The Experts below are selected from a list of 142416 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

A M Api - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment 2 endo 3 exo ethyl 3 1 methylethyl bicyclo 2 2 1 hept 5 ene 2 carboxylate cas registry number 116044 44 1
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date, M L Dagli, Wolfgang Dekant
    Abstract:

    In addition, the total systemic exposure to (2-endo,3-exo)-ethyl 3-(1-methylethyl)bicyclo[2.2.1]hept-5-ene-2-carboxylate (3.3 μg/kg/day) is below the TTC (9 μg/kg/day; Kroes, 2007) for the repeated Dose Toxicity endpoint of a Cramer Class II material at the current level of use.

  • RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, cyclohexanol, CAS Registry Number 108-93-0.
    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M L Dagli, M Date
    Abstract:

    Abstract Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Cyclohexanol was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that cyclohexanol is not genotoxic. Data on cyclohexanol provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. Data show that there are no safety concerns for cyclohexanol for skin sensitization under the current declared levels of use. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; cyclohexanol is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to cyclohexanol is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; cyclohexanol was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment 3 7 dimethyl 1 3 6 octatriene cas registry number 13877 91 3
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, F Belmonte, M L Dagli
    Abstract:

    The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. 3,7-Dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data from 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene and read-across analog myrcene (β-myrcene; CAS # 123-35-3) show that 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene is not expected to be genotoxic and provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and developmental and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. The skin sensitization endpoint was completed using the dermal sensitization threshold (DST) for non-reactive materials (900 μg/cm 2 ); exposure is below the DST. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6- octatriene is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6- octatriene was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental oncentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are <1.

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment glyceryl monooleate cas registry number 111 03 5
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date
    Abstract:

    Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Glyceryl monooleate was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that glyceryl monooleate is not genotoxic. Data on glyceryl monooleate provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. The skin sensitization endpoint was completed using the dermal sensitization threshold (DST) for reactive materials (64 μg/cm2); exposure is below the DST. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; glyceryl monooleate is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to glyceryl monooleate is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; glyceryl monooleate was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use (VoU) in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment p tolualdehyde cas registry number 104 87 0
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date
    Abstract:

    Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. p-Tolualdehyde was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity, skin sensitization potential, and environmental safety. Data from read-across analog benzaldehyde (CAS # 100-52-7) show that p-tolualdehyde is not expected to be genotoxic. Data from read-across analog cuminaldehyde (CAS # 122-03-2) provided p-tolualdehyde a No Expected Sensitization Induction Level (NESIL) of 1100 μg/cm2 for the skin sensitization endpoint. The repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, and local respiratory Toxicity endpoints were completed using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to p-tolualdehyde is below the TTC (0.03 mg/kg/day, 0.03 mg/kg/day, and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on data from read-across analog 4-ethylbenzaldehyde (CAS # 4748-78-1); p-tolualdehyde is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The environmental endpoints were evaluated; p-tolualdehyde was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

M Date - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment 2 endo 3 exo ethyl 3 1 methylethyl bicyclo 2 2 1 hept 5 ene 2 carboxylate cas registry number 116044 44 1
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date, M L Dagli, Wolfgang Dekant
    Abstract:

    In addition, the total systemic exposure to (2-endo,3-exo)-ethyl 3-(1-methylethyl)bicyclo[2.2.1]hept-5-ene-2-carboxylate (3.3 μg/kg/day) is below the TTC (9 μg/kg/day; Kroes, 2007) for the repeated Dose Toxicity endpoint of a Cramer Class II material at the current level of use.

  • RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, cyclohexanol, CAS Registry Number 108-93-0.
    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M L Dagli, M Date
    Abstract:

    Abstract Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Cyclohexanol was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that cyclohexanol is not genotoxic. Data on cyclohexanol provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. Data show that there are no safety concerns for cyclohexanol for skin sensitization under the current declared levels of use. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; cyclohexanol is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to cyclohexanol is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; cyclohexanol was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment glyceryl monooleate cas registry number 111 03 5
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date
    Abstract:

    Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Glyceryl monooleate was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that glyceryl monooleate is not genotoxic. Data on glyceryl monooleate provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. The skin sensitization endpoint was completed using the dermal sensitization threshold (DST) for reactive materials (64 μg/cm2); exposure is below the DST. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; glyceryl monooleate is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to glyceryl monooleate is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; glyceryl monooleate was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use (VoU) in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment p tolualdehyde cas registry number 104 87 0
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date
    Abstract:

    Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. p-Tolualdehyde was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity, skin sensitization potential, and environmental safety. Data from read-across analog benzaldehyde (CAS # 100-52-7) show that p-tolualdehyde is not expected to be genotoxic. Data from read-across analog cuminaldehyde (CAS # 122-03-2) provided p-tolualdehyde a No Expected Sensitization Induction Level (NESIL) of 1100 μg/cm2 for the skin sensitization endpoint. The repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, and local respiratory Toxicity endpoints were completed using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to p-tolualdehyde is below the TTC (0.03 mg/kg/day, 0.03 mg/kg/day, and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on data from read-across analog 4-ethylbenzaldehyde (CAS # 4748-78-1); p-tolualdehyde is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The environmental endpoints were evaluated; p-tolualdehyde was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment 2 methylpropyl pentanoate cas registry number 10588 10 0
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2020
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M L Dagli, M Date
    Abstract:

    The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. 2-Methylpropyl pentanoate was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data from read-across analog ethyl 2-methylbutyrate (CAS # 7452-79-1) show that 2-methylpropyl pentanoate is not expected to be genotoxic and provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) > 100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. Data from read-across analog isoamyl acetate (CAS # 123-92-2) show that there are no safety concerns for 2-methylpropyl pentanoate for skin sensitization under the current declared levels of use. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; 2-methylpropyl pentanoate is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material; exposure is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; 2-methylpropyl pentanoate was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are <1. (Less)

D Belsito - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment 2 endo 3 exo ethyl 3 1 methylethyl bicyclo 2 2 1 hept 5 ene 2 carboxylate cas registry number 116044 44 1
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date, M L Dagli, Wolfgang Dekant
    Abstract:

    In addition, the total systemic exposure to (2-endo,3-exo)-ethyl 3-(1-methylethyl)bicyclo[2.2.1]hept-5-ene-2-carboxylate (3.3 μg/kg/day) is below the TTC (9 μg/kg/day; Kroes, 2007) for the repeated Dose Toxicity endpoint of a Cramer Class II material at the current level of use.

  • RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, cyclohexanol, CAS Registry Number 108-93-0.
    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M L Dagli, M Date
    Abstract:

    Abstract Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Cyclohexanol was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that cyclohexanol is not genotoxic. Data on cyclohexanol provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. Data show that there are no safety concerns for cyclohexanol for skin sensitization under the current declared levels of use. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; cyclohexanol is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to cyclohexanol is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; cyclohexanol was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment 3 7 dimethyl 1 3 6 octatriene cas registry number 13877 91 3
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, F Belmonte, M L Dagli
    Abstract:

    The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. 3,7-Dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data from 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene and read-across analog myrcene (β-myrcene; CAS # 123-35-3) show that 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene is not expected to be genotoxic and provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and developmental and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. The skin sensitization endpoint was completed using the dermal sensitization threshold (DST) for non-reactive materials (900 μg/cm 2 ); exposure is below the DST. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6- octatriene is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6- octatriene was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental oncentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are <1.

