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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 204-909-5 | CAS number: 128-80-3
- 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
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
Skin Irritation
Skin irritation study was conducted on New Zealand White rabbits under occlusive condition to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical. The study was performed according to OECD guideline 404.
No destructions or irreversible alterations of the treated skin and no corrosion effects had occurred on the skin.
Also the mean primary irritation index was estimated to be 0.0.
Thus on basis of scores and observed effects, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to the rabbits skin under tested experimental condition.
Eye Irritation
An ocular irritation study of test chemical was conducted on New Zealand White rabbits according to OECD guideline 405.
The test chemical showed no irritation when applied on the rabbit eye mucosa. No discoloration of the cornea and conjunctivae was observed in the rabbits during the entire test period which could be related to compound effects. No corrosion effect was observed at each of the measuring intervals.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to eyes.
The eye irritation potential of the test chemical was also evaluated in an Eye irritation test with EpiOcular™ (MatTek ,MA) was conducted according to OECD 492.
The mean %tissue viability was 100%, since the treated tissues had viability greater than 60%, the test substance was classified as non-irritating. Hence, the test chemical was considered not to be an ocular irritant and it can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin irritation / corrosion
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin irritation: in vivo
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Justification for type of information:
- Data is from experimental report
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 404 (Acute Dermal Irritation / Corrosion)
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Skin irritation study of test chemical was conducted on New Zealand White rabbits under occlusive condition according to OECD guideline 404.
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Remarks:
- pre-dates GLP regulation
- Species:
- rabbit
- Strain:
- New Zealand White
- Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: KLEENTIERFARM MADOERIN AG; 4414 FUELLINSDORF; SWITZERLAND
- Age at study initiation: 12 -16 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: 2.3 to 3.0 kg
- Housing: The animals were caged individually in stainless steel cages.
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): Standard kliba rabbit maintenance food;ad libitum.
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): ad libitum
- Acclimation period: 4
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 22 +/- 2 degC
- Humidity (%): 55 +/- 10 %
- Air changes (per hr): no data
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12 hours/day - Type of coverage:
- occlusive
- Preparation of test site:
- clipped
- Vehicle:
- other: Polyethylene glycol / Saline (70/30 PARTS)
- Controls:
- not specified
- Amount / concentration applied:
- TEST MATERIAL
- Amount(s) applied (volume or weight with unit): 0.5 ml
- Concentration : 50%
VEHICLE
- Amount(s) applied (volume or weight with unit): no data
- Concentration (if solution): 70% polyethylene glycol + 30 % saline - Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 4 hours
- Observation period:
- 72 hours
- Number of animals:
- 3 (2 males and 1 female)
- Details on study design:
- TEST SITE
- Area of exposure: 6,25 cm²
- Type of wrap if used: occlusive
REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
- Washing (if done): no data
- Time after start of exposure: 4 hours
OBSERVATION TIME POINTS
(indicate if minutes, hours or days): Observed at 1, 24, 48 and 72 hours.
SCORING SYSTEM:
- Method of calculation: Draize method. - Irritation parameter:
- primary dermal irritation index (PDII)
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- 24/48/72 h
- Score:
- 0
- Reversibility:
- other: not applicable
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
- Irritant / corrosive response data:
- The test chemical showed no irritation,when applied to intact rabbit skin.
No destructions or irreversible alterations of the treated skin were observed. Thus it was concluded that no corrosion effect had occured on the skin. - Other effects:
- In the area of application a moderate to slight greyish discoloration of the skin was observed. This effect was recorded in the rabbits during the entire observation period.
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not irritating
- Conclusions:
- In the area of application a moderate to slight greyish discoloration of the skin was observed. This effect was recorded in the rabbits during the entire observation period.
No destructions or irreversible alterations of the treated skin and no corrosion effects had occurred on the skin.
Also the mean primary irritation index was estimated to be 0.0.
