or more and in female mice fed 6,000 or 25,000 ppm. No other compound- related abnormalities occurred.(20)
Chronic Toxicity
Oral
lntragastric doses of Dioctyl Adipate of 0.4, 1 .O or 2.0 g/kg given for six months to rats caused no enzymatic changes, but did increase the level of sulphydryl compounds in the blood. Hepatic detoxification appeared depressed at the onset of the study, but it was accelerated after six months. Administration of 0.1 g/kg for 10 months decreased CNS excitability. (21) (See Carcinogenesis Section of this report for additional chronic test results.)(20)
CIR Panel Book Page 278
114
Mutagenesis
COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
Special Studies
Dioctyl Adipate (5 mg/plate or the dose which gave a toxic response, whichever was lower), was tested in the Ames Salmone//a/microsome assay. The compound was nonmutagenic when S. typhimurium strains TA1535, TA1537, TA1538, TA98, and TAlOO were exposed to the chemical with and without metabolic activation systems from rat livers.‘43)
Carcinogenesis
Oral administration
Groups of 50 male and 50 female F344 rats and 50 male and 50 female B6C3Fl mice were fed diets containing 12,000 or 25,000 ppm Dioctyl Adipate for 103 weeks. Fifty untreated rats and mice of both sexes were used as controls, and all surviving animals were sacrificed at 104-107 weeks. In rats, mean body weights of the 25,000 ppm group were lower than those of the controls. Males had survival rates of 68% in both the control and low-dose (12,000 ppm) group and 80% in the high-dosed (25,000 ppm) group. In females, 58% of controls, 78% of the low-dose group, and 88% of the high-dose group survived the study. Neoplastic and nonneoplastic lesions were seen with equal frequency in treated and control groups and none appeared related to administration of the com- pound. Dioctyl Adipate was not carcinogenic in F344 rats.(20)
In the prechronic studies a dose level of 12,500 ppm and 25,000 ppm caused a weight change in male mice, relative to controls, of minus 15% and minus 25%, respectively. In female mice, the same low and high dose concentrations caused a plus 5.6% and minus 13% weight loss, respectively. In three of these four dose concentrations, the weight loss exceeded the criteria for selecting the Maximum Tolerated Dose.(44)
In treated mice, mean body weights of either sex were lower than those of controls. Males had survival rates of 72% in controls, 64% in the low-dose group, and 82% in the high-dose group. In females, 84% of controls, 78% of the low- dose group, and 73% of the high-dose group survived. Incidence of hepatocellular adenomas in male mice were dose-related and statistically significant in the high- dose group. The incidence of hepatocellular carcinomas in male mice was higher in dosed groups, but was not statistically significantly increased. In female mice, there was a significant, dose-related trend and significantly higher incidence of hepatocellular adenomas or carcinomas in each of the dosed groups than in the control group (see Table 6). Since hepatocellular tumors were induced in this bioassay, Dioctyl Adipate was considered carcinogenic in B6C3Fl mice.(20)
Hodge and associates (45) fed rats a diet containing O%, O.l%, 0.5%, or 2.5% Dioctyl Adipate for two years. A total of 33 tumors were found which were mainly lymphomas and adenomas; one fibroma occurred. Also two carcinomas of the mammary gland and one carcinoma of the kidney were found, but the incidence of these tumors was not different from controls and not related to dietary treat- ment. They concluded the compound was not carcinogenic.
No tumors were found when dogs were maintained for one year on diets containing O%, 0.07%, 0.15%, or 0.2% Dioctyl Adipate.r45)
CIR Panel Book Page 279
ASSESSMENT: DIOCTYL ADIPATE AND DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 115
TABLE 6. Hepatocelhlar Tumors in Mice.a
Tumor Dose @pm)
Time to first observed tumor
(weeks)
F M
incidence (%)
F M
Adenoma 0 12,000 25,000
Carcinoma 0 12,000 25,000
a Data from Ref. 20.
106 46 4 12
103 37 10 16 a4 101 12 31
106 86 2 14
a5 68 28 24 79 65 24 24
Subcutaneous and skin application
Dioctyl Adipate was included in a study which tested the carcinogenic potency of six chemicals by subcutaneous implantation and by repeated skin ap- plication. Three compounds, aminotriazole, Aramite [2-(p-tert-butylphenoxy) isopropyl 2-chloroethyl oulfite] and Flectol H (a polymer of 1,2,dihydro-2, 2,4trimethylquinoline) were chosen as carcinogens or suspected carcinogens. Two additional reported noncarcinogenic compounds, butylated hydroxyanisole and dioctyl adipate, were included in the study. Groups of 50 male and 50 female C3HIAnF strain mice were used for each chemical and for each dosing method and dose concentration. A single 10 mg subcutaneous injection dose was used for one group of animals. A weekly application of either 0.1 or 10 mg of each chemical in acetone was applied for life to the clipped skin of the back in two separate groups of animals. All animals were observed for life. No significant adverse treatment-related effects were reported, nor were any of the compounds tested considered to be carcinogenic by the test methods used. The authors con-
cluded that methods used are not substitutes for tests by other routes of ad- ministration.(45)
Teratogenesis/Dominant lethal Study
Dioctyl Adipate was injected i.p. to each of 10 male albino Swiss strain mice at doses of 0.47, 0.93, 4.7, or 9.3 g/kg. Two groups of controls were injected with distilled water. Immediately after injection, two virgin female mice were caged with each male mouse. Females were replaced weekly for eight weeks. Pregnant mice were sacrificed on Day 15 ( f 2) of gestation and necropsy was performed to determine the number of corpora lutea, implantations, preimplantation losses, early and late fetal deaths, and viable fetuses. The antifertility effect was con- sidered a function of the reduction in the number of pregnancies; the dominant lethal mutation was determined directly from the number of early fetal deaths in individual females and indirectly from the number of implantations. The results indicated no compound-related changes in the incidence of late fetal deaths. The 10 ml/kg dose of Dioctyl Adipate reduced the number of pregnancies, but the lower doses had values comparable to controls. The compound caused a dose- dependent and time-dependent decrease in implants per pregnancy, and there was a dose-related increase in early fetal death, a direct measure of dominant lethal mutation. A dose- and time-related decrease in the number of live fetuses
CIR Panel Book Page 280
116 COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
TABLE 7. Embryonic-Fetal Toxicity of Dioctyl Adipate on Rat Fetuses.=fb
Number
Dose of Number of live
in jetted corpora resorptions Dead fetuses
Treatment groups b’k) lutea (percent) fetuses Cpercen t)
Mean weight
of fetuses (g)’
Blunt needle (injection)
Distilled water
Normal saline Control
Cottonseed oil
Di-2-ethylhexyl adipate
-
10.00
10.00
9.2
0.93
4.7
9.3
69
59
62
71
62
65
60
4t6.0)
4C6.8)
7f11.5)
S(7.5)
3f5.3)
2f3.1)
4f7.0)
63 (94.0) 3.91 f 0.02
55 (93.2) 4.40 f 0.33
54 (88.5) 4.10 f 0.13
62 (92.5) 3.89 f 0.09
54 (94.7) 3.90 f 0.09
63 (96.9) 3.83 f 0.03~
53 (93.0) 3.49 f 0.14d
a Data from Ref. 48.
b Five pregnant female rats were injected in each group on Days 5, 10, and 15 of pregnancy.
CNumbers represent the average values (g) f the standard error of the mean for each group.
dp S 0.05.
occurred in groups treated with Dioctyl Adipate. The authors concluded that the mutational effects occurred mainly during the postmeiotic stage of sper- matogenesis. (46) A comment received on this study questioned the author’s con- clusions, noting that additional data on the number of pregnancies per treated male were required. It was also suggested the number of corpora lutea was necessary if one is to determine whether the differences in implantations per pregnancy are associated with male infertility or are a dominant lethal effect. The comment also stressed the need for historical control data on the test species, as well as the need to have included a positive control in the experiment.(47’
Singh et al.“” studied the embryonic-fetal toxicity and teratogenic effect of Dioctyl Adipate in rats. The compound was administered i.p. at 0.93, 4.7, and 9.3 g/kg to pregnant rats on the 5th, lOth, and 15th days of gestation. The diluents at each dose level were water, saline and cottonseed oil, respectively. Animals were sacrificed on Day 20. Resorption rates were 5.3%, 3.1 O/O, and 7.0% for each increasing dose; each control had similar or greater rates (Tables 7 and 8). One
TABLE 8. Gross, Skeletal, and Visceral Malformationsa
Dose
injected Resorptionsb Abnormalities
Treatment groups (g/kg) f%o) CrossC ske/etald Viscera/e
Blunt needle (injection) - 4f6.0) 0 1(3.0%) 0 Distilled Water 10.00 4f6.8) 0 0 -
Normal saline 10.00 7Ul.5) 1(1.9%) 4(14.3%) -
Cottonseed oil 10.00 5f7.5) 1(1.6%) 2(6.3%) 0
Di-2-ethylhexyl adipate 0.93 3f5.3) 0 1(3.6%) 0
4.7 2(3.1) 1(1.6%) 3(9.4%) 1(3.2%)
9.3 4(7.0) 2(3.8%)’ 2(7.1%) 1(4.0%)
a Data from Ref. 48.
bPercent resorptions are based on total number of resorptions and dead and live fetuses.
c Percent gross abnormalities are based on total number of fetuses.
d Percent skeletal abnormalities are based on total number of stained fetuses (50% of total fetuses).
ePercent visceral abnormalities are based on total number of unstained fetuses,
‘Values greater than the 95% confidence interval of the “pooled volume control.”