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment glyceryl monooleate cas registry number 111 03 5
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date
    Abstract:

    Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Glyceryl monooleate was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that glyceryl monooleate is not genotoxic. Data on glyceryl monooleate provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. The skin sensitization endpoint was completed using the dermal sensitization threshold (DST) for reactive materials (64 μg/cm2); exposure is below the DST. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; glyceryl monooleate is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to glyceryl monooleate is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; glyceryl monooleate was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use (VoU) in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment p tolualdehyde cas registry number 104 87 0
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date
    Abstract:

    Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. p-Tolualdehyde was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity, skin sensitization potential, and environmental safety. Data from read-across analog benzaldehyde (CAS # 100-52-7) show that p-tolualdehyde is not expected to be genotoxic. Data from read-across analog cuminaldehyde (CAS # 122-03-2) provided p-tolualdehyde a No Expected Sensitization Induction Level (NESIL) of 1100 μg/cm2 for the skin sensitization endpoint. The repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, and local respiratory Toxicity endpoints were completed using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to p-tolualdehyde is below the TTC (0.03 mg/kg/day, 0.03 mg/kg/day, and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on data from read-across analog 4-ethylbenzaldehyde (CAS # 4748-78-1); p-tolualdehyde is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The environmental endpoints were evaluated; p-tolualdehyde was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

M Bruze - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment 2 endo 3 exo ethyl 3 1 methylethyl bicyclo 2 2 1 hept 5 ene 2 carboxylate cas registry number 116044 44 1
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date, M L Dagli, Wolfgang Dekant
    Abstract:

    In addition, the total systemic exposure to (2-endo,3-exo)-ethyl 3-(1-methylethyl)bicyclo[2.2.1]hept-5-ene-2-carboxylate (3.3 μg/kg/day) is below the TTC (9 μg/kg/day; Kroes, 2007) for the repeated Dose Toxicity endpoint of a Cramer Class II material at the current level of use.

  • RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, cyclohexanol, CAS Registry Number 108-93-0.
    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M L Dagli, M Date
    Abstract:

    Abstract Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Cyclohexanol was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that cyclohexanol is not genotoxic. Data on cyclohexanol provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. Data show that there are no safety concerns for cyclohexanol for skin sensitization under the current declared levels of use. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; cyclohexanol is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to cyclohexanol is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; cyclohexanol was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment 3 7 dimethyl 1 3 6 octatriene cas registry number 13877 91 3
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, F Belmonte, M L Dagli
    Abstract:

    The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. 3,7-Dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data from 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene and read-across analog myrcene (β-myrcene; CAS # 123-35-3) show that 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene is not expected to be genotoxic and provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and developmental and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. The skin sensitization endpoint was completed using the dermal sensitization threshold (DST) for non-reactive materials (900 μg/cm 2 ); exposure is below the DST. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6- octatriene is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6- octatriene was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental oncentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are <1.

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment glyceryl monooleate cas registry number 111 03 5
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date
    Abstract:

    Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Glyceryl monooleate was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that glyceryl monooleate is not genotoxic. Data on glyceryl monooleate provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. The skin sensitization endpoint was completed using the dermal sensitization threshold (DST) for reactive materials (64 μg/cm2); exposure is below the DST. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; glyceryl monooleate is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to glyceryl monooleate is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; glyceryl monooleate was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use (VoU) in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment p tolualdehyde cas registry number 104 87 0
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date
    Abstract:

    Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. p-Tolualdehyde was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity, skin sensitization potential, and environmental safety. Data from read-across analog benzaldehyde (CAS # 100-52-7) show that p-tolualdehyde is not expected to be genotoxic. Data from read-across analog cuminaldehyde (CAS # 122-03-2) provided p-tolualdehyde a No Expected Sensitization Induction Level (NESIL) of 1100 μg/cm2 for the skin sensitization endpoint. The repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, and local respiratory Toxicity endpoints were completed using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to p-tolualdehyde is below the TTC (0.03 mg/kg/day, 0.03 mg/kg/day, and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on data from read-across analog 4-ethylbenzaldehyde (CAS # 4748-78-1); p-tolualdehyde is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The environmental endpoints were evaluated; p-tolualdehyde was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

