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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 236-942-6 | CAS number: 13557-75-0
- 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
Skin sensitisation
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vitro
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2018-03-22 to 2018-10-11
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 018
- Report date:
- 2018
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: OECD Guideline 442E (In Vitro Skin Sensitisation assays addressing the Key Event on activation of dendritic cells on the Adverse Outcome Pathway for Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- Adopted 09 October 2017
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- activation of dendritic cells
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The correlation of upregulation of immunologically relevant cell surface markers with the skin sensitising potential of a chemical has been reported and represents the third key event of the skin sensitisation process as described by the AOP for skin sensitisation. This method, which measures the markers of DC activation, using the DC-like cell line THP-1 is considered relevant for the assessment of the skin sensitisation potential of chemicals.
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Sodium 2-(1-carboxylatoethoxy)-1-methyl-2-oxoethyl laurate
- EC Number:
- 236-942-6
- EC Name:
- Sodium 2-(1-carboxylatoethoxy)-1-methyl-2-oxoethyl laurate
- Cas Number:
- 13557-75-0
- Molecular formula:
- C18H32O6.Na
- IUPAC Name:
- sodium 2-{[2-(dodecanoyloxy)propanoyl]oxy}propanoate
- Test material form:
- solid
Constituent 1
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- - Purity: technically pure
SOURCE OF TEST MATERIAL
- Source and lot/batch no. of test material: Esterlac SLL (Lot No. 1805900121)
STABILITY AND STORAGE CONDITIONS OF TEST MATERIAL
- Storage condition of test material: At room temperature; protected from light
- Solubility and stability of the test substance in the solvent/vehicle: All test item solutions were freshly prepared immediately prior to use. The test item was soluble in tetrahydrofuran (THF) at a concentration of 500 mg/mL.
TREATMENT OF TEST MATERIAL PRIOR TO TESTING
- Treatment of test material prior to testing: Sonication and warming to 50 °C for 10-20 minutes were performed to aid solubilisation. Stock solutions were prepared by diluting the highest soluble concentration seven times with a constant dilution factor of 1:2.
- Final dilution of a dissolved solid, stock liquid or gel: The working stock solutions were then prepared by diluting each stock solution 250 times with cell culture medium.
The working stock solutions were applied to the cells by adding equal volumes of each solution to prepared cells, resulting in a further 1:2 dilution of the working solutions. The solvent (THF) was present at a constant volume ratio of 0.2 % (v/v) in all cultures, i.e. in all concentrations of the test item and the solvent control.
In vitro test system
- Details on the study design:
- Skin sensitisation (In vitro test system) - Details on study design:
CELL LINE:
The test was carried out using THP-1 cells (ATCC® TIB-202TM), an acute human monocytic leukemic cell line used as a surrogate for dendritic cells. Cells from frozen stock cultures, tested routinely for mycoplasma, were seeded in culture medium at an appropriate density and subcultured at least 2 weeks before they were used in the in vitro h-CLAT test. Cells at passage number (<30) were used. Cells are routinely passaged every 2-3 days at a density of 0.1–0.2E+06 cells/mL.
Cells were cultured in 75 cm² culture flasks (Greiner) in cell culture medium consisting of Roswell Park Memorial Institute medium (RPMI-1640, Gibco Life Science; Cat. No.: 31870-025) supplemented with 10 % foetal bovine serum, 25 mM HEPES, L-glutamine, 0.05 mM 2-mercaptoethanol and 100 U/mL penicillin / 100 µg/mL streptomycin at 37 ± 1 °C and 5 % CO2.
PRE-EXPERIMENTS:
Reactivity Check of the Cells Stock
Prior to testing, the quality of freshly thawed cell batch was checked by monitoring the doubling time and checking the reactivity towards positive controls. For the reactivity check of the cell batch additional negative and positive controls were included. DNCB at a final concentration of 4 µg/mL and nickel sulphate (NiSO4) at a final concentration of 100 µg/mL served as positive controls while lactic acid (LA) at a final concentration of 1000 µg/mL served as negative control. Cells were accepted when both DNCB and NiSO4 produce a positive response and LA produces a negative response for the upregulation of CD86 and CD54.