Thus on basis of scores and observed effects, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to the rabbits’ skin under tested experimental condition. - Executive summary:
Skin irritation study was conducted on New Zealand White rabbits under occlusive condition to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical. The study was performed according to OECD guideline 404.
The test chemical was applied to the intact skin of three rabbits (2 male and 1 female) for exposure period of 4 hours under occlusive condition at a dose of 50% in Polyethylene glycol / Saline (70/30 Parts). The skin reactions were recorded at 1, 24, 48 and 72 hours according to Draize method.
In the area of application a moderate to slight greyish discoloration of the skin was observed. This effect was recorded in the rabbits during the entire observation period.
No destructions or irreversible alterations of the treated skin and no corrosion effects had occurred on the skin.
Also the mean primary irritation index was estimated to be 0.0.
Thus on basis of scores and observed effects, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to the rabbits skin under tested experimental condition.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Eye irritation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- eye irritation: in vivo
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Justification for type of information:
- Data is from experimental report
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 405 (Acute Eye Irritation / Corrosion)
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Evaluation of occular irritation produced by the test chemical introduced into the conjuntival sac of the rabbit eye.
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Remarks:
- pre-dates GLP regulation
- Species:
- rabbit
- Strain:
- New Zealand White
- Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: KLEINTIERFARM MADOERIN AG; 4414 FUELLINSDORF / SWITZERLAND
- Age at study initiation: 12 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: 2,3 -3,0 kg
- Housing: The animals were caged individually in stainless steel cages.
- Identification: Individually by numbered ear tags and cage numbers.
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): Pelleted standard KLIBA 341, rabbit maintenance diet,ad libitum.
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): Tap water,ad libitum.
- Acclimation period: 5 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 22+/- 2 degC
- Humidity (%): 55 +/- 10 %
- Air changes (per hr): no data
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12 hours/day - Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Controls:
- yes, concurrent no treatment
- Amount / concentration applied:
- TEST MATERIAL
- Amount(s) applied (volume or weight with unit): 100 mg/rabbit eye.
- Concentration (if solution): pure
VEHICLE
- none - Duration of treatment / exposure:
- single application
- Observation period (in vivo):
- 72 hours
- Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
- 3 (2 male and 1 female)
- Details on study design:
- REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
- Washing (if done): Eyes were not washed.
SCORING SYSTEM: Draize method
TOOL USED TO ASSESS SCORE: No data
- Irritation parameter:
- other: Primary irritation index
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- 24/48/72 h
- Score:
- 1.6
- Reversibility:
- not specified
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
- Remarks:
- Unrinsed Eyes
- Irritant / corrosive response data:
- The test chemical showed no irritation when applied on the rabbit eye mucosa.
No discoloration of the cornea and conjunctivae was observed in the rabbits during the entire test period which could be related to compound effects.
No corrosion effect was observed at each of the measuring intervals. - Other effects:
- No acute toxicological signs were observed in the animals during the test period.
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not irritating
- Conclusions:
- The test chemical showed no irritation when applied on the rabbit eye mucosa. No discoloration of the cornea and conjunctivae was observed in the rabbits during the entire test period which could be related to compound effects. No corrosion effect was observed at each of the measuring intervals.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to eyes. - Executive summary:
An ocular irritation study of test chemical was conducted on New Zealand White rabbits according to OECD guideline 405.
About 100mg of undiluted chemical was instilled into the one eye of each rabbit whereas the other untreated eye served as control.
The treated eyes were not rinsed and the ocular lesions were scored after 72 hours according to Draize method.
The test chemical showed no irritation when applied on the rabbit eye mucosa. No discoloration of the cornea and conjunctivae was observed in the rabbits during the entire test period which could be related to compound effects. No corrosion effect was observed at each of the measuring intervals.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to eyes.
