Application for the Reassessment of a Hazardous Substance under ...

Justification for Classification: Ueda et al. (1994) was a published study, althoughTest Guideline and GLP status were not reported. The positive response rate wasmore than the minimum threshold as stated in Section 13.2 of the User Guide to theThresholds and Classifications in the HSNO Act (ERMA, 2008), so dichlorvosshould be classified 6.5B for contact sensitisation.BACKGROUND:The APVMA (2008a) reported:―Ueda A, Aoyama K, Manda F, Ueda T & Kawahara Y (1994) Delayed-typeallergenicity of triforine (Saprol®). Contact Dermititis 31:140-145.“Humans: The delayed-type allergenicity of seven pesticides (triforine,dichlorvos, chlorothalonil, quinomethionate, cyhexatin, methomyl and benomyl)and chrysanthemum extracts (known to induce contact dermatitis due to theirsesquiterpene lactones) were studied in 59 male and 48 female chrysanthemumgrowers following the spring harvest season. The average age of males was38.6+11.8 years and the average age of females was 42.2+9.6 years. Subjects hadworked in flower growing for an average of 14 years and had reportedly beenexposed to a range of pesticides. Health information was obtained usingquestionaires (work-related allergies, family history of allergies and general healthinformation). Patch testing of the 7 pesticides and extracts was performed on theinner side of the forearm and reactions read after 2 days. Subjects were alsoanalysed for serum immunoglobulins (IgE, IgA, IgG and IgM).―Approximately 60% of subjects were reported to have one or more work-relatedallergic symptoms (immediate-type or delayed-type), 25% had a personal historyof allergic diseases and 26% a family history of allergic disease. Of the 27% ofsubjects who reported experiencing work-related skin conditions, approximatelyhalf attributed this to pesticides. Pesticides thought to be causative factorsincluded dichlorvos, chlorothalonil, methomyl, maneb and macozeb. Twentypercent of males and 44% of females patch-tested positive to at least one or moreof the compounds. When subjects were patched tested with 0.02% dichlorvos,10% of males (6/59) and 19% of females (9/48) exhibited a positive reaction(average of 14%). On this basis, dichlorvos is concluded to be a skin sensitiser inhumans.‖ (Originals not sighted; APVMA, 2008a)The ATSDR (1997) reported:“A 52-year-old male truck driver who had been hauling pesticide containerspresented with dermatitis of his neck, anterior chest, dorsal hands, andforearms (Mathias 1983). On the previous day, several containers spilled inhis truck, and he apparently had direct dermal contact with a pesticidecontaining 5% dichlorvos, 15% petroleum distillates, and 80%trichloroethane. A faint papular dermatitis was present over the dorsal arms,hands, and V of the neck. .Vertical erythematous, slightly scaling streaks werepresent over the lateral and posterior neck, a pattern suggesting that liquiddroplets had produced the dermatitis. The dermatitis was treated with 1%hydrocortisone ointment. Follow-up examination six weeks later showedDichlorvos reassessment – application Page 185 of 436