Solvent Finding
Solubility of the test item was determined prior to the main experiment. The test item was dissolved in 0.9 % NaCl at a final concentration of 100 mg/mL. Test items not soluble in 0.9 % NaCl solution were dissolved in DMSO at a concentration of 500 mg/mL. If the test item was not soluble in DMSO, other solvents (e.g. THF) were used. It was taken care that the test chemical was dissolved or stably dispersed in the chosen solvent and that it did not interfere with the test design.
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE:
Dose Finding Assay
Using the 500 mg/mL stock solution of the test item, eight working stock solutions were prepared by 2-fold serial dilutions using the appropriate solvent (THF). These working stock solutions were further diluted 250-fold with cell culture medium (working solutions). The working solutions were finally used for treatment by adding an equal volume of working solution to the volume of THP-1 cell suspension in a 96-well plate to achieve a further 2-fold dilution.
For testing, THP-1 cells were pre-cultured for at least 48 h in culture flasks at a cell density of 0.1–0.2E+06 cells/mL. Prior to test item application, cells were harvested from the cell culture flask by centrifugation and were re-suspended in fresh culture medium at a density of 2.0E+06 cells/mL. Then 500 µL of the cell suspension were seeded onto a 24 well flat-bottom plate (1.0E+06 cells/well).
The solvent controls and the test item working solutions were mixed 1:1 (v/v) with the cell suspensions prepared in the 24-well plate. Treated plates were incubated for 24 h ± 0.5 h at 37 °C ± 1 °C and 5% CO2.
After 24 h ± 0.5 h of exposure, cells were transferred into sample tubes and collected by centrifugation (approx. 250 × g). The supernatant was discarded and the remaining cells were washed twice with Dulbecco’s phosphate buffered saline (DPBS) containing 0.1% bovine serum albumin (BSA; i.e. FACS buffer). After washing, cells were re-suspended in 600 µL FACS buffer.
200 µL of the cell suspension were transferred into a FACS tube and stained with a propidium iodide (PI) solution at a final concentration of 0.625 µg/mL.
The PI uptake of the cells (an indicator of cytotoxicity) was analysed immediately after the staining procedure by flow cytometry using an excitation wavelength of λ = 488 nm and an emission wavelength of λ > 650 nm. A total of 10,000 cells were acquired and cell viability was calculated for each test concentration.
The CV75 value, i.e. the concentration showing 75 % cell survival, was calculated by log-linear interpolation. The CV75 value was used to calculate and set the concentration range of the test item for the main experiments.
CD54 and CD86 Expression
The test item was dissolved using THF as determined in the pre-experiment. Based on the concentration of the CV75 value determined in the dose finding assay 8 concentrations of the test item were defined for the measurement of the surface marker expression, corresponding to 1.2*CV75; CV75; CV75/1.2; CV75/1.22; CV75/1.23; CV75/1.24; CV75/1.25; CV75/1.26. If the CV75 could not be determined due to insufficient cytotoxicity of the test item in the dose finding assay, the highest soluble concentration of the test item prepared with each solvent was used as starting dose.
The test item was diluted to the concentration corresponding to 500-fold of the 1.2 × CV75. Then, 1.2-fold serial dilutions were made using the corresponding solvent to obtain the 8 stock solutions to be tested. The stock solutions were further diluted 250-fold into the culture medium (working solutions). These working solutions were finally used for cell treatment with a further final 2-fold dilution factor.
For testing, THP-1 cells were pre-cultured for at least 48 h in culture flasks at a cell density of 0.1–0.2E+06 cells/mL. Prior to test item application, cells were harvested from the cell culture flask by centrifugation (125 × g) and were re-suspended in fresh culture medium at a density of 2.0E+06 cells/mL. Then 500 µL of the cell suspension were seeded onto a 24 well flat-bottom plate (1.0E+06 cells/well).
The solvent controls, the positive control and the working solutions were mixed 1:1 (v/v) with the cell suspensions prepared on the 24-well plate. Treated plates were incubated for 24 h ± 0.5 h at 37 °C ± 1 °C and 5 % CO2.
