Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
Data platform availability banner - registered substances factsheets
Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.
The new ECHA CHEM database has been released by ECHA, and it now contains all REACH registration data. There are more details on the transition of ECHA's published data to ECHA CHEM here.
Diss Factsheets
Use of this information is subject to copyright laws and may require the permission of the owner of the information, as described in the ECHA Legal Notice.
EC number: 202-905-8 | CAS number: 100-97-0
- Life Cycle description
- Uses advised against
- Endpoint summary
- Appearance / physical state / colour
- Melting point / freezing point
- Boiling point
- Density
- Particle size distribution (Granulometry)
- Vapour pressure
- Partition coefficient
- Water solubility
- Solubility in organic solvents / fat solubility
- Surface tension
- Flash point
- Auto flammability
- Flammability
- Explosiveness
- Oxidising properties
- Oxidation reduction potential
- Stability in organic solvents and identity of relevant degradation products
- Storage stability and reactivity towards container material
- Stability: thermal, sunlight, metals
- pH
- Dissociation constant
- Viscosity
- Additional physico-chemical information
- Additional physico-chemical properties of nanomaterials
- Nanomaterial agglomeration / aggregation
- Nanomaterial crystalline phase
- Nanomaterial crystallite and grain size
- Nanomaterial aspect ratio / shape
- Nanomaterial specific surface area
- Nanomaterial Zeta potential
- Nanomaterial surface chemistry
- Nanomaterial dustiness
- Nanomaterial porosity
- Nanomaterial pour density
- Nanomaterial photocatalytic activity
- Nanomaterial radical formation potential
- Nanomaterial catalytic activity
- Endpoint summary
- Stability
- Biodegradation
- Bioaccumulation
- Transport and distribution
- Environmental data
- Additional information on environmental fate and behaviour
- Ecotoxicological Summary
- Aquatic toxicity
- Endpoint summary
- Short-term toxicity to fish
- Long-term toxicity to fish
- Short-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Long-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Toxicity to aquatic algae and cyanobacteria
- Toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
- Toxicity to microorganisms
- Endocrine disrupter testing in aquatic vertebrates – in vivo
- Toxicity to other aquatic organisms
- Sediment toxicity
- Terrestrial toxicity
- Biological effects monitoring
- Biotransformation and kinetics
- Additional ecotoxological information
- Toxicological Summary
- Toxicokinetics, metabolism and distribution
- Acute Toxicity
- Irritation / corrosion
- Sensitisation
- Repeated dose toxicity
- Genetic toxicity
- Carcinogenicity
- Toxicity to reproduction
- Specific investigations
- Exposure related observations in humans
- Toxic effects on livestock and pets
- Additional toxicological data
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Genetic toxicity in vitro
Description of key information
Methenamine revealed no mutagenic effects in the Ames tests if tested up to the recommended limit concentration of 5000 µg/plate. It was weakly positive in bacterial gene mutation assays at extremely high concentrations (>= 10000 µg/plate) and in an in vitro chromosomal aberration assay in V79 cells at severely cytotoxic doses indicating some genotoxic potential in vitro test systems with bacteria and mammalian cells at very harsh test conditions.
A modified in vitro mouse lymphoma assay showed no mutagenicity of methenamine with and without metabolic activation. Although the study cannot be assigned to a reliability class as no complete test report is available, test results are in line with results from an in vivo dominant lethal assay (DLA). In this DLA, no indication of germ cell mutations were found after treatment of mice with different methenamine concentrations. It can therefore be concluded that methenamine does not cause gene mutations in mammalian cells. For this reason, a further in vitro gene mutation study in mammalian cells is not necessary.
Conclusion
In conclusion, methenamine is not considered to be of concern with regard to genetic toxicity.
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- in vitro gene mutation study in bacteria
- Remarks:
- Type of genotoxicity: gene mutation
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- 1984
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Remarks:
- public available literature (non GLP, no guideline)
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 471 (Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay)
- Deviations:
- not specified
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of assay:
- bacterial reverse mutation assay
- Target gene:
- histidine operon.
- Species / strain / cell type:
- S. typhimurium, other: TA98 and TA100
- Additional strain / cell type characteristics:
- not applicable
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Metabolic activation system:
- S 9 mix
- Test concentrations with justification for top dose:
- 0, 200, 1000, 5000 µg/plate
- Vehicle / solvent:
- water
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- yes
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- other: 4-nitro-ophenylenediamine
- Remarks:
- TA98 without S9 mix
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- yes
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- other: 2-aminoanthracene
- Remarks:
- TA98 and TA100 with S9 mix
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- yes
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- sodium azide
- Remarks:
- TA100 without S9 mix
- Details on test system and experimental conditions:
- preincubation method.