CIR Panel Book Page 281
ASSESSMENT: DIOCTYL ADIPATE AND DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 117
malformed fetus occurred at the 4.7 g/kg dose and two at the 9.3 g/kg dose. The equivalent control had one abnormality. Skeletal abnormalities occurred at rates of 3.6%, 9.4%, and 7.1% as compared with 6.3% in the control. Visceral abnor- malities of O%, 3.2%, and 4.0% were observed for each increasing dose. No similar results were seen in the control. The investigator concluded that Dioctyl Adipate depressed the mean body weight of the developing fetus. Further, there was a significant increase of gross fetal abnormalities in the high-dose group as compared with the pooled controls. However, the available data did not indicate teratogenic effect when the same results were compared to control groups for each dose concentration. The lack of data on historical controls, and the failure to include a positive control in the study, make it difficult to accept the validity of the statistical procedures used and the conclusions made by the investigator.
Clinical Assessment of Safety
Dioctyl Adipate
Patch tests
A Schwartz-Peck prophetic patch test was used to assess the irritation and
sensitization potential of a rouge product containing 0.01% Dioctyl Adipate. A 48 h patch impregnated with the formulation was applied under occlusion to the cleansed upper backs of 100 panelists. Simultaneously, an open patch was affixed for 48 h to the inside of the right upper arm and after the allotted time, the sites were scored. After a 1Cday rest, a second open and closed insult was applied and graded 48 h later. The sites on the backs were then irradiated for 1 min at a distance of 12 in with a UV source (Hanovia Tanette Mark I Lamp) at a wave- length of 360 nm. These sites were read 48 h after irradiation. Two of the 100 sub- jects had a weak erythematous reaction at the open patch site after the first patch and one individual had a strong edematous or vesicular reaction after the second open patch. No reactions occurred after the UV exposure. The investigators con- cluded the product was nonirritating, nonsensitizing and nonphotosensitizing.(49)
A Shelanski and Shelanski repeated insult patch test was conducted on the same rouge product discussed above. A series of 10 successive 24 h open and closed patches was applied to the skin of 49 panelists and each site was graded after patch removal. After a two- to three-week rest, an 11 th challenge patch was applied for 48 h and read after patch removal. Ultraviolet light sensitization was evaluated after removal of patch numbers 1, 4, 7, 10, and 11 by irradiating the sites for 1 min at a distance of 12 in with a Hanovia Tanette Mark I Lamp. No photosensitivity was indicated by this test, but weak reactions were produced in three, one, and four panelists, after the fourth, fifth, and tenth open patch ex- posures, respectively. Strong reactions occurred in one panelist after the sixth open patch, and in another after the 1 lth (challenge) open patch.(49)
A liquid makeup product containing 9.0% Dioctyl Adipate was assayed in a Modified Draize-Shelanski patch test on 209 men and women. The undiluted product was applied under occlusion to sites on the upper back on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday for three consecutive weeks. Patches were removed and sites scored on the next patch replacement day. After a two-week rest, two con- secutive 48 h challenge patches were applied to adjacent sites on the back and these areas were scored 48 and 96 h after application. Three subjects had moderate to strong erythematous reactions, with or without infiltration and
CIR Panel Book Page 282
118 COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
vesicles, and one subject had a macular faint erythema over 25% of the test area after the second challenge.‘50’
Another makeup product containing 9.0% Dioctyl Adipate was tested as above in a Modified Draize-Shelanski patch test. The product caused irritant reactions in two of the 151 men and women tested, but no significant sensitiza- tion or primary irritation occurred.(S”
A Shelanski-Jordan repeated insult procedure was used to evaluate primary irritation and allergic sensitivity of a moisturizing product containing 0.7% of a 25% solution of Dioctyl Adipate (0.175% actual concentration). Patches contain- ing the material were affixed to the cleansed back for 24 h on each Monday, Wednesday, and Friday for 3% consecutive weeks for 10 insults. A lo- to 14-day rest followed removal of the 10th insult, at which time a 48 h challenge patch was applied. The challenge site was scored and seven to 10 days later, a second 48 h challenge patch was applied and graded immediately and 24 h after patch removal. One subject had erythema and papules on the test site after the ninth and tenth inductions. The second challenge patch caused erythema and papules in one subject. No other reactions were noted.(52)
Cumulative irritancy test
A similar moisturizing product containing 0.175% Dioctyl Adipate was tested in a 21-day cumulative irritation assay. The product, 0.2 ml, was applied under cotton patches to the backs of 11 female panelists for 21 consecutive days. The patches were removed 23 h after application and the sites were scored 1 h after patch removal. New patches were applied immediately. The cumulative irrita- tion score for this product was 72 out of a possible 630. This product was slightly irritating.(53)
Photopatch test
A photopatch test was conducted using a formulation containing 9.0% Dioc- tyl Adipate. Each of 25 panelists received patches containing 0.1 ml of the prod- uct. Twenty-four hours later, the patches were removed and the sites were ir- radiated with a Xenon Arc Solar Simulator (150 W) with a continuous emission in the UVA and UVB range (290-400 nm). Forty-eight hours later, the irradiated sites were scored for irritation. This entire procedure was repeated twice weekly for a total of six exposures. After a lo-day rest, a challenge patch was applied for 24 h and then irradiated for 3 min. This site was then scored 0.25, 24, 48, and 72 h after irradiation. Two control sites, one with the test product with no irradia- tion, and a second receiving irradiation but no product, were included in the test program. None of the 25 individuals had phototoxic or photoallergic reac- tions(54) (see Table 9).
Diispropyl Adipate
24-hour patch tests
Diisopropyl Adipate, alone and in a formulation, was assayed for skin irrita- tion potential in 24 h patch tests. Occlusive patches containing 0.1 ml of the substance were affixed to the volar surface of the forearm and/or the medial aspect of arm. The patches were removed 24 h later, and the sites read 2 and 24 h later. The sites were scored on a scale of 0 (no irritation) to 4 (severe deep red
CIR Panel Book Page 283
TAB
LE
9.
Clin
ica
l A
sse
ssm
ent
o
f Sa
fety
.
ing
red
ient
Te
st
App
lied
Tim
e Ir
rit.
scor
e N
o.
of
Con
t. am
ount
sub
jec
ts
(%)
(ml)
C
ont
ac
t O
bser
v.
Ma
x.
Com
men
ts
Ref
.
Dio
ctyl
A
dip
ate
Form
ula
tion
Sc
hw
art
z-Pe
ck
pro
phe
tic
pa
tch
100
M,F
0.
01
- 2
24-h
Form
ula
tion
Sh
ela
nsk
i- 49
M
,F
0.01
-
11
24-h
She
lan
ski
RIPT
+
u
v
Form
ula
tion
M
od
ifie
d
Dra
ize
-
She
lan
ski
RIPT
209
M,F
9.
0 -
See
co
mm
ent
s
48
h
-
48,
96
h
Mo
difi
ed
D
raiz
e-
151
M,F
9.
0 -
See
48
, 96
h
She
lan
ski
RIPT
c
om
me
nts
- Tw
o
pa
ne
lists
sh
ow
ed
a
mild
re
ac
tion
49
aft
er
the
fir
st
op
en
pa
tch.
1
pa
ne
list
sho
we
d
a s
tro
ng
rea
ctio
n a
fte
r th
e
2nd
o
pe
n p
atc
h.
- Te
n in
duc
tion
p
atc
hes;
14
-da
y re
st;
49
ch
alle
ng
e
pa
tch
(1 lt
h).
