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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 212-094-2 | CAS number: 762-16-3
- 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 vivo (LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- Experimental starting date: 10th February 2015 Experimental completion date: 9th April 2015
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Study conducted to GLP and in compliance with agreed protocols, with no or minor deviations from standard test guidelines and/or minor methodological deficiencies, which do not affect the quality of the relevant results.
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 015
- Report date:
- 2015
Materials and methods
Test guidelineopen allclose all
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.42 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Dioctanoyl peroxide
- EC Number:
- 212-094-2
- EC Name:
- Dioctanoyl peroxide
- Cas Number:
- 762-16-3
- Molecular formula:
- C16H30O4
- IUPAC Name:
- octanoyl octaneperoxoate
- Test material form:
- solid: flakes
- Details on test material:
- Identification: Dioctanoyl peroxide (CAS# 762-16-3)
Chemical Name: Dioctanoyl peroxide
Trade Name: Perkadox SE-8
CAS Number: 762-16-3
Batch: 1204350050
Purity: 99.2 %
Physical state / Appearance: White flakes
Expiry Date: 06 March 2016
Storage Conditions: approximately 20 °C in the dark
Constituent 1
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- other: CBA/Ca (CBA/CaCrl)
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- Female CBA/Ca (CBA/CaCrl) strain mice were supplied by Charles River (UK), Kent, UK. On receipt the animals were randomly allocated to cages. The animals were nulliparous and non pregnant. After an acclimatization period of at least 5 days the animals were selected at random and given a number unique within the study by indelible ink marking on the tail and a number written on a cage card. At the start of the study the animals were in the weight range of 15 to 23 g, and were 8 to 12 weeks old.
The animals were housed in suspended solid floor polypropylene cages furnished with softwood woodflakes. Free access to mains tap water and food (2014C Teklad Global Rodent diet supplied by Harlan Laboratories UK Ltd., Oxon, UK) was allowed throughout the study.
The temperature and relative humidity were set to achieve limits of 19 to 25 degrees C and 30 to 70%, respectively. The rate of air exchange was approximately fifteen changes per hour and the lighting was controlled by a time switch to give 12 hours continuous light (06.00 to 18.00) and 12 hours darkness.
The animals were provided with environmental enrichment items which were considered not to contain any contaminant of a level that might have affected the purpose or integrity of the study.
Study design: in vivo (LLNA)
- Vehicle:
- acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v)
- Concentration:
- Preliminary screening test: 50%, 25%, 10%, 5%, 2.5% and 1% in acetone/olive oil 4:1
Main test: 2.5%, 1% and 0.5% in acetone/olive oil 4:1 - No. of animals per dose:
- Preliminary screening test: 1 mouse per test item concentration
Main test: Five mice - Details on study design:
- Preliminary Screening Test
Using available information regarding the systemic toxicity/irritancy potential of the test item, a preliminary screening test was performed using six mice, one mouse per test item concentration. The mice were treated by daily application of 25 µL of the test item at concentrations of 50%, 25%, 10%, 5%, 2.5% or 1% w/w in acetone/olive oil 4:1, to the dorsal surface of each ear for three consecutive days (Days 1, 2, 3). The surviving mice were observed twice daily on Days 1, 2 and 3 and once daily on Days 4, 5 and 6. The mouse treated at a concentration of 50% w/w in acetone/olive oil 4:1 was observed on Days 1, 2 and 3. Local skin irritation was scored daily according to the scale included as Appendix 4. Any clinical signs of toxicity, if present, were also recorded. The body weight of each mouse was recorded on Day 1 (prior to dosing) and of the surviving mice on Day 6. The body weight of the mouse that was humanely killed was recorded immediately prior to termination.
Where necessary the thickness of each ear was measured using a Mitutoyo 547 300S gauge (Mitutoyo Corporation), pre dose on Day 1, post dose on Day 3 and on Day 6. Any changes in the ear thickness were noted. Mean ear thickness changes were calculated between time periods Days 1 and 3 and Days 1 and 6. A mean ear thickness increase of equal to or greater than 25% was considered to indicate excessive irritation and limited biological relevance to the endpoint of sensitization.
Main Test
Test Item Administration
Groups of five mice were treated with the test item at concentrations of 2.5%, 1% or 0.5% w/w in acetone/olive oil 4:1. The preliminary screening test suggested that the test item would not produce systemic toxicity or excessive local irritation at a concentration of 2.5% w/w in acetone/olive oil 4:1. The mice were treated by daily application of 25 µL of the appropriate concentration of the test item to the dorsal surface of each ear for three consecutive days (Days 1, 2, 3). The test item formulation was administered using an automatic micropipette and spread over the dorsal surface of the ear using the tip of the pipette.
