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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 690-796-1 | CAS number: 420-16-6
- 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
Description of key information
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- migrated information: read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 1997
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Guideline study.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- Buehler test
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Hartley
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- Cage cards incorporating animal group code, arrival date, color code, marking system were used to identify each guinea pig.
TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Harlan Sprague Dawley, Inc. P.O. Box 29176 Indianapolis, IN 46229
- Age at study initiation: Young adult
- Weight at study initiation: At the start of the pilot phase of testing, the pilot animals weighed 458 to 594 grams. At the start of the induction phase of testing distilled water control, positive control, and naive positive control animals weighed 422 to 703 grams.
- Housing: The animals were randomly caged according to Standard Operating Procedures and individually housed, in wire mesh suspension cages.
- Diet: Teklad Guinea Pig Diet
- Water: ad libitum
- Acclimation period: five days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature: 64-79 °F (18.3 - 26.1 °C)
- Humidity: 30-70%
- Photoperiod: 12-hour light/12-hour dark - Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- undiluted
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- undiluted
- No. of animals per dose:
- A total of 53 animals were utilized. Twenty test animals, ten distilled water control animals, ten positive control animals, five naive positive control animals, and eight pilot animals were used. Equal numbers of males and females were included in each animal group, as possible.
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS: The irritation phase had the purpose of determining the proper level of test material to be used in the induction and challenge phases. The irritation potential of the test material at levels of undiluted, 50%, 25%, and 10% was evaluated in four animals. One level of the test material was evaluated per animal. Dilutions of the test material were prepared w/v in distilled water. The day prior to test material exposure, the hair was removed from each of the animal's backs using a small animal clipper. Closed patches were applied to the animals in the following manner: A 0.3 mL quantity of each test preparation was applied into a 25 mm Hill Top Chamber®. The animal was placed into the restrainer, and the chambers were applied to the clipped surface as quickly as possible. The chambers were occluded with rubber dental dam pulled taut and fastened to the bottom of the restrainer with clips. The restrainer was adjusted to minimize movement of the animal during exposure. Approximately six hours later, the dental dam and chambers were removed and the animal was taken from the restrainer and placed in its cage.
A second pilot study was conducted to evaluate the irritation potential of the undiluted test material. A single patch was applied to four additional pilot animals utilizing the same exposure procedure as for the "Irritation Screening Phase".
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
The left shoulder (Site 1) of each test, distilled water control, and positive control animal was clipped with a small animal clipper the day before exposure. The animals were restrained, and a 0.3 mL quantity of the undiluted test material was applied to the test animals. Undiluted distilled water was applied to the distilled water control animals. The positive control material was applied to the positive control animals as a 2.5% w/v formulation in 95% ethanol. The appropriate material was applied using a Hill Top Chamber®. The procedure was repeated at the same site once a week for the next two weeks for a total of three approximate six-hour exposures (the interval between induction exposures varied from 6 to 7 days). After the last induction exposure, the animals were left untreated for approximately two weeks (13 days) before primary challenge.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
The test, distilled water control, and positive control animals, which had three previous exposures to the appropriate test material at appropriate intervals, were again exposed in the challenge phase approximately two weeks after the last induction exposure. In addition, five naive positive control animals, which had never been exposed to the positive control material, were concurrently treated with the same concentrations.
The same exposure procedure as for the "Induction Phase" was used except the chambers were applied to a skin site that had not been exposed previously. Each test animal received one patch of the undiluted test material using Site 2. Each distilled water control animal received one patch of the undiluted test material and one patch of distilled water material using Sites 2 and 5. Each positive and naive positive control animal received the positive control material at concentrations of 5%, 2.5%, and 1% formulated w/v in acetone using Sites 2, 4, and 5. The patch site was rotated for possible site-to-site variation in response. - Challenge controls:
- Yes
- Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
- Statistics:
- Data were not analyzed statistically.