UV
irr
ad
iatio
n
aft
er
pa
tch
nos.
1,
4,7,
10,1
1.
We
ak
rea
ctio
n in
3/
49
aft
er
pa
tch
4;
in
l/49
a
fte
r p
atc
h 5;
in
4/4
9 a
fte
r
pa
tch
10.
-
Stro
ng
rea
ctio
n in
l/
49
aft
er
pa
tch
6;
in
l/49
a
fte
r p
atc
h 11
. N
o
UV
rea
ctio
n.
Nin
e
48
h i
nduc
tions
; 14
-da
y re
st;
50
one
48
h
ch
alle
ng
e.
Thre
e
mo
de
rate
to s
tro
ng
ery
the
ma
tous
re
ac
tions
dur
ing
in
duc
tion
. O
ne
fa
int
ery
the
ma
tous
re
ac
tion
from
ch
alle
ng
e
pa
tch.
N
ot
a s
ens
itize
r o
r
irrita
nt.
Nin
e
48
h i
nduc
tions
; 14
-da
y re
st;
one
48
h
ch
alle
ng
e.
Two
su
bje
cts
ha
d i
rrita
nt
rea
ctio
ns;
no
sens
itiza
tion.
51
CIR Panel Book Page 284
TABL
E 9.
(C
ont
inue
d.)
hgre
dien
t T
est
Ap
plie
d
Tim
e In
it.
sco
re
No.
of
C
ont.
am
oun
t
sub
jec
ts
(%)
(ml)
Co
nta
ct
Obs
erv.
M
ax.
Co
mm
ent
s R
ef.
Form
ula
tion
Sh
ela
nsk
i-Jo
rda
n
210
M,F
0.
225
- Se
e
See
-
Ten
24
h i
nduc
tions
; 14
-da
y re
st;
one
52
RIPT
c
om
me
nts
co
mm
ent
s 48
h
ch
alle
ng
e;
7- t
o
lo-d
ay
rest
an
d 2
nd
48
h c
ha
llen
ge
.
Resu
lts:
Insu
lts
l-8
ca
use
d
no
rea
ctio
n.
Insu
lts
9,10
c
aus
ed
e
ryth
em
a,
pa
pu
les
in 2
/210
.
Ch
alle
ng
e
1 c
aus
ed
no
re
ac
tion.
Ch
alle
ng
e
2 c
aus
ed
e
ryth
em
a,
pa
pu
les
in
l/21
0 a
fte
r 72
h.
Form
ula
tion
21
-da
y c
um
ula
tive
11
F
0.17
5 0.
2 21
23
-h
- 72
1630
Si
tes
sco
red
1
h a
fte
r p
atc
h re
mo
val.
53
irrita
nt
test
M
axi
mum
irr
itatio
n
oc
cur
red
in
3
pa
ne
lists
a
fte
r in
sults
3,
7,18
; sli
ght
irrita
tion
o
cc
urre
d
in
1 a
fte
r
pa
tch
16.
Form
ula
tion
Ph
oto
pa
tch
test
25
M
,F
9.0
0.1
See
-
- Si
x 24
h
pa
tche
s (t
wic
e
we
ekl
y fo
r 54
co
mm
ent
s 3
we
eks
).
Site
s irr
ad
iate
d
(Xe
no
n
UV
lam
p)
on
pa
tch
rem
ova
l a
nd
re
ad
48
h l
ate
r; lo
-da
y re
st;
one
24
h
pa
tch
to
ne
w s
ite;
irra
dia
tion
a
fte
r
pa
tch
rem
ova
l; re
ad
ing
s ta
ken
0.25
,
24,
48,
an
d 7
2 h
aft
er
irra
dia
tion
.
Resu
lts:
No
p
hoto
toxi
city
o
r p
hoto
-
alle
rge
nic
ity.
Diis
op
rop
yl
Ad
ipa
te
Ing
red
ient
24
h
pa
tch
24
h p
atc
h
24
h p
atc
h
24
h p
atc
h
19
M,F
10
0 0.
1 24
h
2,
24
h
o
/4
No
irr
itatio
n.
55
19
M,F
10
0 0.
1 24
h
2,
24
h
o
/4
No
irr
itatio
n.
55
15
M,F
10
0 0.
1 24
h
2,
24
h
o
/4
No
irr
itatio
n
56
15
M,F
10
0 0.
1 24
h
2,
24
h
o
/4
No
irr
itatio
n.
56
CIR Panel Book Page 285
Form
ula
tion
24
h
pa
tch
19
M,F
24
h p
atc
h 19
M
,F
Form
ula
tion
M
aib
ac
h-M
arz
ulli
23
5 M
,F
RIPT
Form
ula
tion
RI
PT
50
M,F
Mo
difi
ed
D
raiz
e
108
M,F
RIPT
RIPT
11
6 M
.F
Form
ula
tion
Kl
igm
an
ma
xim
iza
tion
test
25
M,F
0.
7
0.26
0.
1 24
h
2.
24
h
5.0
1.08
0.1
24
h
2,
24
h
0.5
See
-
co
mm
ent
s
3.0
5.0
1.04
- Se
e
See
co
mm
ent
s c
om
me
nts
0.4
See
Se
e
co
mm
ent
s c
om
me
nts
0.1
See
Se
e
co
mm
ent
s c
om
me
nts
- Se
e
See
co
mm
ent
s c
om
me
nts
- N
ine
24
h
in
duc
tion
p
atc
hes;
14
-da
y
rest
; o
ne
24
h c
ha
llen
ge
re
ad
48
an
d 9
6 h
aft
er
ap
plic
atio
n.
No
irrita
tion
w
as
see
n in
a
ny
pa
ne
list.
61
F $ 0 x 62
0 2 0 s 6 z 4
- N
ine
24
h
ind
uctio
ns,
3-w
ee
k re
st,
one
24
h
ch
alle
ng
e
sco
red
24
a
nd
48
h a
fte
r re
mo
val.
If a
ch
alle
ng
e
rea
ctio
n o
cc
urre
d,
a 2
nd
24
h
ch
alle
ng
e
wa
s a
pp
lied
.
Resu
lts:
Ind
uctio
n N
o.
l-fa
int
ery
the
ma
in
2/l
16
; m
ild
ery
the
ma
in
l/
l 16
.
Ind
uctio
n N
o.
2-fa
int
ery
the
ma
in 4
1116
; in
duc
tion
s 3
an
d 5
-
fain
t e
ryth
em
a
in
l/l
16;
an
d
ind
uctio
n
4-m
ild
ery
the
ma
in
l/l
16.
Ch
alle
ng
e
pro
duc
ed
fa
int
ery
the
ma
in
21
116.
No
p
ote
ntia
l fo
r a
llerg
ic
sens
itiza
tion.
-
Five
48
h
in
duc
tion
p
atc
hes;
e
ight
63
lo-d
ay
rest
; 1
h p
retr
ea
tme
nt
with
SLS;
48
h
ch
alle
ng
e
pa
tch
rea
d a
t
pa
tch
rem
ova
l a
nd
aft
er
24
an
d
48
h.
No
c
ont
ac
t se
nsiti
zatio
n
oc
cur
red
.
0.16
14.0
13
su
bje
cts
h
ad
no
irri
tatio
n;
6 h
ad
57
ba
rely
p
erc
ep
tible
e
ryth
em
a.
i?i
i4
Min
ima
l irr
itatio
n.
No
irr
itatio
n.
w
o/4
58
3
- Te
n 48
h
pa
tche
s;
14-d
ay
rest
; O
ne
59
48
h p
atc
h.
Eryt
hem
a
oc
cur
red
in
T
one
p
ers
on
aft
er
ind
uctio
n.
Hyp
er-
6
pig
me
nta
tion
oc
cur
red
in
17
1235
,
but
no
se
nsiti
zatio
n re
ac
tions
K
oc
cur
red
. 2
- Te
n 24
h
pa
tche
s,
7-d
ay
rest
, o
ne
24
h
60
ch
alle
ng
e
an
d o
bse
rva
tion
aft
er
24
an
d 4
8 h.
N
o
irrita
tion
o
r
sens
itiza
tion
rea
ctio
ns.
d
I:
CIR Panel Book Page 286
TABL
E 9.
(C
ont
inue
d.)
Ap
plie
d
Tim
e Ir
rit.
scor
e N
o.
of
Co
nt.
am
oun
t
ing
red
ient
Te
st
sub
jec
ts
(%)
(ml)
Co
nta
ct
Ob
serv
. M
ax.