A further group of five mice received the vehicle alone in the same manner.
3H-Methyl Thymidine Administration
Five days following the first topical application of the test item or vehicle (Day 6) all mice were injected via the tail vein with 250 µL of phosphate buffered saline (PBS) containing 3H methyl thymidine (3HTdR: 80 µCi/mL, specific activity 2.0 Ci/mmoL, ARC UK Ltd) giving a total of 20 µCi to each mouse.
Observations
Clinical Observations: All animals were observed twice daily on Days 1, 2 and 3 and on a daily basis on Days 4, 5 and 6. Any signs of toxicity or signs of ill health during the test were recorded.
Body Weights: The body weight of each mouse was recorded on Day 1 (prior to dosing) and Day 6 (prior to termination).
Terminal Procedures
Termination: Five hours following the administration of 3HTdR all mice were killed by carbon dioxide asphyxiation followed by cervical separation. For each individual animal of each group the draining auricular lymph nodes were excised and processed. For each individual animal 1 mL of PBS was added to the lymph nodes.
Preparation of Single Cell Suspension: A single cell suspension of the lymph node cells for each individual animal was prepared by gentle mechanical disaggregation through a 200 mesh stainless steel gauze. The lymph node cells were rinsed through the gauze with 4 mL of PBS into a petri dish labeled with the study number and dose concentration. The lymph node cells suspension was transferred to a centrifuge tube. The petri dish was washed with an additional 5 mL of PBS to remove all remaining lymph node cells and these were added to the centrifuge tube. The lymph node cells were pelleted at 1400 rpm (approximately 190 g) for 10 minutes. The pellet was re suspended in 10 mL of PBS and re pelleted. To precipitate out the radioactive material, the pellet was re suspended in 3 mL of 5% Trichloroacetic acid (TCA).
Determination of 3HTdR Incorporation: After approximately 18 hours incubation at approximately 4 C, the precipitates were recovered by centrifugation at 2100 rpm (approximately 450 g) for 10 minutes, resuspended in 1 mL of TCA and transferred to 10 mL of scintillation fluid (Optiphase 'Trisafe'). 3HTdR incorporation was measured by scintillation counting. The "Poly Q™" vials containing the samples and scintillation fluid were placed in the sample changer of the scintillator and left for approximately 20 minutes. The purpose of this period of time in darkness was to reduce the risk of luminescence, which has been shown to affect the reliability of the results. After approximately 20 minutes, the vials were shaken vigorously. The number of radioactive disintegrations per minute was then measured using the Beckman LS6500 scintillation system (Beckman Instruments Inc, Fullerton, CA, USA). - Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
- Statistics:
- Data was processed to give group mean values for disintegrations per minute and standard deviations where appropriate. Individual and group mean disintegrations per minute values were assessed for dose response relationships. Data was first assessed for suitability by analysis of normality and homogeneity of variance. If the assumptions that the data are both normally distributed and has homogeneity of variances, then parametric one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Dunnett’s multiple comparison procedure were used to determine statistical significance. If the assumptions were not met, non parametric Kruskal Wallis Rank Sum and Mann Whitney U test procedures were used.
Probability values (p) are presented as follows:
P<0.001 ***
P<0.01 **
P<0.05 *
P>0.05 (not significant)
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- Results
The Stimulation Index expressed as the mean radioactive incorporation for the treatment group divided by the mean radioactive incorporation of the vehicle control group is as follows:
Concentration (% v/v) in
acetone/olive oil 4:1 Stimulation Index Result
25 13.93 Positive
Conclusion
α Hexylcinnamaldehyde, tech., 85% was considered to be a sensitizer under the conditions of the test.
In vivo (LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- The Stimulation Index expressed as the mean radioactive incorporation for each treatment group divided by the mean radioactive incorporation of the vehicle control group are as follows: Concentration (% w/w) in acetone/olive oil 4:1 Stimulation Index Result 0.5 1.89 Negative 1 2.83 Negative 2.5 8.15 Positive The concentration of test item expected to cause a 3 fold increase in 3HTdR incorporation (EC3 value) was calculated to be 1.05%.