- Evaluation criteria:
- 2-fold increase of revertants compared to negative control.
- Statistics:
- standard deviation
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 1538
- Remarks:
- Not tested. This strain was tested in the other WoE Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay (see IUCLID section 7.6.1)
- Metabolic activation:
- not applicable
- Genotoxicity:
- not determined
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not determined
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not examined
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not examined
- True negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- not examined
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 1537
- Remarks:
- Not tested. This strain was tested in the other WoE Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay (see IUCLID section 7.6.1)
- Metabolic activation:
- not applicable
- Genotoxicity:
- not determined
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not determined
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not examined
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not examined
- True negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- not examined
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 1535
- Remarks:
- Not tested. This strain was tested in the other WoE Bacterial Reverse Mutation Assay (see IUCLID section 7.6.1)
- Metabolic activation:
- not applicable
- Genotoxicity:
- not determined
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not determined
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not examined
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- not examined
- True negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- not examined
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 98
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not specified
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- valid
- True negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- S. typhimurium TA 100
- Metabolic activation:
- with and without
- Genotoxicity:
- negative
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- not specified
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- valid
- True negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Additional information on results:
- no additional information.
- Conclusions:
- Methenamine is not mutagenic in Ames test up to limit concentration of 5000 µg/plate.
- Executive summary:
In a reverse gene mutation assay in bacteria, strains TA98 and TA100 of S. typhimurium were exposed to methenamine in water at concentrations of 0, 200, 1000, 5000 µg/plate in the presence and absence of mammalian metabolic activation (S9 mix). Methenamine was tested up to the limit concentration of 5000 µg/plate.
The positive controls induced the appropriate responses in the corresponding strains. There was no evidence of induced mutant colonies over background at any test concentration with methenamine. Consequently, methenamine is evaluated to be not mutagenic in the Ames test if tested up to the limit concentration of 5000 µg/plate.
This study is classified as acceptable. This study was conducted under equivalent or similar conditions compared to the requirements of EU Method B.13/14 and OECD 471 for in vitro mutagenicity (bacterial reverse gene mutation) data.
- Endpoint:
- in vitro cytogenicity / chromosome aberration study in mammalian cells
- Remarks:
- Type of genotoxicity: chromosome aberration
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 1991
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: public available literature (non GLP, no guideline)
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 473 (In Vitro Mammalian Chromosome Aberration Test)
- Deviations:
- not specified
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Sister chromatid exchange was measured additionally
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of assay:
- in vitro mammalian chromosome aberration test
- Target gene:
- not applicable, chromosome aberration test
- Species / strain / cell type:
- Chinese hamster lung fibroblasts (V79)
- Additional strain / cell type characteristics:
- not applicable
- Metabolic activation:
- without
- Test concentrations with justification for top dose:
- 0.1, 1, 10, 50 mmol/L
- Vehicle / solvent:
- water
- Untreated negative controls:
- yes
- Negative solvent / vehicle controls:
- yes
- True negative controls:
- yes
- Positive controls:
- yes
- Positive control substance:
- mitomycin C
- Details on test system and experimental conditions:
- incubation time: 20 h (Chromosome aberration), 30 h (Sister chromatid exchanges)
- Evaluation criteria:
- 100 metaphases from two replicates were evaluated.
- Statistics:
- Student t-test
- Key result
- Species / strain:
- Chinese hamster lung fibroblasts (V79)
- Metabolic activation:
- without
- Genotoxicity:
- positive
- Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
- cytotoxicity
- Remarks:
- strong cytotoxic effect at a concentration of 50 mmol/L
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Untreated negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Additional information on results:
- Chromosome aberrations:
In the highest analysable concentration of 10 mmol/l 7% aberrant cells (without gaps) were induced compared to 2% in control cultures. Higher doses were strongly cytotoxic.
Sister chromatid exchanges:
Slightly increased SCE frequencies were described after treatment of V79 cells with 10 and 50 mmol/l methenamine.
Historical control data and other critical parameters at high concentrations (osmolarity, pH) not reported. - Conclusions:
- Methenamine induced chromosome aberrations in the highest analysable concentration of 10 mmol/L. Slightly increased Sister Chromatid Exchange frequencies were also described after treatment of V79 cells with 10 and 50 mmol/L methenamine.
- Executive summary:
In a mammalian cell cytogenetics assay (Chromosome aberration (CA) and Sister Chromatid Exchanges (SCE)), V79 cell cultures were exposed to methenamine in water at concentrations of 0, 0.1, 1, 10, 50 mmol/L without metabolic activation.