- Endpoint:
- eye irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- data from handbook or collection of data
- Justification for type of information:
- data is from peer reviewed journals
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 492 (Reconstructed Human Cornea-like Epithelium (RhCE) Test Method for Identifying Chemicals Not Requiring Classification and Labelling for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage)
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- The eye irritation potential of the test chemical was evaluated in an Eye irritation test with EpiOcular™ (MatTek , MA) was conducted according to OECD 492
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Species:
- other: EpiOcular™ (MatTek, USA)
- Vehicle:
- other: Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline (D-PBS)
- Controls:
- yes, concurrent no treatment
- Amount / concentration applied:
- 50 mg of solid material
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 360 min
- Duration of post- treatment incubation (in vitro):
- Tissues were then transferred to a six-well plate containing 1 mL of warm assay medium (37 ℃) and incubated for 18 hours
- Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
- Duplicates
- Details on study design:
- Pre-treatment of the tissues:
Tissues were transferred to a six-well plate containing 1.0 mL of pre-warmed assay medium. Tissues were then incubated overnight at 37 ℃ in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2. After incubation,
tissues were pre-treated with 20 mL of Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline (D-PBS) and incubated for 30 min, prior to exposure to the test chemical.
Study Design:
The experimental steps after pre- treatment of solid materials, was as follows:
1) Treatment, 50 mg of solid material for 360 min;
2) Rinse, for rinsing the tissues, three clean beakers, each containing 100 mL of Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline, were prepared; two tissues that were treated with the same chemical were washed at a time; and each beaker was rinsed three times;
3) Post-soak, after the final rinse, tissues were immersed in 5 mL of assay medium in a 12-well plate for 25 min for solid materials at room temperature;
4) Post-incubation, tissues were then transferred to a six-well plate containing 1 mL of warm assay medium (37 ℃) and incubated for 18 hrs for solid materials.
Then, through MTT assay, the viability of tissues was measured to determine the eye irritation potential of test materials.
Description of the method used to quantify MTT formazan:
Because colorants can interfere with MTT assay, additional color interference tests were conducted for EpiOcularTM according to TG 492. First, the light absorbance of colorants in water and isopropanol were examined for interference at 570 nm, which is in the same range with MTT for formazan, revealing significant color interferences. To consider the interference, an additional control, a non-specific color in living tissue (NSCliving) control, which underwent the entire testing procedure, although it was incubated with the medium instead of MTT solution during the MTT incubation step.
True tissue viability was calculated as [%Viability test] - [%NSCliving], and results showed similar tissue viabilities with those obtained without NSCliving,
Statistics:
The data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation of the mean of duplicates to analyze statistical differences from the control group. For RhCE, data are presented as the mean ± SD or mean ± 1/2 difference between duplicate wells. - Irritation parameter:
- other: % tissue viability
- Run / experiment:
- 1
- Value:
- 100
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
- Other effects / acceptance of results:
- The mean %tissue viability was 100%, since the treated tissues had viability greater than 60%, the test substance was classified as non-irritating.
- Interpretation of results:
- other: Not irritating
- Conclusions:
- The mean %tissue viability was 100%, since the treated tissues had viability greater than 60%, the test substance was classified as non-irritating. Hence, the test chemical was considered not to be an ocular irritant and it can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
- Executive summary:
The eye irritation potential of the test chemical was evaluated in an Eye irritation test with EpiOcular™ (MatTek ,MA) was conducted according to OECD 492.
EpiOcular™ (MatTek, USA)tissues were transferred to a six-well plate containing 1.0 mL of pre-warmed assay medium.Tissues were then incubated overnight at 37℃in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2. After incubation,tissues were pre-treated with 20 mL of Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline (D-PBS) and incubated for 30 min, prior to exposure to the test chemical. The experimental steps after pre- treatment of solid materials, was as follows:
1) Treatment, 50 mg of solid material for 360 min;
2) Rinse, for rinsing the tissues, three clean beakers, each containing 100 mL of Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline, were prepared; two tissues that were treated with the same chemical were washed at a time; and each beaker was rinsed threetimes;
3) Post-soak, after the final rinse, tissues were immersed in 5 mL of assay medium in a 12-well plate for 25 min for solid materials at room temperature;
4) Post-incubation, tissues were then transferred to a six-well plate containing 1 mL of warm assay medium (37℃) and incubated for 18 hrsfor solid materials.
