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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 811-616-1 | CAS number: 1563063-07-9
- 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:
- 20 - 26 Oct 2016
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 017
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 442B (Skin Sensitization: Local Lymph Node Assay: BrdU-ELISA)
- Version / remarks:
- adopted 22 July 2010
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA): BrdU-ELISA
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Essential oil of Mentha Spicata L., Erospicata (Labiatae) obtained from aerial parts by steam distillation
- EC Number:
- 811-616-1
- Cas Number:
- 1563063-07-9
- Molecular formula:
- not applicable for UVCB substances
- IUPAC Name:
- Essential oil of Mentha Spicata L., Erospicata (Labiatae) obtained from aerial parts by steam distillation
Constituent 1
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- other: CBA/N
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Age at study initiation: 9 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: 17.6 - 21.9 g (range-finding study), 17.3 - 22.9 g (main study part 1), 17.9 - 20.6 g (main study part 2)
- Housing: 2 - 3 animals per cage in polysulfone cages (200W x 320D x 140H mm)
- Diet: Teklad Certified Irradiated Global 18% Protein Rodent Diet 2918C (Envigo RMS. Ltd., USA), ad libitum
- Water: public tap water filtered and irradiated by ultraviolet light, ad libitum
- Acclimation period: 4 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 20.6 - 23.0
- Humidity (%): 45.8 - 58.5
- Air changes (per hr): 10 - 15
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12
Study design: in vivo (LLNA)
- Vehicle:
- acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v)
- Concentration:
- Range-finding study:
5, 10, 25, 50% (w/v) and 100%
Main study:
1, 10% (w/v) and 100% (Part 1)
25 and 50% (Part 2) - No. of animals per dose:
- 2 (range-finding study), 5 (main study)
- Details on study design:
- RANGE-FINDING STUDY:
- Compound solubility: The test substance was dissolved in AOO in a preliminary solubility test. Therefore, AOO was utilized as vehicle for this study.
Dose selection was based on the consecutive doses and dose levels are selected from a series of appropriate concentrations such as 5, 10, 25, 50 and 100%.The preliminary screening test was performed under identical conditions as the main study, except determination of stimulation indices.
- Irritation: Excessive local irritation is indicated by an erythema score ≥ 3 on any day of measurement.
- Ear thickness: Ear thickness was ≥ 25% on any day of measurement.
- Systemic toxicity: The following clinical observations indicate systemic toxicity when used as part of an integrated assessment and therefore may indicate the maximum dose level to use in the main study: changes in nervous system, changes in behavior, changes in respiratory patterns, and changes in food and water consumption.
Based on the results of the dose range finding study the highest dose for the main study was selected as 100%. Two additional low dose levels (10 and 1%) were included after discussion with the sponsor/ study monitor (Part 1). Two additional mid dose levels (50 and 25%) were included after discussion with the sponsor/ study monitor (Part 2). In addition, the positive and negative control groups were included in the main study.
MAIN STUDY
- Name of test method: 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine (BrdU) incorporation determined by ELISA
- Criteria used to consider a positive response: A stimulation index (SI) was calculated for each group using the BrdU labelling index of each test group divided by the BrdU labelling index of the vehicle control group. A test substance is considered positive if the SI value is ≥ 1.6.
TREATMENT PREPARATION AND ADMINISTRATION: The dorsal surface of both ears was topically treated (25 μL/ear) with the test substance on Day 1. The application was repeated on Day 2 and 3. Two days after the third application on Day 5, an intraperitoneal injection of 0.5 mL (5 mg/mouse) of BrdU (10 mg/mL) was made. Approximately 24 h later, following injection of BrdU, the mice were sacrificed and draining auricular lymph nodes were excised and pooled for each individual animal. A single cell suspension was prepared by separation through a nylon mesh. In each case, the target volume of the cell suspension was adjusted to the determined optimized volume. The optimized volume was based on the mean absorbance within 0.1 - 0.2 in the vehicle control group. BrdU was measured by ELISA using a commercial kit. Briefly, 100 µL of the cell suspension was added to the wells of a microplate in triplicate. After fixation and denaturation of the cell suspension, anti-BrdU antibody was added to each well. Subsequently, anti-BrdU antibody was removed by washing and the substrate solution was added. Absorbance was measured at 370 nm with a reference wavelength of 492 nm. - Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
- Statistics:
- Statistical analysis was conducted using a statistical program (version 9.3, SAS Institute Inc., U.S.A.) for the data including body weight, erythema score, ear thickness, ear weight and stimulation index. Bartlett’s test was employed on homogeneity of variance (significance level: 0.05) for body weights, ear thickness, ear weight and stimulation index data. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was employed on homogeneous data. Dunnett’s t-test was applied for multiple comparisons (significance levels: 0.05 and 0.01, one-tailed) between the negative control group and each of the test substance groups or positive substance group. Since homoscedasticity was rejected, Kruskal-Wallis test was employed on heterogeneous data and Steel’s test was applied for multiple comparisons (significance levels: 0.05 and 0.01, one-tailed) between the negative control group and each of the test substance groups or positive substance group. Kruskal-Wallis test for the erythema score was employed on heterogeneous data, and Steel’s test was applied for multiple comparisons (significance levels: 0.05 and 0.01, one-tailed) between the negative control group and each of the test substance groups or positive substance group.