C
om
me
nts
Ref.
Ing
red
ient
21
-da
y c
um
ula
tive
16
M,F
10
0 0.
3 21
22
-h
- 26
.33/
630
All
but
one
p
an
elis
t sh
ow
ed
e
ryth
em
a.
64
irrita
tion
te
st
pa
tche
s In
gre
die
nt
is
“mo
de
rate
ly
irrita
ting
.”
Form
ula
tion
21
-da
y c
um
ula
tive
10
F
0.7
0.3
21
23-h
-
2163
0
irrita
tion
te
st
pa
tche
s
21-d
ay
cu
mu
lativ
e
irrita
tion
te
st
17F
1.08
0.
5 Se
e
co
mm
ent
s
- 0.
2918
4
21-d
ay
cu
mu
lativ
e
17
F 1.
08
0.5
See
-
irrita
tion
te
st
co
mm
ent
s
21 -
da
y c
um
ula
tive
7
M,F
20
.75
- 21
24
-h
-
irrita
tion
te
st
pa
tche
s
Form
ula
tion
Sc
hw
art
z-Pe
ck
98
M,F
0.
7 -
2 24
-h
48
h
pro
phe
tic
pa
tch
+
uv
+
uv
0.24
184
8184
-
On
e
pa
ne
list
sho
we
d
min
ima
l 65
ery
the
ma
a
fte
r p
atc
h no
. 18
. Pr
od
uct
is
“ess
en
tially
no
nirri
tatin
g.”
Ap
plic
atio
n
of
ma
teria
l w
as
ma
de
on
66
5 c
ons
ec
utiv
e
da
ys d
urin
g
3 c
ons
ec
utiv
e
we
eks
. C
ont
inuo
us
co
nta
ct
wa
s m
ad
e o
n Sa
t./Su
n.
to
allo
w
for
21-d
ay
co
ntin
uous
exp
osu
re.
Two
p
an
elis
ts
ha
d
que
stio
na
ble
e
ryth
em
a,
one
h
ad
vesic
ula
tion
. Lo
w
irrita
tion.
Pro
ce
dur
e
as
ab
ove
. O
ne
p
an
elis
t h
ad
66
que
stio
na
ble
e
ryth
em
a,
2 h
ad
de
finite
e
ryth
em
a.
Low
irr
itatio
n.
- 67
All
pa
tch
test
s w
ere
ne
ga
tive
. U
V
test
68
wa
s ne
ga
tive
.
CIR Panel Book Page 287
Form
ula
tion
D
raiz
e-S
he
lan
ski
RIPT
+
U
V
Form
ula
tion
M
od
ifie
d
ma
xim
iza
tion
+
uv
Mo
difi
ed
ma
xim
iza
tion
+
uv
Mo
difi
ed
ma
xim
iza
tion
+
uv
Mo
difi
ed
ma
xim
iza
tion
+
uv
49
F 0.
7 -
See
co
mm
ent
s
50
M,F
3.
0 -
See
co
mm
ent
s
49
M,F
3.
0 -
See
co
mm
ent
s
50
M,F
17
.0
See
co
mm
ent
s
50
M,F
17
.0
See
co
mm
ent
s
48
h
- Te
n 48
h
ind
uctio
ns;
14-d
ay
rest
; o
ne
48
h c
ha
llen
ge
. U
V
irra
dia
tion
a
fte
r
pa
tch
nos.
1,
4,7,
10,1
1.
All
pa
tch
test
s +
U
V
test
s w
ere
ne
ga
tive
. -
Patc
h te
st
site
s p
retr
ea
ted
w
ith
5%
aq
.
SLS
for
30
min
. Si
x to
8
h l
ate
r, th
e
first
te
st
pa
tch
wa
s a
pp
lied
a
nd
re
ad
48
h l
ate
r. A
se
co
nd
48
h p
atc
h w
as
the
n a
pp
lied
. Th
is p
roc
ed
ure
w
as
rep
ea
ted
tw
ice
a
nd
fo
llow
ed
b
y a
5-d
ay
rest
. A
n SL
S p
retr
ea
tme
nt
pre
ce
de
d t
he
48
h c
ha
llen
ge
p
atc
h.
Dup
lica
te
site
s w
ere
e
xpo
sed
to
a
Ha
no
via
U
V
Lam
p
aft
er
pa
tche
s
1,3,
5,
an
d 7
(c
ha
llen
ge
) a
nd
re
ad
48
h l
ate
r. N
o
ph
oto
alle
rgic
resp
ons
es
oc
cur
red
. -
- Te
st
pe
rfo
rme
d
as
dire
ctly
a
bo
ve.
Pro
duc
t is
no
t a
pho
tose
nsiti
zer
or
pho
toto
xic
. -
- Te
st
pe
rfo
rme
d
as
dire
ctly
a
bo
ve.
Pro
duc
t is
no
t a
ph
oto
alle
rgic
sens
itize
r. -
- Te
st
pe
rfo
rme
d
as
dire
ctly
a
bo
ve
Pro
duc
t is
no
t a
ph
oto
alle
rgic
sens
itize
r o
r a
prim
ary
irr
itant
.
68
>
M
Ii 52
69
T 0 70
=
5 2 71
0 3
72
G
zj
m
CIR Panel Book Page 288
124 COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
erythema, vesiculation). Two different lots of the undiluted ingredient were tested on 15 men and women. Neither product caused irritation.(55) Additionally, 19 individuals were tested with two different lots of the undiluted ingredient. None of the 19 had signs of irritation.‘55*56)
Product formulations containing Diisopropyl Adipate were tested as discussed in the preceding paragraph. One formulation containing the ingredient at 20.75% was diluted to 1.25% in water (actual ingredient concentration = 0.26%) and tested on 19 individuals. Thirteen subjects had no irritation and six had minimal faint erythema. The PII was 0.16 (possible score of 4.0).‘57’ Another for- mulation containing 5.0% Diisopropyl Adipate was tested undiluted on 19 panelists and produced no irritation.(5B)
Repeated insult patch tests
A Marzulli-Maibach repeat insult sensitization study was performed using a perfume containing 1.08% Diisopropyl Adipate (18% of a 6% solution). The per- fume (0.5 ml) was applied under occlusion to the skin of the upper backs of 235 women for 48 h (72 h on weekends). The sites. were scored on a scale of 0 (no reaction) to 5 (erythema with induration and bullae). New patches were applied to the same sites; this procedure was repeated for a total of 10 applications. A two-week rest was followed by a challenge patch applied to an adjacent, un- treated site for 48 h. During the induction series, one individual had erythema covering the entire test site and one had erythema with induration and vesicula- tion. This patient had no reaction when challenged. Seventeen subjects had slight hyperpigmentation, but no sensitization reaction occurred in any of the 235 volunteers.r59) A similar test was conducted using a suntan lotion containing 3.0% Diisopropyl Adipate. No reactions were produced in the 50 men and women panelists. The product was neither a sensitizer nor a contact irritant.‘60’ A hair grooming preparation containing 5.0% Diisopropyl Adipate was tested as above on 108 men and women. This product caused no reactions and gave no evidence of sensitization.‘61) A 5.0% aqueous dispersion of a bath oil containing 20.75% Diisopropyl Adipate was tested as above on 116 men and women. The first insult produced minimal faint to pink erythema in four panelists. Minimal faint erythema occurred in four panelists after insult 2, in one after insult 3, and in one after insult 5. Pink, uniform erythema occurred in one person after insult 4. The challenge patch produced minimal, faint erythema in two persons after 24 h, and no reactions occurred after 48 h.(62)
Maximization test
A facial cream containing 0.7% Diisopropyl Adipate was evaluated for contact-sensitization potential in a maximization test. The material was applied under occlusion to the skin of the volar forearm or back of 25 subjects for five consecutive 48 h periods. The patch site was then treated with 2.5% sodium lauryl sulfate for 24 h under occlusion. A challenge.patch was then applied for 48 h and the site read immediately after patch removal and 24 h later. The product produced no reactions indicative of contact-sensitization.‘6J,
Cumulative irritancy test
Twenty-one day cumulative irritancy tests were performed on Diisopropyl Adipate alone and in a formulation. The undiluted ingredient was tested on 16 men and women. No irritation was observed until after the sixth patch was ap-
CIR Panel Book Page 289
ASSESSMENT: DlOCTYL ADIPATE AND DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 125
plied (sixth day). After this time, irritation was reported in 14 of 16 panelists
where erythema and papules were the most severe reaction. The undiluted in- gredient had a total irritation score of 395 out of a possible 945; it was classified by the authors as “moderately irritating.” The formulation, a face cream product containing 0.7% Diisopropyl Adipate, was tested on 13 individuals. Minimal erythema occurred in one person after the third patch (third day), and in one per- son after patch 18 (18th day). This product had a score of 2 out of a possible 630; the product was classified as nonirritating.‘64*65)
A cumulative irritancy test of two products containing 1.1% Diisopropyl Adipate was tested on 17 subjects using procedures similar to that previously noted for Dioctyl Adipate. cs3) The first product had a score of 0.5 (questionable
erythema) in two subjects, T.0 (definite erythema) in one, and 3.0 (vesiculation) in one. The mean score was 0.29 (possible 84). The second product had a score of 0.5 in one person, 1 .O in two people, and 1.5 (definite erythema and possible induration) in one person. The mean score for this product was 0.24 (possible 84). These product scores indicate a low potential for hazard to the consumer.(66) In a similar test, a bath oil containing 20.75% Diisopropyl Adipate was tested on seven patients. The bath oil caused an average score of 8 (possible 84).(57’
Photopatch tests