Then, through MTT assay, the viability of tissues was measured to determine the eye irritation potential of test materials. Because colorants can interfere with MTT assay, additional color interference tests were conducted for EpiOcularTM according to TG 492. First, the light absorbance of colorants in water and isopropanol were examined for interference at 570 nm, which is in the same range with MTT for formazan, revealing significant color interferences.To consider the interference, anadditional control, a non-specific color in living tissue (NSCliving) control, which underwent the entire testing procedure, although it was incubated with the medium instead of MTT solution during the MTT incubation step.
True tissue viability was calculated as [%Viability test] - [%NSCliving], and results showed similar tissue viabilities with those obtained without NSCliving.The treated tissues had viability greater than 60%, the test substance was classified as non-irritating, and if less than 60%, the test substance was classified as irritating.
The mean %tissue viability was 100%, since the treated tissues had viability greater than 60%, the test substance was classified as non-irritating.Hence, the test chemical was considered not to be an ocular irritant and it can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
Referenceopen allclose all
Decisions on eye irritancy of the coal-tar dyes according to UN GHS in in vitro eye irritation tests
CAS |
EpiOcularTM (≤60%, Irritant) |
MCTT HCETM (≤45%, Irritant) |
Bottom –up approach |
Reference & ECHA |
|
EpiOcularTM (≤60%, Irritant) |
MCTT HCETM (≤45%, Irritant) |
||||
128 -80 -3 |
NC |
NC |
NC |
NC |
NC,CAT 2 |
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Respiratory irritation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Additional information
Skin Irritation
Various studies have been reviewed to evaluate the dermal irritation potential of the test chemical in living organisms. These include in vivo experimental studies on rabbits for the test chemical. The results are summarized below:
Skin irritation study was conducted on New Zealand White rabbits under occlusive condition to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical. The study was performed according to OECD guideline 404.
The test chemical was applied to the intact skin of three rabbits (2 male and 1 female) for exposure period of 4 hours under occlusive condition at a dose of 50% in Polyethylene glycol / Saline (70/30 Parts). The skin reactions were recorded at 1, 24, 48 and 72 hours according to Draize method.
In the area of application a moderate to slight greyish discoloration of the skin was observed. This effect was recorded in the rabbits during the entire observation period.
No destructions or irreversible alterations of the treated skin and no corrosion effects had occurred on the skin.
Also the mean primary irritation index was estimated to be 0.0.
Thus on basis of scores and observed effects, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to the rabbits skin under tested experimental condition.
This is supported by the results of a primary dermal irritation study conducted on intact skin of the inner surface of the ear of two adult New Zealand White rabbits under occlusive conditions to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical.
The rabbits were exposed to 500 mg of undiluted test substance at the inner side of the ear flap of one ear secured by an adhesive bandage for 24 hours. The contralateral ear served as control.
Animals were then observed for erythema and edema upto7 days.
The skin reactions were was scored by the method of (US-Departments of Agriculture, Federal Register Vol.38, No.187, p. 27019, 1973 resp. DRAIZE, J.H., Appraisal of the safety of chemicals in foods,drugs and cosmetics, Association of Food and Drug Officials of the US, p.46, 1959).
Since the chemical did not induce erythema or edema in both the rabbits, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating on intact skin of the inner surface of the ear of two adult New Zealand White rabbits under the tested experimental conditions.
The above results are further supported by another skin irritation study carried out in New Zealand white rabbit to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical.
A measurement of 0.5 g of the test material was applied to a 1 in. x 1in. gauze pad, moistened with saline, and secured with surgical tape to two abraded and two unabraded sites in 6 New Zealand White rabbits. The trunk of the rabbit was covered first with plastic wrap and then with stockinette to prevent disturbance of the test sites.