After 24 h ± 0.5 h of exposure, cells were transferred into sample tubes and collected by centrifugation (approx. 250 × g). The following steps were carried out on ice with pre-cooled buffers and solutions. The supernatant was discarded and the remaining cells were washed twice with FACS buffer. After washing, cells were blocked using 600 µL of a FcR blocking buffer (FACS buffer containing 0.01 % (w/v) Globulin Cohn Fraction) and incubated at 4 °C for 15 min. After blocking, cells were split in three aliquots into a 96-well V-bottom plate. After centrifugation (approx. 250 × g), cells were incubated with 50 µL of FITC-labelled anti-CD86, FITC-labelled anti-CD54, or mouse FITC-labelled IgG1 (isotype) antibodies in the dark for 30 min at 4 °C. All antibodies were diluted in FACS buffer. After incubating and then washing with FACS buffer two times, cells were re-suspended in FACS buffer and PI solution was added. PI staining was done just prior to the measurement by adding PI solutions to each sample (final concentration of PI was 0.625 µg/mL).
The expression levels of CD86 and CD54 as well as cell viability (as determined by living cells with no PI uptake) were analysed by flow cytometry using an excitation wavelength of λ = 488 nm and an emission wavelength of λ = 530 nm ± 15 nm for FITC and λ > 650 nm for PI. Based on the geometric mean fluorescence intensity (MFI), the relative fluorescence intensity (RFI) of CD86 and CD54 were calculated. The cell viability was also calculated.
DATA ANALYSIS
FACS data analysis was performed using the software BD FACS DIVA 6.0. Further data analysis such as calculations of the CV75, RFI, Effective Concentration 150 (EC150) and Effective Concentration 200 (EC200) values were performed using the software Microsoft Excel 2010 as appropriate. The mean values and standard deviations of the single replicates were determined using the respective Excel commands.
PREDICTION MODEL
For CD86/CD54 expression measurement, each test item was tested in at least two independent runs to derive a single prediction. Each independent run was performed on a different day or on the same day provided that for each run independent fresh stock solutions and working solutions of the test chemicals and antibody solutions were prepared and independently harvested cells were used.
Sensitising potential of the test item was predicted from the mean percentage expression of CD86 and CD54. Any test item tested by the h-CLAT was considered positive if any of the three scenarios is met:
- if the RFI of CD86 was equal to or greater than 150% at any tested dose at a cell viability ≥ 50 % in at least two independent runs
- if the RFI of CD54 was equal to or greater than 200% at any tested dose at a cell viability ≥ 50 % in at least two independent runs
- if the RFIs of both the CD86 and CD54 were equal to or are greater than 150 % and 200% respectively at any tested dose at a cell viability ≥ 50% in at least two independent runs
In case of not concordant results a third run should be conducted to make the final prediction. Otherwise the results were considered as inconclusive.
A negative test result of a test item was only accepted if the cell viability at a concentration of 1.2 × CV75 is < 90 %. In contrast, a positive test outcome was accepted irrespective of cell viability of > 90 % at a concentration of 1.2 × CV75. If no CV75 could be derived negative test results can be accepted when the test item is tested at the highest soluble concentration (i.e. up to 5000 µg/mL for 0.9 % NaCl solution; up to 1000 µg/mL for DMSO or a different organic solvent) even if the cell viability is > 90 %.
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- The positive control (DNCB) led to an upregulation of CD54 and CD86 in both experiments. The thresholds of 150 % for CD86 (302 % experiment 1; 275 % experiment 2) and 200 % for CD54 (428 % experiment 1; 248 % experiment 2) were clearly exceeded.
In vitro / in chemico
Resultsopen allclose all
- Key result
- Run / experiment:
- other: 1
- Parameter:
- other: CD86 upregulation
- Remarks:
- at highest tested concentration of 125.56 µg/mL
- Value:
- 2 273
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- severe cytotoxicity
- Key result
- Run / experiment:
- other: 1
- Parameter:
- other: CD54 upregulation
- Remarks:
- at highest tested concentration of 125.56 µg/mL
- Value:
- 3 499
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- severe cytotoxicity
- Key result
- Run / experiment:
- other: 2
- Parameter:
- other: CD86 upregulation
- Remarks:
- at highest tested concentration of 125.56 µg/mL
- Value:
- 102
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- severe cytotoxicity
- Key result
- Run / experiment:
- other: 2
- Parameter:
- other: CD54 upregulation
- Remarks:
- at highest tested concentration of 125.56 µg/mL
- Value:
- 94
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- not examined
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- severe cytotoxicity
- Other effects / acceptance of results:
- ACCEPTANCE OF RESULTS:
- Acceptance criteria met for negative control: Yes
- Acceptance criteria met for positive control: Yes
For individual results see Tables 1 and 2 in box "Any other information on results incl. tables".