A face cream containing 0.7% Diisopropyl Adipate was evaluated for irrita- tion potential by a Schwartz-Peck prophetic patch test followed by UV exposure and by the Draize-Shelanski repeated insult patch test which was also followed by UV exposure. In the Schwartz-Peck Procedure, 98 panelists were patch tested with the product on the back and on the volar surface of the right arm for 48 h. A second patch was applied 12-14 days later and graded 48 h after application. After the patch site was scored, the same site was irradiated with a UV source (Hanovia Tanette Mark I Lamp) at 12 in for 1 min. The site was graded 48 h after exposure. Reactions were not observed at the induction patch, the challenge patch, or the irradiation sites.(6s) In the Draize-Shelanski test, 10 consecutive 48 h inductions were applied for 48 h to each of 49 panelists and an 11 th challenge patch was ap- plied for 48 h approximately 14 days later. Skin sites which received patches 1, 4, 7, 10, and 11 also were exposed to UV radiation (Hanovia Tanette Mark I Lamp) at 12 in for 1 min. These light-exposed sites were graded 48 h after irradiation. No reactions occurred after any induction patch, challenge patch, or UV exposure. The product was neither a primary irritant nor a sensitizer.‘68)
Several products were used in modified maximization tests with UV ex- posure. The procedures followed were: on Day 1 of the test (Monday), patch test sites were pretreated for 30 min with 0.5 ml of 5.0% aqueous sodium lauryl sulfate. The test material was then applied to the test site 6-8 h later for a period of 48 h. On Wednesday, the sites were graded immediately after patch removal, and a new patch was then applied for 48 h. On Friday, this site was graded and left untreated over the weekend. This regimen was repeated for two more weeks. After the last induction patch was graded (Friday of the third week), a five-day nontreatment period followed and a patch of sodium lauryl sulfate was again ap- plied for 30 min. After 6-8 h, a challenge test patch was applied and graded 48 h later. A control site was treated with sodium lauryl sulfate, but no test material was applied to it. To assess UV sensitization, skin sites which received patches 1, 3, 5, and 7 were also exposed to a UV source (Hanovia Tanette Mark I Lamp) at 12 in for 1 min. Sites were graded 48 h later. A suntan product containing 3.0%
CIR Panel Book Page 290
126 COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
Diisopropyl Adipate was tested on 50 people. There were no reactions and the product was not a photoallergic sensitizer. (6g) A sunburn lotion containing 3.0% Diisopropyl Adipate was similarly tested on 49 individuals. No reaction occurred and the product was not a photosensitizer or a phototoxic agent.“‘) Two sun- burn foam bases, each containing 17.0% Diisopropyl Adipate, were tested on two panels of 50 subjects. Neither material caused any reaction and the products were not photoallergic sensitizers or primary irritants’71.72’ (see Table 9).
SUMMARY
Dioctyl Adipate, the diester of octyl alcohol and adipic acid, and Diisopropyl Adipate, the diester of isopropyl alcohol and adipic acid, are plasticizers and emollients. They are produced by the esterification of adipic acid and the ap- propriate alcohol in the presence of an esterification catalyst. Both Adipates are clear, colorless to light yellow viscous liquids, with an aromatic odor.
In noncosmetic products, the two Adipates are used in plastic food wraps, blood and hemodialysis bags, solvents, and lubricants. Dioctyl Adipate has In- direct Food Additive status for use in food wrapping materials. The Adipates are used in cosmetics as emollients and bases. Dioctyl Adipate is used in 27 products in concentrations of I O.l%-25%, and Diisopropyl Adipate is used in 112 for- mulations, ranging in concentration from I O.l%-25%.
Dioctyl Adipate had low acute oral toxicity, with the LDso ranging from 9.11 g/kg to 45.0 g/kg (estimated). Likewise, Diisopropyl Adipate had low oral toxicity. Estimated LDSOs ranged from greater than 5 g/kg to greater than 76.8 g/kg. In a 14-day study, rats and mice fed up to 50,000 ppm (for males) and 100,000 ppm (females) had weight loss and weight gain reduction at the highest concentra- tions. Females fed the 100,000 ppm diet died. The intravenous LDso of Dioctyl Adipate to rats and rabbits was 900 mglkg and 540 mg/kg, respectively. Diisopropyl Adipate had an intravenous LDso of 640 mg/kg for rats. A per- cutaneous absorption test on rabbits showed that Dioctyl Adipate had an LDso of 16 g/kg, but up to 8.7 g/kg for 24 h was not toxic to rabbits in another test. An im- mersion test of a formulation containing Diisopropyl Adipate (20.75%) indicated no toxicity to guinea pigs. The intraperitoneal LDso of Dioctyl Adipate in mice was 1 .O g/kg; in rats, 47.0 g/kg; and 38.0 g/kg in rabbits.
In ocular irritation studies, undiluted Dioctyl Adipate was nonirritating; for- mulations containing up to 0.175% of the ingredient were, at most, mild, tran- sient irritants. Undiluted Diisopropyl Adipate was a very mild, transient irritant; formulations containing the ingredient produced minimal irritation. The results of primary dermal irritation tests indicated that Dioctyl Adipate, when ad- ministered alone and in formulations, was a very mild irritant and Diisopropyl Adipate was minimally irritating. Dioctyl Adipate was not a skin sensitizer in guinea pigs. Two perfumes containing 0.108% Diisopropyl Adipate were neither irritating nor phototoxic to rabbits and a product with 0.175% Dioctyl Adipate caused no mucous membrane irritation in rabbits.
Mice and rats fed up to 25,000 ppm Dioctyl Adipate for 91 days had weight gain depression, but no other abnormalities.
An Ames test for the mutagenic potential of Dioctyl Adipate was negative. An assay of the carcinogenic potential of Dioctyl Adipate showed that administration
CIR Panel Book Page 291
ASSESSMENT: 9lOCTYL ADIPATE AND DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 127
of up to 25,000 ppm of the compound for 103 weeks produced no untoward ef- fects and was noncarcinogenic to rats. Mice fed the same amount for 103 weeks had dose-related body-weight reductions and a higher incidence of hepatocellular adenoma and carcinoma than controls. Hodge and associates reported that rats fed up to 2.5 Dioctyl Adipate for two years had a tumor incidence similar to that of the control group. They also found no tumors in dogs fed up to 0.2% Dioctyl Adipate for one year. A single 10 mg dose of Dioctyl Adipate given by subcutaneous injection was not carcinogenic in mice. In a lifetime study Dioctyl Adipate caused no skin tumors when 10 mg was applied weekly to the back skin of mice.
The teratogenicity of Dioctyl Adipate was studied in mice. According to the author, intraperitoneal injection of up to 9.3 g/kg of the ingredient to male mice caused antifertility effects in females to which they were mated. lntraperitoneal injections of up to 9.3 g/kg Dioctyl Adipate were administered to pregnant rats on the 5th, lOth, and 15th days of gestation. The investigator reported that resorp- tion rates were similar; however, there was a greater incidence of skeletal and visceral abnormalities. The experimental design and interpretation have been questioned by some.
Clinical assessment of Dioctyl Adipate at concentrations of O.Ol%-9.0% in formulation showed, at most, erythema and papules when applied under occlu- sion for extended periods of time. No UV sensitization occurred. Undiluted Diisopropyl Adipate produced no irritation in 24 h patch tests, but was mod- erately irritating in a 21-day cumulative irritancy test. Formulations containing concentrations of 0.26%-20.75% Diisopropyl Adipate caused minimal to mild ir- ritation, no sensitization and no photosensitization.