Application of 0.5 g of the test chemical to 2 abraded and 2 unabraded test sites of 6 rabbits for 24 hours produced barely perceptible erythema to one abraded test site of one male and two female rabbits, and one unabraded site of one male rabbit. This erythema resolved in all cases by 72 hours. No edema was observed at any of the sites during the 24 and 72 hour observation period. The Primary Irritation Score for this test sample was 0.08. Clinical signs indicative of systemic toxicity were not observed. Hence the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to skin.
The results of the in vivo experimental studies are in mutual agreement with each other indicating a very strong possibility that the test chemical is indeed not irritating to skin. Comparing the above annotations with the criteria of the CLP regulation the test chemical can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
Eye Irritation
Various studies have been reviewed to determine the extent of ocular damage caused by the test chemical to living organisms. These include in vivo experiments on rabbits as well as in vitro experimental results for the test chemical. The studies are summarized below:
An ocular irritation study of test chemical was conducted on New Zealand White rabbits according to OECD guideline 405.
About 100mg of undiluted chemical was instilled into the one eye of each rabbit whereas the other untreated eye served as control.
The treated eyes were not rinsed and the ocular lesions were scored after 72 hours according to Draize method.
The test chemical showed no irritation when applied on the rabbit eye mucosa. No discoloration of the cornea and conjunctivae was observed in the rabbits during the entire test period which could be related to compound effects. No corrosion effect was observed at each of the measuring intervals.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to eyes.
The above study is supported another OECD 405 Guideline study conducted on New Zealand White rabbits to determine the ocular irritation potential of the test chemical.
About 100mg of undiluted chemical was instilled into the one eye of each rabbit whereas the other untreated eye served as control.
The treated eyes were not rinsed and the ocular lesions were scored after 72 hours according to Draize method.
The test chemical showed no irritation when applied on the rabbit eye mucosa. No discoloration of the cornea and conjunctivae was observed in the rabbits during the entire test period which could be related to compound effects. No corrosion effect was observed at each of the measuring intervals.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not irritating to eyes.
These results are supported by an eye irritation study carried out on New Zealand white rabbits to assess the irritation potential of the test chemical. 100 mg of the test sample was instilled into the everted lower lid of the right eye. The left eye remained untreated and served as control. The treated eyes remained unwashed and were observed for corneal opacity, iritis, hyperemia, chemosis or discharge till 72 hours. Clinical signs indicative of systemic toxicity were not observed.
The test chemical failed to produce corneal opacity, iritis, hyperemia, chemosis or discharge throughout the 72 hour observation period. The test chemical was considered to be non-irritating to unirrigated eyes of rabbits.
These results are further supported by another study performed on rabbits to assess the ocular irritation potential of the test chemical was assessed in rabbits. 20 mg of the test chemical was instilled into the eyes of rabbits and observed for 24 hours for signs of irritation.
Moderate irritation effect was observed after 24 hours exposure to the test chemical. Hence, the test chemical was considered to be irritating to eyes.
The eye irritation potential of the test chemical was also evaluated in an Eye irritation test with EpiOcular™ (MatTek ,MA) was conducted according to OECD 492.
EpiOcular™ (MatTek, USA)tissues were transferred to a six-well plate containing 1.0 mL of pre-warmed assay medium.Tissues were then incubated overnight at 37℃in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2. After incubation,tissues were pre-treated with 20 mL of Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline (D-PBS) and incubated for 30 min, prior to exposure to the test chemical. The experimental steps after pre- treatment of solid materials, was as follows:
1) Treatment, 50 mg of solid material for 360 min;
2) Rinse, for rinsing the tissues, three clean beakers, each containing 100 mL of Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline, were prepared; two tissues that were treated with the same chemical were washed at a time; and each beaker was rinsed threetimes;
3) Post-soak, after the final rinse, tissues were immersed in 5 mL of assay medium in a 12-well plate for 25 min for solid materials at room temperature;
4) Post-incubation, tissues were then transferred to a six-well plate containing 1 mL of warm assay medium (37℃) and incubated for 18 hrsfor solid materials.