Any other information on results incl. tables
Summary of Results:
Severe cytotoxicity was observed for the cells treated with the test item. Relative cell viability at the highest test item concentration of 125.56 μg/mL was reduced to 7.6 % (CD86), 7.5 % (CD54) and 7.8 % (isotype IgG1 control) compared to the solvent control in the first experiment and to 13.4 % (CD86), 13.3% (CD54) and 12.4 % (isotype IgG1 control) compared to the solvent control in the second experiment.
In both experiments, the expression of the cell surface marker CD86 was upregulated above the threshold of 150 % relative to the solvent control at the highest test item concentration of 125.56 μg/mL (2273 % in the first experiment, 203 % in the second experiment). At this concentration the test item showed severe cytotoxicity. No further upregulation above the threshold of 150 % was observed for CD86 in the other tested concentrations.
In both experiments, the expression of the cell surface marker CD54 was upregulated above the threshold of 200 % relative to the solvent control at the highest test item concentration of 125.56 μg/mL (3499 % in the first experiment, 377 % in the second experiment). At this concentration the test item showed severe cytotoxicity. No further upregulation above the threshold of 200 % was observed for CD54 in the other tested concentrations.
Table1: CD54 and CD86 Expression Experiment 1
Sample |
Conc. |
Cell Viability [%] |
Mean Fluorescence Intensity |
Mean Fluorescence Intensity (corrected for IgG1) |
Relative Fluorescence Intensity (RFI) [%]1 |
Cell marker to Isotype IgG1 [%]2 |
|||||||
CD86 |
CD54 |
Isotype IgG1 |
CD86 |
CD54 |
Isotype IgG1 |
CD86 |
CD54 |
CD86 |
CD54 |
CD86 |
CD54 |
||
Medium Control |
- |
94.7 |
95.4 |
95.2 |
2174 |
1124 |
610 |
1564 |
514 |
84 |
95 |
356 |
184 |
Solvent Control (0.2% THF) |
- |
94.8 |
94.4 |
94.9 |
2036.0 |
1190.0 |
637.0 |
1399 |
553 |
100 |
100 |
320 |
187 |
Solvent Control (0.2% DMSO) |
- |
94.0 |
94.3 |
94.1 |
2469 |
1137 |
597 |
1872 |
540 |
100 |
100 |
414 |
190 |
DNCB |
4.00 |
77.2 |
76.8 |
77.1 |
6275 |
2930 |
617 |
5658 |
2313 |
302 |
428 |
1017 |
475 |
Sodium lauroyl lactylate |
125.56 |
7.6 |
7.5 |
7.8 |
34370 |
21922 |
2574 |
31796 |
19348 |
2273 |
3499 |
1335 |
852 |
104.63 |
14.0 |
14.5 |
14.2 |
2363 |
1698 |
795 |
1568 |
903 |
112 |
163 |
297 |
214 |
|
87.19 |
85.3 |
84.1 |
84.3 |
2473 |
1316 |
695 |
1778 |
621 |
127 |
112 |
356 |
189 |
|
72.66 |
90.9 |
91.4 |
89.7 |
2403 |
1248 |
705 |
1698 |
543 |
121 |
98 |
341 |
177 |
|
60.55 |
92.6 |
92.7 |
91.5 |
2317 |
1168 |
709 |
1608 |
459 |
115 |
83 |
327 |
165 |
|
50.46 |
93.5 |
93.1 |
93.2 |
2234 |
1220 |
695 |
1539 |
525 |
110 |
95 |
321 |
176 |
|
42.05 |
93.5 |
94.3 |
93.6 |
2453 |
1216 |
700 |
1753 |
516 |
125 |
93 |
350 |
174 |
|
35.04 |
93.7 |
94.1 |
93.3 |
2259 |
1179 |
677 |
1582 |
502 |
113 |
91 |
334 |
174 |
Table2: CD54 and CD86 Expression Experiment 2
Sample |
Conc. |
Cell Viability [%] |
Mean Fluorescence Intensity |
Mean Fluorescence Intensity (corrected for IgG1) |
Relative Fluorescence Intensity (RFI) [%]1 |
Cell marker to Isotype IgG1 [%]2 |
|||||||
CD86 |
CD54 |
Isotype IgG1 |
CD86 |
CD54 |
Isotype IgG1 |
CD86 |
CD54 |
CD86 |
CD54 |
CD86 |
CD54 |
||
Medium Control |
- |
92.0 |
93.2 |
92.6 |
3138 |
1369 |
616 |
2522 |
753 |
98 |
109 |
509 |
222 |
Solvent Control 2 (0.2% THF) |
- |
93.4 |
93.7 |
93.6 |
2849 |
1258 |
672 |
2177 |
586 |