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- Body weight: Mean body weights for Day 1 and Day 6 were 20.0 and 20.3 g, respectively. There were no significant differences when compared to the negative control group.
Ear thickness: Mean ear thickness was 0.20 and 0.23 mm on Day 1 and Day 6, respectively.
Ear weight: Mean ear punch weight was 15.1 mg. There were significant increases when compared to the negative control group (p<0.05).
Erythrema score: Mean erythema score was 0–2.
Stimulation index: SI value calculated for the positive control was 3.73. There was a significant increase when compared to the negative control group (p<0.01).
In vivo (LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.03
- Test group / Remarks:
- 1% test substance
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.01
- Test group / Remarks:
- 10% test substance
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 2.17
- Test group / Remarks:
- 25% test substance
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 3.06
- Test group / Remarks:
- 50% test substance
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 3.09
- Test group / Remarks:
- 100% test substance
- Key result
- Parameter:
- other: EC1.6
- Value:
- 16.7
- Cellular proliferation data / Observations:
- IRRITATION, EAR THICKNESS and EAR WEIGHTS:
Erythema score:
Part 1: In the negative control group, the mean erythema score was 0 and 0 on Day 1 and Day 6 after dosing, respectively.
In the test substance groups at 1, 10 and 100%, the mean erythema scores were 0–0, 0–0 and 0–2, respectively.
However, since the erythema score was below 3, the value is not considered to be excessive for local irritation.
Part 2: In the negative control group, the mean erythema score was 0 and 0 on Day 1 and Day 6 after dosing, respectively.
In the test substance groups at 25 and 50%, the mean erythema scores were 0–0 and 0–0, respectively. There were no significant differences when compared to the negative control group.
Ear thickness:
Part 1: In the negative control group, the mean ear thickness was 0.18 and 0.19 mm on Day 1 and Day 6 after dosing, respectively.
In the test substance groups at 1, 10 and 100%, the mean ear thickness values (Day 1 and Day 6) were 0.19 and 0.19, 0.19 and 0.20 as well as 0.19 and 0.21 mm, respectively. There were significant increases when compared to the negative control group (p<0.05: Day 1 (100%), p<0.01: Day 3 (1, 10 and 100%), Day 6 (10 and 100%)). However, since the increase in ear thickness was below 25%, the value is not considered to be excessive for local irritation.
Part 2: In the negative control group, the mean ear thickness was 0.19 and 0.19 mm on Day 1 and Day 6 after dosing, respectively.
In the test substance groups at 25 and 50%, the mean ear thickness values (Day 1 and Day 6) were 0.19 and 0.20 as well as 0.19 and 0.20 mm, respectively. There were significant increases when compared to the negative control group (p<0.05: Day 6 (25%), p<0.01: Day 6 (50%)). However, since the increase in ear thickness was below 25%, the value is not considered to be excessive for local irritation.
Ear weights:
Part 1: In the negative control group, the mean ear punch weight was 12.5 mg.
In the test substance groups at 1, 10 and 100%, the mean ear punch weights were 12.6, 12.8 and 12.7 mg, respectively. There were no significant differences when compared to the negative control group.
Part 2: In the negative control group, the mean ear punch weight was 13.3 mg.
In the test substance groups at 25 and 50%, the mean ear punch weights were 13.8 and 14.2 mg, respectively. There were no significant differences when compared to the negative control group.
EC1.6 CALCULATION: EC1.6 =2^{log2(c) + (3-d)/(b-d) x [log2(a)-log2(c)]}
a = The dose concentration with higher SI; b = The higher SI value, c = The dose concentration with lower SI; d = the lower SI value
EC1.6 = 16.7%
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS:
Part 1 and 2: There were no abnormal clinical signs or deaths in any dosing group during the observation period.
BODY WEIGHTS:
Part 1: In the negative control group, the mean body weights were 19.7 and 19.5 g on Day 1 and Day 6 after dosing, respectively.
In the test substance groups at 1, 10 and 100%, the mean body weights (Day 1 and Day 6) were 20.0 and 19.8, 19.4 and 20.3 as well as 20.1 and 19.7 g, respectively. There were no significant differences when compared to the negative control group.
Part 2: In the negative control group, the mean body weights were 19.4 and 19.3 g on Day 1 and Day 6 after dosing, respectively.
In the test substance groups at 25 and 50%, the mean body weights (Day 1 and Day 6) were 18.7 and 18.1 as well as 18.6 and 18.2 g, respectively. There were no significant differences when compared to the negative control group.
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- other: Skin Sens Cat 1B according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of the local lymph node assay, the test substance revealed a SI ≥ 1.6 at concentrations of 25, 50 and 100%. The calculated EC1.6 value was 16.7%. Therefore, the test substance is considered as weak sensitiser.
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.