Methenamine was tested up to cytotoxic concentration. In the highest analysable concentration of 10 mmol/l 7% aberrant cells (without gaps) were induced compared to 2% in control cultures. Higher doses were strongly cytotoxic. Only one experiment without S-9 mix was done. In the same publication slightly increased SCE frequencies were described after treatment of V79 cells with 10 and 50 mmol/l methenamine. Positive controls induced the appropriate response. There was a concentration related positive response of Chromosome aberration and SCE induced over background.
This study is classified as acceptable but due to missing data about cytotoxicity a final evaluation is difficult. This study satisfies the requirement for Test Guideline (OECD 473, EU B.10 and in vitro sister chromatid exchange assay in V79 cells) for in vitro cytogenetic mutagenicity data.
Referenceopen allclose all
Genetic toxicity in vivo
Description of key information
No mutagenic effects were noted in vivo tests. Neither an in vivo chromosomal aberration test in mice nor a dominant lethal test in mice revealed any genotoxic potential in vivo. Consequently, methenamine is not considered to be of concern with regard to genetic toxicity.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (negative)
Additional information
In vitro assays with bacteria
In a bacterial gene mutation assay weak positive effects with and without S-9 mix were noted for tester strains TA 97, TA 98 and TA 100 (approx. 2-fold increases compared to control values) only in high concentrations from 10 000 μg/plate upwards (Zeiger et al., 1992). The approximately 2-fold increases of the mutation rates (compared to the control value) were observed only at clearly higher concentrations than 5000 μg/plate, the maximum test concentration recommended by the guideline (Shimizu et al., 1985). The relevance of such findings is questionable at such high concentrations as indirect effects might be responsible for the biological response noted.For tester strains TA 98, TA 100, TA 1535, TA 1537, TA 1538 up to 5000 μg/plate negative results were found with and without S-9 mix (Andrews et al., 1980; Crebelli et al., 1984; Takahashi, 1993).
In vitro assays with mammalian cells
Girmanova et al. (1991) reported on a positive chromosomal aberration assay with V79 cells: In the highest analysable concentration of 10 mmol/l 7% aberrant cells (without gaps) were induced compared to 2% in control cultures. Higher doses were strongly cytotoxic. Only one experiment without S-9 mix was done. In the same publication slightly increased SCE frequencies were described after treatment of V79 cells with 10 and 50 mmol/l methenamine. No historical control data are given to allow a final assessment of the effects noted.
In a poorly documented chromosomal aberration assay with HeLa cells negative results were found up to concentrations of 1 mmol/l; higher tested doses induced strong cytotoxic effects (Baldermann et al., 1967). Information on the use of S9 is not given.
Dooley et al. (1985) reported in an abstract without detailed data on a negative mouse lymphoma assay with methenamine under addition of formaldehyde dehydrogenase and NAD+ to the test system.
In vivo assays with mammals
Two in vivo chromosomal aberration tests with mouse bone marrow cells were negative (Vujosevic et al. 1986). An in-vivo chromosomal aberration test with mouse bone marrow cells led to a negative result after single oral doses up to 618 mg/kg (corresponding to 1/3 of LD50-value). Sampling times were 6 h, 12 h, and 24 h after single treatments. Another in vivo chromosomal aberration test with mouse bone marrow cells led also to a negative result after repeated oral doses. Doses up to 618 mg/kg bw were given five times with intervals of 24 h; sampling time was 6 h after last administration. No information about clinical symptoms or cytotoxic effects is given by the authors. However, from the toxicokinetic data available it can be concluded that the substance was available at the target organ.
A dominant lethal assay with mice led to a negative result after single i.p. doses of up to 10 g/kg methenamine. A second trial, in which oral doses of 25 g/kg (maximum tolerated dose) were administered, is not valid, because of higher frequencies of live implants in treated animals than in control animals. No positive control substances were included. Methenamine is not mutagenic in a dominant lethal assay in mice even tested at clear systemic toxic doses of up to 25 g/kg bw.
Conclusion: As no aneugenic or clastogenic effects were found in in vivo studies, methenamine is considered to be non-genotoxic.
Justification for classification or non-classification
The available experimental test data are reliable and suitable for classification purposes under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008. As a result the substance is not considered to be classified under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, as amended for the sixth time in Regulation No 605/2014.
Information on Registered Substances comes from registration dossiers which have been assigned a registration number. The assignment of a registration number does however not guarantee that the information in the dossier is correct or that the dossier is compliant with Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (the REACH Regulation). This information has not been reviewed or verified by the Agency or any other authority. The content is subject to change without prior notice.
Reproduction or further distribution of this information may be subject to copyright protection. Use of the information without obtaining the permission from the owner(s) of the respective information might violate the rights of the owner.