Then, through MTT assay, the viability of tissues was measured to determine the eye irritation potential of test materials. Because colorants can interfere with MTT assay, additional color interference tests were conducted for EpiOcularTM according to TG 492. First, the light absorbance of colorants in water and isopropanol were examined for interference at 570 nm, which is in the same range with MTT for formazan, revealing significant color interferences.To consider the interference, anadditional control, a non-specific color in living tissue (NSCliving) control, which underwent the entire testing procedure, although it was incubated with the medium instead of MTT solution during the MTT incubation step.
True tissue viability was calculated as [%Viability test] - [%NSCliving], and results showed similar tissue viabilities with those obtained without NSCliving.The treated tissues had viability greater than 60%, the test substance was classified as non-irritating, and if less than 60%, the test substance was classified as irritating.
The mean %tissue viability was 100%, since the treated tissues had viability greater than 60%, the test substance was classified as non-irritating. Hence, the test chemical was considered not to be an ocular irritant and it can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
The above in vitro result is supported by an Eye irritation test with MCTT HCE™ assay to determine the irritation parameter of the test chemical. MCTT HCETMwas prepared from primary human limbal cells. After receiving the tissues, 900 mL of fresh maintenance medium was replenished and incubated at 37°C, 5% CO2 for 24 h. The experimental steps after pre-
treatment of solid materials, was as follows:
Test material solutions at various concentrations were prepared by serial dilution in PBS and were treated at50 mg for solids (100% coal-tar dyes) per well, after which MCTT HCETMwas incubated for 60 minutes. After the exposure, the models were washed four times with PBS and further incubated with 900 ml of a new maintenance medium for 16 hrs (post-incubation period) at 37°C, 5% CO2.For the measurement of tissue viability, tissues were incubated with 300 μL of WST-1 (4-[3-(4-iodophenyl)-2-(4-nitrophenyl)-2H-5-tetrazolio]-1,3-benzene disulfonate) and optical density was measured at 450 nm. For the measurement of tissue viability, tissues were incubated with 300 μL of WST-1 (4-[3-(4-iodophenyl)-2-(4 -nitrophenyl)-2H-5-tetrazolio]-1,3-benzene disulfonate) and optical density was measured at 450 nm.
Negative control, PBS, and coal-tar dyes showing cell viability over 45%, were determined as non-irritant materials. Positive control (2% of SLS) and coal-tar dyes that reduced cell viability below 45% were determined to be irritant materials.
For histological evaluation, the MCTT HCETM was fixed in 10% neutral buffered formalin to process it for embedding in paraffin. Five-mm vertical sections were cut and stained with hematoxylin and eosin for examination by Olympus BX43 microscope.
The mean %tissue viability was 100%, since the treated tissues showed cell viability over 45%, the test chemical was determined to be non-irritant materials.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not an ocular irritant and it can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
Eventhough the results of one in vivo study indicates a possibility that the test chemical can cause moderate irritation to eyes, but the remaining in vivo and in vitro studies suggest other wise. Also the results of the Invivo and in vitro Guideline studies are in mutual agreement with each other, indicating a very strong possibility of the test chemical being not irritating to eyes. Comparing the above annotations with the criteria of the CLP regulation the test chemical can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
Justification for classification or non-classification
The results of the in vivo experimental studies are in mutual agreement with each other indicating a very strong possibility that the test chemical is indeed not irritating to skin.
This is also supported by the weakly acidic nature of the substance (pH= 5.71). Comparing the above annotations with the criteria of the CLP regulation the test chemical can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
Eventhough the results of one in vivo study indicates a possibility that the test chemical can cause moderate irritation to eyes, but the remaining in vivo and in vitro studies suggest other wise. Also the results of the Invivo and in vitro Guideline studies are in mutual agreement with each other, indicating a very strong possibility of the test chemical being not irritating to eyes. This is also supported by the weakly acidic nature of the substance (pH= 5.71). Comparing the above annotations with the criteria of the CLP regulation the test chemical can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
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.