DISCUSSION
The Expert Panel, in reviewing the animal and human test data on Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate, found them adequate to evaluate the safety of these ingredients as used in cosmetic products. No human data were available for Dioctyl Adipate as a pure ingredient; however, data were available on for- mulations up to a concentration of 9.0%. These data, plus animal test data at a concentration of 100% of the ingredient, indicated Dioctyl Adipate is, at most, a weak irritant. Sensitization and phototoxicity tests were negative. In a formula- tion Diisopropyl Adipate at a concentration of 0.1% was neither an irritant or phototoxic agent to rabbits.
Two studies by the same investigator, one which reported on fetal toxicity and teratogenic effects, and the second on mutation and antifertility effects of Dioctyl Adipate, were reviewed. The author concluded a statistically significant effect in each study, but there were several deficiencies noted in each study which made the author’s conclusions questionable.
Several carcinogenic studies have been reported. All but one were negative; one oral feeding study conducted by the National Toxicology Program indicated that Dioctyl Adipate was carcinogenic in female mice and was probably car- cinogenic in male mice. The Expert Panel noted that the Maximum Tolerated Dose was significantly exceeded in this chronic study; thus, these test data may not be relevant in a safety assessment for humans.
CIR Panel Book Page 292
128
CONCLUSION
COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
On the basis of available data, the Panel concludes that Dioctyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate are safe as presently used in cosmetics.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Ms. Anne Moore, Scientific Analyst and writer, prepared the literature review used by the Expert Panel in developing this report.
REFERENCES
1. BALSAM, M.S. and SAGARIN, E. (ed.). (1972). Cosmetics: Science and Technology. New York, NY: Wiley
Interscience.
2. HAWLEY, G.G. (ed.). (1971). The Condensed Chemical Dictionary, 8th ed. New York, NY: Van Nostrand
Reinhold Co.
3. ESTRIN, N.F., CROSLEY, P., and HAYNES, C. (ed.). (1982). CTFA Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary, 3rd ed.
Washington, DC: Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Assoc.
4. NATIONAL LIBRARY OF MEDICINE (NLM). (1981). Toxicology database; computer database.
5. CTFA. (Oct. 9, 1981). Submission of data of CTFA. Cosmetic ingredient chemical description for Dioctyl
Adipate.*
6. CTFA. (Oct. 9, 1981). Submission of data by CTFA. Cosmetic ingredient chemical description for
Diisopropyl Adipate.’
7. CTFA. (1972). Specifications. Washington, DC.
8. RAMSEY, JO., LEE, T.D., OSSELTON, M.D., and MOFFAT, A.C. (1980). Gas liquid chromatographic reten-
tion indices of 296 nondrug substances on SE-30 or OV-1 likely to be encountered in toxicological analyses.
J. Chromatogr. 184(2), 185-206.
9. JANARDAN, K.G., SCHAEFFER, D.)., and SOMANI, S.M. (1980). Efficiencies of liquid-liquid extraction car-
bon and XAD-2 absorption in isolating organic compounds from environmental sources. Bull. Environ,
Contam. Toxicol. 24(l), 145-51.
10. THRUSTON, Jr., A.D. (1978). High pressure liquid chromatography techniques for the isolation and iden-
tification of organics in drinking water extracts. 1. Chromatogr. Sci. 16(6), 254-9.
11. CLAYTON, C.D. and CLAYTON, F.E. (eds.). (1978). Patty’s fndustrial Hygiene and Toxicology, 3rd rev. ed.,
vol. ZA, Toxicology. New York, NY: Wiley-lnterscience Publication.
12. VANDERVORT, R. and BROOKS, S.M. (1977). Polyvinyl chloride fils thermal decomposition products as an
occupational illness: I. Environmental exposures and toxicology. 1. Occup. Med. 19(3), 188-91.
13. BAXTER TRAVENOL LABS. (May 7, 1980). Japan Kokai Tokkyo Koho Patent No. 80 60459.
14. CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS (CFR). Title 21, Parts 175.105; 177.1200; 177.1210; 177.2600;
178.3740.
15. SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS (SCC). (March 5, 1982). Submission of data by CTFA. Personal com-
munication.
16. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION (FDA). (Dec. 22, 1981). Cosmetic product formulation data. Com-
puter printout. Washington, DC.
17. MOODY, D.E. and REDDY, J.K. (1978). Hepatic peroxisome (microbody) proliferation in rats fed
plasticizers and related compounds. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 45(2), 497-504.
18. RUBIN, R.]. and JAEGER, R.J. (1973). Some pharmacologic and toxicologic effects of di-2-ethylhexyl
phthalate (DEHP) and other plasticizers. Environ. Health Perspect. 1973(3), 53-9.
19. NAPIER, Jr., E.A. (1976). Accumulation, toxicity and metabolism of common plasticizers in humans, U.S.N.T.I.S. PB 260406.
20. NATIONAL TOXICOLOGY PROGRAM (NTP). (March 1982). Carcinogenesis bioassay of Di(2&hylhexyl)- adipate. NTP report series No. 212, NIH Publication No. 81-l 768.
*Available on request: Administrator, Cosmetic Ingredient Review, Suite 810, 11 10 Vermont Ave., NW,
Washington, DC 20005.
CIR Panel Book Page 293
ASSESSMENT: DIOCTYL ADIPATE AND DIISOPROPYL ADIPATE 129
21. ANDREEVA, G.A. (1971). Gig. Primen. Toksikol. Pestits. Klin. 9, 373.
22. SMYTH, H.F., CARPENTER, C.P., and WEIL, C.S. (1951). Range-findingtoxicitydata: list IV. Arch. Ind. Hyg.
4,119-22. 23. CTFA. (Aug. 1967). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished primary skin irritation, primary irritation of
eye mucous membrane, acute oral toxicity, acute dermal toxicity, and skin sensitization study of Dioctyl
Adipate.* 24. CTFA. (March 18, 1982). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished acute oral, dermal, ocular, and mucous
membrane testing of a moisturizing product containing 0.7 percent of a 25 percent solution of Dioctyl
Adipate (0.175 percent).* 25. BIODYNAMICS, INC. (BI). (Jan. 16, 1976). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished acute oral toxicity in
rats of a face cream containing 0.7 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.’
26. FOOD AND DRUG RESEARCH LABS (FDRL). (June 20, 1980). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished
acute oral toxicity in rats of Diisopropyl Adipate (18 percent of a 6 percent solution in perfume [1.08 per-
cent]).*
27. FDRL (May 1, 1979). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished acute oral toxicity in rats of Diisopropyl Adipate (18 percent of a 6 percent solution in perfume [1.08 percent]).*
28. CTFA. (Feb. 21, 1975). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished acute oral toxicity test of a product con-
taining 5.0 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.* 29. CTFA. (Nov. 9, 1978). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished acute oral toxicity test of a product con-
taining 20.75 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.* 30. NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH (NIOSH). (1977). Registry of Toxic
Effects and Chemical Substances, vols, I and II. Cincinnati, OH.
31. CTFA. (Nov. 9, 1978). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished immersion test of a product containing
20.75 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.’ 32. CTFA (1975). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished ocular irritation test summary of a product contain-
ing 0.01 percent Dioctyl Adipate.*
33. CTFA. (May 28, 1973). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished eye irritation test of Diisopropyl
Adipate.’
34. BI. (Dec. 29, 1975). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished rabbit eye irritation study of a face cream
containing 0.7 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.’
35. CTFA. (Feb. 21, 1975). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished eye irritation test of a product containing
5.0 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.’
36. CTFA. (Nov. 9, 1978). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished eye irritation test of a product containing
20.75 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
37. CTFA. (Feb. 2, 1973). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished primary skin irritation study of Diisopropyl
Adipate.*
38. CTFA. (Nov. 2, 1978). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished primary skin irritation test of Diisopropyl
Adipate.’
39. CTFA. (Feb. 21, 1975). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished primary skin irritation study of a product
containing 5 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
40. CTFA. (Nov. 9, 1978). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished primary skin irritation test of a product
containing 20.75 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
41. FDRL. (July 21, 1980). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished primary dermal phototoxic irritation study
of Diisopropyl Adipate (18 percent of a 6 percent solution in perfume [1.08 percent]).*
42. FDRL. (July 21, 1980). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished primary dermal phototoxic irritation study
with Diisopropyl Adipate (18 percent of a 6 percent solution in perfume [1.08 percent]).*
43. SIMMON, V.F., KAUHANEN, K., and TARDIFF, R.G. (1977). Mutagenic activity of chemicals identified in
drinking water. Dev. Toxicol. Environ. Sci. Prog. Genet. Toxicol. 2, 249-58.