- Parameter:
- other: disintegrations per minute (DPM)
- Remarks on result:
- other: Please refer to the atatched Table 4
Any other information on results incl. tables
Preliminary Screening Test
The animal treated with the test item at a concentration of 50% w/winacetone/olive oil 4:1was humanely killed, post dose on Day 3, due to the occurrence of clinical signs of toxicity that approachedthe moderate severity limit set forth in the UK Home Office Project Licence. Hunched posture, lethargy and body weight loss were noted in this animal.
Very slight erythema was noted on both ears of the animals treated with the test item at concentrations of 50%, 25%, 10%, 5% or 1% w/winacetone/olive oil 4:1. Novisual local skin irritation was notedon the ears of the animal treated with the test item at a concentration of2.5% w/winacetone/olive oil 4:1.
A greater than 25% increase in mean ear thickness was notedthe animals treated with the test item at concentrations of 50%, 25%, 10% or 5% w/winacetone/olive oil 4:1. Noirritation indicated by an equal to or greater than 25% increase in mean ear thickness was notedthe animals treated with the test item at concentrations of2.5% or 1% w/winacetone/olive oil 4:1.
Based on this information the dose levels selected for the main test were2.5%,1% and0.5% w/winacetone/olive oil 4:1.
Main Test
Estimation of the Proliferative Response of Lymph Node Cells
The Stimulation Index expressed as the mean radioactive incorporation for each treatment group divided by the mean radioactive incorporation of the vehicle control group are as follows:
Concentration (%w/w) in |
Stimulation Index |
Result |
0.5 |
1.89 |
Negative |
1 |
2.83 |
Negative |
2.5 |
8.15 |
Positive |
Clinical Observations and Mortality Data
There were no deaths. No signs of systemic toxicity were noted in the test or control animalsduring the test.
Body Weight
Body weight change of the test animals between Day 1 and Day 6 were comparable to that observed in the corresponding control group animals over the same period.
Calculation of EC3Value
aEC3= c + [[(3-d)/(b-d)] x (a-c)]
a |
= |
2.5 |
b |
= |
8.15 |
c |
= |
1 |
d |
= |
2.83 |
|
||
EC3=1+ [[(3-2.83)/(8.15-2.83)] x (2.5-1)] =1.05 |
The concentration of test item expected to cause a 3 fold increase in3HTdR incorporation (EC3value) was calculated to be1.05%.
a= lowest concentration giving stimulation index >3
b = actual stimulation index caused by ‘a’
c = highest concentration failing to produce a stimulation index of 3
d = actual stimulation index caused by ‘c’
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- sensitising
- Remarks:
- Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- The test item was considered to be a sensitizer under the conditions of the test.
The test item was also classified as a contact sensitizer (Category 1A) according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, relating to the Classification, Labeling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures. It is reasonable to assume that the Signal Word “Warning” and the Hazard Statement “H317: May cause an allergic skin reaction” are therefore required.
The test item was classified as a contact sensitizer (Category 1A) according to the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals - Executive summary:
Introduction
A study was performed to assess the skin sensitization potential of the test item in the CBA/Ca strain mouse following topical application to the dorsal surface of the ear.
Methods
Following a preliminary screening test in which no clinical signs of toxicity were noted at aconcentration of 2.5% w/w, this concentration was selected as the highest dose investigated in the main test of the Local Lymph Node Assay. Three groups, each of five animals, were treated with 50 µL (25 µL per ear) of the test item as a solution in acetone/olive oil 4:1at concentrations of2.5%,1% or 0.5% w/w. A further group of five animals was treated with acetone/olive oil 4:1alone.
Results
The Stimulation Index expressed as the mean radioactive incorporation for each treatment group divided by the mean radioactive incorporation of the vehicle control group are as follows:
Concentration (%w/w) in
acetone/olive oil 4:1Stimulation Index
Result
0.5
1.89
Negative
1
2.83
Negative
2.5
8.15
Positive
The concentration of test item expected to cause a 3 fold increase in3HTdR incorporation (EC3value) was calculated to be1.05%.
Conclusion
The test item was considered to be a sensitizer under the conditions of the test.
The test item was also classified as a contact sensitizer (Category 1A) according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008, relating to the Classification, Labeling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures. It is reasonable to assume that the Signal Word “Warning” and the Hazard Statement “H317: May cause an allergic skin reaction” are therefore required.
The test item was classified as a contact sensitizer (Category 1A) according to the GloballyHarmonized Systemof Classification and Labelling of Chemicals.
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.