100 |
100 |
424 |
187 |
Solvent Control 1 (0.2% DMSO) |
- |
93.5 |
93.2 |
93.4 |
3159 |
1280 |
590 |
2569 |
690 |
100 |
100 |
535 |
217 |
DNCB |
4.0 |
76.9 |
77.2 |
76.9 |
7652 |
2300 |
586 |
7066 |
1714 |
275 |
248 |
1306 |
392 |
Sodium lauroyl lactylate |
125.56 |
13.4 |
13.3 |
12.4 |
5733 |
3528 |
1319 |
4414 |
2209 |
203 |
377 |
435 |
267 |
104.63 |
28.8 |
29.6 |
29.7 |
3071 |
1607 |
743 |
2328 |
864 |
107 |
147 |
413 |
216 |
|
87.19 |
70.5 |
69.1 |
69.7 |
3288 |
1466 |
735 |
2553 |
731 |
117 |
125 |
447 |
199 |
|
72.66 |
88.6 |
89.2 |
89.0 |
3024 |
1392 |
765 |
2259 |
627 |
104 |
107 |
395 |
182 |
|
60.55 |
90.9 |
90.7 |
90.7 |
3250 |
1334 |
772 |
2478 |
562 |
114 |
96 |
421 |
173 |
|
50.46 |
91.0 |
91.9 |
92.1 |
2983 |
1327 |
781 |
2202 |
546 |
101 |
93 |
382 |
170 |
|
42.05 |
92.2 |
92.6 |
91.7 |
3033 |
1337 |
734 |
2299 |
603 |
106 |
103 |
413 |
182 |
|
35.04 |
93.2 |
93.7 |
93.4 |
2984 |
1301 |
753 |
2231 |
548 |
102 |
94 |
396 |
173 |
RFI is relative to the respective solvent control (i.e. 0.2% DMSO for DNCB and medium control and 0.2% THF for the test item).
1(MFInegative control, solvent control, positive control, test item* 100) / MFIsolvent control(all corrected for IgG1)
2(MFInegative control, solvent control, positive control, test item* MFIsolvent control) * 100
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- In this study (performed in accordance with OECD 442E) under the given conditions the test item sodium lauroyl lactylate did not trigger an upregulation of the expression of the cell surface markers CD86 and CD54 in two independent experiment runs. Therefore, the test item is considered to be non-sensitiser in this test.
- Executive summary:
In a skin sensitisation study conducted according to OECD 442E, the sensitisation potential of the test item sodium lauroyl lactylate (technically pure) in tetrahydrofuran was assessed on the basis of dendritic cell activation by quantifying the expression of the cell surface markers CD54 and CD86 in the human monocytic cell line THP-1.
Cells were incubated with the test item (8 concentrations; range 35.04–125.56 µg/mL) for 24 h at 37 °C. After exposure cells were labelled with fluorescent antibodies of cell surface markers CD54 and CD86 and the expression levels of CD54 and CD86 were measured by FACS analysis. Cell viability was assessed in parallel using propidium iodide staining.
In both experiments, the expression of the cell surface marker CD86 was upregulated above the threshold of 150 % relative to the solvent control at the highest test item concentration of 125.56 µg/mL (2273 % in the first experiment, 203 % in the second experiment). At this concentration the test item showed severe cytotoxicity. No further upregulation above the threshold of 150 % was observed for CD86 in the other tested concentrations.
In both experiments, the expression of the cell surface marker CD54 was upregulated above the threshold of 200 % relative to the solvent control at the highest test item concentration of 125.56 µg/mL (3499 % in the first experiment, 377 % in the second experiment). At this concentration the test item showed severe cytotoxicity. No further upregulation above the threshold of 200 % was observed for CD54 in the other tested concentrations.
Therefore, sodium lauroyl lactylate is considered to be a non-sensitiser in this test.
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.