G A Burton - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment 2 endo 3 exo ethyl 3 1 methylethyl bicyclo 2 2 1 hept 5 ene 2 carboxylate cas registry number 116044 44 1
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date, M L Dagli, Wolfgang Dekant
    Abstract:

    In addition, the total systemic exposure to (2-endo,3-exo)-ethyl 3-(1-methylethyl)bicyclo[2.2.1]hept-5-ene-2-carboxylate (3.3 μg/kg/day) is below the TTC (9 μg/kg/day; Kroes, 2007) for the repeated Dose Toxicity endpoint of a Cramer Class II material at the current level of use.

  • RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, cyclohexanol, CAS Registry Number 108-93-0.
    Food and chemical toxicology : an international journal published for the British Industrial Biological Research Association, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M L Dagli, M Date
    Abstract:

    Abstract Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Cyclohexanol was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that cyclohexanol is not genotoxic. Data on cyclohexanol provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. Data show that there are no safety concerns for cyclohexanol for skin sensitization under the current declared levels of use. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; cyclohexanol is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to cyclohexanol is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; cyclohexanol was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment 3 7 dimethyl 1 3 6 octatriene cas registry number 13877 91 3
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, F Belmonte, M L Dagli
    Abstract:

    The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. 3,7-Dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data from 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene and read-across analog myrcene (β-myrcene; CAS # 123-35-3) show that 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene is not expected to be genotoxic and provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and developmental and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. The skin sensitization endpoint was completed using the dermal sensitization threshold (DST) for non-reactive materials (900 μg/cm 2 ); exposure is below the DST. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6- octatriene is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6- octatriene was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental oncentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are <1.

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment glyceryl monooleate cas registry number 111 03 5
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date
    Abstract:

    Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. Glyceryl monooleate was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data show that glyceryl monooleate is not genotoxic. Data on glyceryl monooleate provide a calculated margin of exposure (MOE) >100 for the repeated Dose Toxicity and reproductive Toxicity endpoints. The skin sensitization endpoint was completed using the dermal sensitization threshold (DST) for reactive materials (64 μg/cm2); exposure is below the DST. The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on ultraviolet (UV) spectra; glyceryl monooleate is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The local respiratory Toxicity endpoint was evaluated using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to glyceryl monooleate is below the TTC (1.4 mg/day). The environmental endpoints were evaluated; glyceryl monooleate was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use (VoU) in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are

  • rifm fragrance ingredient safety assessment p tolualdehyde cas registry number 104 87 0
    Food and Chemical Toxicology, 2021
    Co-Authors: A M Api, D Belsito, S Biserta, D Botelho, M Bruze, G A Burton, J Buschmann, M A Cancellieri, M Date
    Abstract:

    Summary The existing information supports the use of this material as described in this safety assessment. p-Tolualdehyde was evaluated for genoToxicity, repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, local respiratory Toxicity, photoToxicity, skin sensitization potential, and environmental safety. Data from read-across analog benzaldehyde (CAS # 100-52-7) show that p-tolualdehyde is not expected to be genotoxic. Data from read-across analog cuminaldehyde (CAS # 122-03-2) provided p-tolualdehyde a No Expected Sensitization Induction Level (NESIL) of 1100 μg/cm2 for the skin sensitization endpoint. The repeated Dose Toxicity, developmental and reproductive Toxicity, and local respiratory Toxicity endpoints were completed using the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) for a Cramer Class I material, and the exposure to p-tolualdehyde is below the TTC (0.03 mg/kg/day, 0.03 mg/kg/day, and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The photoToxicity/photoallergenicity endpoints were evaluated based on data from read-across analog 4-ethylbenzaldehyde (CAS # 4748-78-1); p-tolualdehyde is not expected to be phototoxic/photoallergenic. The environmental endpoints were evaluated; p-tolualdehyde was found not to be persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) as per the International Fragrance Association (IFRA) Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No Effect Concentration [PEC/PNEC]), are