- Positive control results:
- For validation of the test system, a positive control group was evaluated concurrently with the test group. Following primary challenge using alpha Hexylcinnamaldehyde, tech., 85% as 5%, 2.5%, and 1% w/v formulations in acetone, the incidence of grade 1 responses or greater in the test group (10 of 10), (9 of 10), and (6 of 10), respectively was compared to that of the naive positive control group (0 of 5), (0 of 5), and (0 of 5), respectively. The incidence and severity of these responses in the positive control group were significantly greater than those of the naive positive control group indicating that sensitization had been induced at all levels tested.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- Undiluted Acetonitrile
- No. with + reactions:
- 3
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- slight, patchy erythema
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: Undiluted Acetonitrile. No with. + reactions: 3.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: slight, patchy erythema.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- Undiluted Acetonitrile
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- slight, patchy erythema
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: Undiluted Acetonitrile. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: slight, patchy erythema.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- Undiluted Acetonitrile
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- slight, patchy erythema
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: Undiluted Acetonitrile. No with. + reactions: 2.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: slight, patchy erythema.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- Undiluted Acetonitrile
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- slight, patchy erythema
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: Undiluted Acetonitrile. No with. + reactions: 2.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: slight, patchy erythema.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- other: distilled water
- Dose level:
- undiluted
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- slight patchy erythema
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: other: distilled water. Dose level: undiluted. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: slight patchy erythema.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- other: distilled water
- Dose level:
- undiluted
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- slight patchy erythema
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: other: distilled water. Dose level: undiluted. No with. + reactions: 2.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: slight patchy erythema.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 1%
- No. with + reactions:
- 10
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- (5) slight but confluent, or moderate patchy erythema; (5) moderate erythema
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: positive control. Dose level: 1%. No with. + reactions: 10.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: (5) slight but confluent, or moderate patchy erythema; (5) moderate erythema.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 1%
- No. with + reactions:
- 10
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- (4) slight but confluent, or moderate patchy erythema; (6) moderate erythema
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: positive control. Dose level: 1%. No with. + reactions: 10.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: (4) slight but confluent, or moderate patchy erythema; (6) moderate erythema.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- other: naive positive control
- Dose level:
- 1%
- No. with + reactions:
- 3
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- (3) slight, patchy erythema
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: other: naive positive control. Dose level: 1%. No with. + reactions: 3.0. Total no. in groups: 5.0. Clinical observations: (3) slight, patchy erythema.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- other: naive positive control
- Dose level:
- 1%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: other: naive positive control. Dose level: 1%. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 5.0.
- Interpretation of results:
- not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Migrated information
Reference
Following primary challenge using undiluted Acetonitrile (HPLC Grade) there were no grade 1 responses noted in any animals. The incidence of grade ± responses in the test group (3 of 20) was compared to that of the distilled water control group (2 of 10). The incidence and severity of these responses in the test group were essentially comparable to those produced by the distilled water control group indicating that sensitization had not been induced.
For validation of the test system, a positive control group was evaluated concurrently with the test group. Following primary challenge using alpha - Hexylcinnamaldehyde, tech., 85% as 5%, 2.5%, and 1% w/v formulations in acetone, the incidence of grade 1 responses or greater in the test group (10 of 10), (9 of 10), and (6 of 10), respectively was compared to that of the naive positive control group (0 of 5), (0 of 5), and (0 of 5), respectively. The incidence and severity of these responses in the positive control group were significantly greater than those of the naive positive control group indicating that sensitization had been induced at all levels tested.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
In the key study (Morris, T.D., 1997), the read-across substance of the test item (acetonitrile) was found to be non-irritating and non-sensitizing to guinea pig skin when tested by the Buehler method according to OCED 406 guideline (GLP).
No data on sensitisation potential are available for the other read across substance BF3 or boron trifluoride dihydrate, respectively. Since BF3 is a gas and both BF3 and boron trifluoride dihydrate are corrosive to (eye and) skin, a study on skin sensitisation potential does not need to be conducted, neither with BF3 (boron trifluoride dihydrate) nor with the complex of boron trifluoride and acetonitrile.
Migrated from Short description of key information:
There is no data on the skin sensitisation potential for the test substance. The complex is composed of boron trifluoride and acetonitrile. Acetonitrile, one read across substance for the test item, was found to be non-irritating and non-sensitizing to guinea pig skin when tested by the Buehler method. No data on sensitisation potential are available for the other read across substance BF3 or boron trifluoride dihydrate, respectively. Since BF3 is a gas and both BF3 and boron trifluoride dihydrate are corrosive to (eye and) skin, a study on skin sensitisation potential does not need to be conducted, neither with BF3 (boron trifluoride dihydrate) nor with the complex of boron trifluoride and acetonitrile.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Classification, Labeling, and Packaging Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008
Acetonitrile as one component of the complex was found to be non-sensitizing to guinea pig skin. Because of the corrosive properties of the test substance as such, it cannot be tested and classified and labelled for skin sensitisation under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, as amended for the sixth time in Regulation EC No 605/2014.
Dangerous Substance Directive (67/548/EEC)
Acetonitrile as one component of the complex was found to be non-sensitizing to guinea pig skin. Because of the corrosive properties of the test substance as such, it cannot be tested and classified and labelled for skin sensitisation under Directive 67/548/EEC, as amended for the 31st time in Directive 2009/2/EC.
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.