44. SONTAG, J.M., PAGE, N.P., and SAFFIOTTI. (Feb. 1976). National Cancer Institute. PB-264-061.
45. HODGE, H.C., MAYNARD, E.A., DOWNS, W.L., ASHTON, J.K., and SALERNO, L.L. (1966). Tests on mice
for evaluating carcinogenicity. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 9(3), 583-96.
46. SINGH, A.R., LAWRENCE, W.H., and AUTIAN, J. (1975). Dominant lethal mutations and antifertility effect
of di-2-ethylhexyl adipate and diethyl adipate in male mice. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 32(3), 566-76.
47. NORTHUP, S. (March 9, 1982). Comment received on the CIR Scientific Literature Review on Dioctyl
Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate.*
48. SINGH, A.R., LAWRENCE, W.H., and AUTIAN, J. (1973). Embryonic fetal toxicity and teratogenic effects of
adipic acid esters in rats. J. Pharm. Sci. 62(10), 1596-600.
49. CTFA. (1977). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human prophetic patch test and repeated insult
patch test of a product containing 0.01 percent Dioctyl Adipate.*
50. CTFA. (March 10, 1978). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human modified Draize-Shelanski-Jor-
dan patch test of a product containing 9 percent Dioctyl Adipate.’
CIR Panel Book Page 294
130 COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW
51. CTFA. (Sept. 22, 1976). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human modified Draize-Shelanski test
of a product containing 9 percent Dioctyl Adipate.*
52. LEO WINTER ASSOCIATES (LWA). (Sept. 1978). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human Shelan-
ski-Jordan repeated insult procedure of a product containing 0.175 percent Dioctyl Adipate.* 53. HILL TOP RESEARCH (HTR). (Oct. 6, 1978). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human cumulative
irritancy test of a product containing 0.175 percent Dioctyl Adipate.* 54. CTFA. (March 10, 1978). Submissiion of data by CTFA. Unpublished human photopatch test of a product
containing 9 percent Dioctyl Adipate.* 55. CTFA. (Jan. 24, 1973). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human skin irritation test of Diisopropyl
Adipate.*
56. CTFA. (May 18, 1973). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human skin irritation of Diisopropyl
Adipate.* 57. CTFA. (Oct. 26, 1978). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human skin irritancy test of a product
containing 20.75 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
58. CTFA. (Feb. 12, 1975). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human skin irritation of a product con-
taining 5 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
59. CONCORDIA RESEARCH LABORATORIES (CRL). (Oct. 29, 1980). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished
human repeated insult patch test of a product containing 1.08 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
60. CTFA. (March 5, 1974). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human repeated insult patch test of a
product containing 3.0 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
61. HTR. (Nov. 3, 1976). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human repeated insult patch test of a
product containing 5 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
62. CTFA. (Feb. 1, 1982). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human allergic contact sensitizatron test of
a product containing 20.75 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
63. IVY RESEARCH LABORATORIES (IRL). (Feb. 17, 1976). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human
maximization test of a product containing 0.7 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.’
64. HTR. (March 30, 1976). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human cumulative irritancy test of
Diisopropyl Adipate.*
65. HTR. (Feb. 18, 1976). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human cumulative irritancy test of a
product containing 0.7 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.’
66. CRL. (June 9, 1980). Submission of data by CTFA. Human 21-day cumulative irritation test of a product con-
taining 1.08 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
67. CTFA. I(May 11, 1978). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human 21.day cumulative irritancy test
of a product containing 20.75 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
68. RESEARCH TESTING LABORATORIES (RTL). (March 4, 1976). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished
human prophetic patch test of a product containing 0.7 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.’
69. CTFA. (June 21, 1974). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human modified maximization test of a
product containing 3.0 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.’
70. CTFA. (March 3, 1975). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human modified maximization test of a
product containing 3.0 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
71. CTFA. (June 21, 1974). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human photopatch test of a product con-
taining 17.0 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.*
72. CTFA. (June 21, 1974). Submission of data by CTFA. Unpublished human modified maximization test of a
product containing 17.0 percent Diisopropyl Adipate.’
CIR Panel Book Page 295
Persona Care’ Products CounciCommitted to Safety,Quaity & nnovation
Memorandum
TO: F. Alan Andersen, Ph.D.Director - COSMETIC INGREDIENT REVIEW (C]R)
FROM: John Bailey, Ph.DZ E__3 I . I 2Industry Liaison to the Cifi Expert Panel
DATE: December 1, 2009
SUBJECT: Comments on the Draft Report on the Dicarboxylic Acids and their Salts and Estersprepared for the December 7-8, 2009 CIR Expert Panel meeting
General Comment - This report is still very incomplete. Diethyihexyl Adipate, Dibutyl Adipate andDiisopropyl Adipate, have already been reviewed by CIR and found safe as used. This reportfails to mention these earlier CIR reviews, and this report does not include the information thatwas summarized in these original CW reports, including an NTP bioassay on DiethyhexylAdipate.
Looking only at the Safety/Regulatory Information for the added ingredients on the On-Line,the following items are missing from this report.
Oxalic Acid: listed in EU Annex ifi; NTP continuous breeding study; NTP testednegative in Salmonella (Haworth et al. 1983)
Malonic Acid: NTP tested negative in SalmonellaDimethyl Succinate: NTP micronucleus test in male rats, negative; NTP tested negative
in Salmonella (Zeiger et al. 1992)Glutaric Acid: NTP tested negative in SalmonellaDimethyl Glutarate: NTP micronucleus test in male rats, equivocal; NTP tested negative
in SalmonellaAdipic Acid: NTP tested negative in SalmonellaDimethyl Adipate: NTP has selected Dimethyl Adipate for further study; there is a
nomination background report that includes information that is not in the CIRreport; NTP tested negative in Salmonella
Diethylhexyl Adipate - IARC unclassifiable; CIR report; NTP carcinogenicity study(includes 14-day, 90-day and 2-year studies); NTP battery of genotoxicity assays
Report organization - Generally CW reports are organized by duration of exposure, route of exposure,then compound. It is not clear how this report is organized. There are very few route ofexposure section headings. Inhalation exposure is its own section, not under any duration ofexposure. The Introduction states “the data are presented by order of carbon chain length,beginning with Oxalic Acid.” This is a good idea, but it is not how the report is organized.
11011 7th Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20036-4702 202.331.1770 202.331 .1969 (fax) www.personalcarecouncil.org CIR Panel Book Page 295
Most sections start with information on Sebacic Acid and the Sebacates. Both the text (eachsection) and all the tables should be presented by order of carbon chain length as indicated inthe Introduction.
p.1 - Only the esters of the dicarboxylic acids have side chains between 1-18 carbons (not the salts).p.1 - In the introduction, it should be mentioned that Diethyihexyl Adipate, Dibutyl Adipate and
Diisopropyl Adipate have previously been reviewed by CW and found safe for use.p.2 - Please delete the sentence concerning the name of Sodium Oxalate. If you search on ChemlD for
Sodium Oxalate, the compound found has two sodium atoms, a compound with one sodium isnot found.
p.2 - In the second paragraph under the heading Dicarboxylic Acids - General, it would be helpful toadd some of the additional ingredients that have been added to this report.
p.3, 4, 49 - Anonymous (2000b) should be changed to IARC (2000).p.4 - Ingredients in addition to the sebacates should be mentioned in the first paragraph of the Cosmetic
use section.p.5 - As the ingredients added to this report since the September meeting have not yet been included in
a Council concentration of use survey, it is likely that the results will not be available untilsometime in March. Please look at the VCRP again to be sure all of the ingredients included inthe report were found. Searching the VCRP for adipate revealed 2 uses of Dimethyl Adipate, 2uses of Dibutyl Adipate and 41 uses of Diethylhexyl Adipate that are not included in the Cifireport. The uses of Diethyihexyl Adipate, Dibutyl Adipate and Diisopropyl Adipate from theold reports (and re-reviews) should also be mentioned in this report
p.6 - Please change “setting” to “settling”. How did Lehman-McKeeman (2008) define nanoparticles?p.6 - Information about how these ingredients are regulated in Europe should be added to the cosmetic
use section.p.9 - In the last paragraph of this page, what is meant by “both substances”?p.10, 25, 44, 45 - The INCI names for diethylmalonate and dimethylmalonate includes a space (Diethyl
Malonate, Dimethyl Malonate).p.10 - The following is not a complete sentence: “Tyrode’s solution as receptor fluid.”p.12 - Please delete the last sentence on p.12 (“According to Lubrizol (2000), Diisopropyl Sebacate is
rapidly absorbed and is fast-spreading, but no supporting data were provided.”), as it does notadd any useful information.
p.13 - What is meant by “the same oxidative stress parameters”? Please define TAR the first time it isused.
p.13 - It is not clear what is meant by “the study supported a NOAEL of 4000 mg/kg for the oral routeand 8000 mg/kg”. Was 4000 mg/kg the highest dose tested and some effects were observed,and was 8000 mg/kg the highest dose tested and no effects observed?
p.14 - What were the i.v. doses given to rabbits? Currently, it states “from 300 to 1800 mg” should thisbe mg/kg b.w.?
p.14 - The information on Diethylhexyl Sebacate in Table 5 is also presented in Table 7.p.15 - Please delete “in repeat dose studies, and no effects in teratologic evaluations” from the Acute
Exposure section. There is no information about acute studies in Table 9. Please provide areference for “A similar relationship existed for ocular irritation, where severity of responsedecreases with increasing carbon number.”
2
CIR Panel Book Page 296
p.15 - If route subheadings are going to be used, they should be used throughout the report.p.15 - It is not clear what is meant by “Smyth et al. (1969) reported an acute oral toxicity in rats of
DEM of 15,794 mg/kg bw (SIDS 2005)”. If Smyth et al. (1969) did the study, why is there alsoa citation to SIDS (2005)? Smyth et al. (1969) is not in the reference section.
p.15 - What is “Gemini surfactant (AGS) mixture”?p.16 - Please delete the second paragraph under Short-Term Exposure as it presents the same
information as in the first paragraph of this section.p.17 - The 3-day rat study should not be presented in the Subchronic Exposure section.p.17-18 - The protocol of the Mingrone et al. (1983) study of Azelaic Acid is not clear. Animals were
fed for 90 days. Was there also a recovery group that was kept for about 90 days after exposureended?
p.18 - What compound were the beagle dogs fed for 90 days (American Chemistry Council, 2003)?p.19 - The three week study of Diethyihexyl Sebacate should not be in the Subchronic Exposure
section.p.19, 45 - Why is 2-ethylhexyl adipate considered a surrogate diester? 2-Ethyihexyl adipate is
Diethylhexyl Adipate, a cosmetic ingredient being reviewed in this report, and previouslyreviewed by CIR and found safe for use in cosmetics.
p.19, 31 - Why is Ditridecyl Adipate included in the Diesters subsection? As it is an ingredientincluded in this report, it should have its own subsection.
p.20 - The 90-day studies should not be discussed in the Chronic Exposure section.p.21, 26 - It is not necessary to present the information on butyl stearate for the Smith (1953) study.p.22 - The inhalation exposure studies are usually presented under the various duration subheadings.p.25 - The Magnussen Kligman test of Dodecanedioic Acid (SIDS 1994) should be moved to the
Dermal Sensitization section.p.26 - There are no additional details of the BIBRA (1996) reproductive study in TableS (the same
information is presented in Table 7).p.27 - The acute exposure studies cited to Greco et al. (1990) should not be in the Reproductive and
Developmental Toxicity section.p.27 - Please clarify what days of gestation the ewes were treated in the Scheifer et al. (1976) study.p.27 - Were reproductive outcomes studied in the Goldman et al. (1977) study of Oxalic Acid? Did
they look for testicular effects?p.27-28 - The protocol of the Lamb et al. (1997) study is not clear. Is this the NTP continuous breeding
study?p.28 - Please change “life” to “live”p.29 - What route of exposure was used in the Bradford et a!. (1984) study? When during gestation
were the rats and rabbits treated?p.29 - When during gestation were the rats treated with the seven adipates?p.29 - When during gestation were the rats and rabbits treated in the Mingrone et al. (1983) study?
Were the rabbits really sacrificed on gestation day 19?p.30 - In the last paragraph of the Azelaic Acid subsection, please change “rams” to “dams”.p.31 - Please delete the following sentence, as this study has already been presented (more than once).
“No adverse reproductive , suckling and growth affects were evident in a four-generation studyin rats fed a diet containing 200 ppm Diethylhexyl Sebacate (BIBRA 1996).”
3
CIR Panel Book Page 297
p.32 - The BII3RA (1996) study is mentioned again at the top of p.32 and should be deleted.p.33 - In the first sentence under the heading Bacterial Gene Mutation Assay, what is meant by “in this
assessment:?p.40 - Did De Groot et al. (1991) really use PEG-300? Or is this PEG-6 (a PEG with an average
molecular weight of 300)?p.43 - Please check the VCRP again for additional adipate ingredients.p.4-7 - The following sentence should be moved with the rest of the genotoxicity information. “In the
HPV report on diesters, mutagenicity nor clastogenicity were exhibited by those diesters citedin vivo or in vitro tests, with or without metabolic activation.” What is meant by those diesters?Please change “cited” to “studied”.
p.48 - There is no mention of the cancer studies in the Summary.Table section - The table section is missing page numbers.Table 1- This table should be organized as stated on the first page of the report (from smallest to largest
dicarboxylic acid). The title of the table needs to be change to reflect all of the ingredientsincluded in the report. For those ingredients for which the definition is based on the structure,the table should refer to the figure in which the structure is shown. Please delete “q.v.” fromthe table or define it at the end of the table. Other names that are the same as the INCI name,with another group designation, e.g., Diisobutyl Adipate (RIFM) should be deleted from thereport. If these names are left in the report the group, e.g., RIFM, should be defined.
Table 2 - The title of Table 2 should indicate the types of compounds included in the table. The tableshould be organized as stated on the first page of the report (from smallest to largestdicarboxylic acid). On the second page of the table, what does “*“ and “**“ mean? Please usethe INCI name, Diethylhexyl Adipate rather than Di(2-Ethylhexyl) Adipate. Please use theINCI names for Dimethylmalonate and Dimethylmalonate. Some units in this table arepresented in the first column, some are presented in the second column; please be consistent.
Table 3 - The title of the table should include more that just Sebacates. Please organize this table asstated on the first page of the report (from smallest to largest dicarboxylic acid).
Table 4 - The title of the table needs to be changed to include the ingredients that have been added tothe report. When the Council concentration of use survey for the other ingredients is complete,the concentration of use for Diethyl Sebacate will be revised to 1.5% (it was rounded to 2%).Please check the VCRP to be sure all the ingredients in this report were identified. The VCRPalso has 2 uses for Dimethyl Adipate, 2 uses for Dibutyl Adipate and 41 uses for DiethylhexylAdipate. Consider adding old concentration of use information for the ingredients alreadyreviewed (and re-reviewed) by CIR. The total uses for Diisobutyl Adipate is listed as DicaprylAdipate. The total uses for Diisopropyl Adipate is listed as Diisostearyl Adipate. The footnote“Ingredients not found in the table were included in the concentration of use survey, but no useswere reported.” is not correct as the Council concentration of use survey on the ingredientsadded to this report has not yet been sent out.
Table 5- Since Diethyihexyl Sebacate is the only ingredient included in this table, the first column canbe deleted. Please consider deleting this complete table as all this information is also presentedin the last row of Table 7.
Table 6 - The heading of column 3 needs to be changed as it includes more than just LD50 values. Inthe route column, please change “skin” to “dermal”. It is not clear what is meant by the NOELs
4
CIR Panel Book Page 298
of 100 mg/kg (males), 500 mg/kg (females) and then in the next row a NOEL for males andfemales of 1000 mg/kg is given. Are the first values adult NOELs and the last value a NOELfor developmental effects?
Table 7 -The Summary table of Diesters Toxicity is misleading as it does not include all of the data oneach ingredient. If it is left in the report, it should include al the data on each ingredient withappropriate references, not just the information as presented by the American ChemistryCouncil (2003).
Table 8- Please identify what was in the Dicarboxylic Acid Mixture. In what species were the dermaland eye irritation tests completed?
Table 9 - What route of exposure was used for these studies? The doses provided are actuallyconcentrations. What do they represent - concentration in the diet? What species were tested inthe developmental and reproductive toxicity studies? What doses were used in thedevelopmental and reproductive toxicity studies?
Table 10 - In the title of this table, please indicate which ingredient was studied.
5
CIR Panel Book Page 299