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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 201-327-3 | CAS number: 81-13-0
- 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
Toxicological Summary
- Administrative data
- Workers - Hazard via inhalation route
- Workers - Hazard via dermal route
- Workers - Hazard for the eyes
- Additional information - workers
- General Population - Hazard via inhalation route
- General Population - Hazard via dermal route
- General Population - Hazard via oral route
- General Population - Hazard for the eyes
- Additional information - General Population
Administrative data
Workers - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 146.9 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 6
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC
- Value:
- 881.5 mg/m³
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The dose response relationship is considered unremarkable, therefore no additional factor is used.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- The default extrapolation factor for exposure duration is used: subchronic (starting point) to chronic (end point). This is in line with the ECHA R8 guidance document.
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- Allometric scaling is not applied, because the ventilation rate directly depends on the basal metabolic rate.
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- Based on the absence of evident systemic/ organ specific toxicity up to and including the limit dose, an additional AF for interspecies differences other than allometric scaling is not considered necessary.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 3
- Justification:
- Substance specific assessment factor: No relevant adverse systemic effects were observed up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. Due to the absence of such effects, intraspecies variations in toxicokinetics or toxicodynamics are not considered relevant. However an AF of 3 has been included to cover for remaining uncertainties of putative subpopulations, based on the following assessment. Additional generic argumentation: In an attempt to evaluate the intraspecies variability within the human population, the distribution of human data for various toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic parameters were examined (Hattis et al 1987, 1999; Hattis and Silver 1994; Renwick and Lazarus, 1998; see ECETOC TR No.86, 2003). These evaluations included data from ‘healthy adults’ of both sexes, as well as limited data from the young and elderly, mixed races and patients with various medical conditions such as cancer and hypertension. The data of Renwick and Lazarus (1998) and Hattis et al (1999) were based exclusively on human data and similar values were obtained within each percentile. Considering that the data analysed by these authors included both sexes, a variety of disease states and ages, the use of the 95thpercentile is considered sufficiently conservative to account for intraspecies variability in the general population. Thus, a default assessment factor of 5 was taken for the general population with a lower factor of 3 (i.e. closer to the 90thpercentile) for the more homogenous worker population.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The quality of the whole data base is considered to be adequate for a robust DNEL derivation.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- Substance specific assessment factor: Subchronic administration of the test item resulted in no adverse effects up to and including the limit dose. Since no human relevant organ specific toxicity has been observed, no additional AF covering toxicodynamic differences between rats and humans is considered necessary.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Workers - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 41.66 mg/kg bw/day
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 24
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL
- Value:
- 1 000 mg/kg bw/day
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The dose response relationship is considered unremarkable, therefore no additional factor is used.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- The default value for extrapolation from subchronic to chronic exposure is used in order to cover the exposure duration (90 days).
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 4
- Justification:
- The default allometric scaling factor for the differences between rats and humans is used (ECHA R8, 2012).
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- Based on the absence of evident systemic/ organ specific toxicity up to and including the limit dose, an additional AF for interspecies differences other than allometric scaling is not considered necessary.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 3
- Justification:
- Substance specific assessment factor: No relevant adverse systemic effects were observed up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. Due to the absence of such effects, intraspecies variations in toxicokinetics or toxicodynamics are not considered relevant. However an AF of 3 has been included to cover for remaining uncertainties of putative subpopulations, based on the following assessment. Additional generic argumentation: In an attempt to evaluate the intraspecies variability within the human population, the distribution of human data for various toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic parameters were examined (Hattis et al 1987, 1999; Hattis and Silver 1994; Renwick and Lazarus, 1998; see ECETOC TR No.86, 2003). These evaluations included data from ‘healthy adults’ of both sexes, as well as limited data from the young and elderly, mixed races and patients with various medical conditions such as cancer and hypertension. The data of Renwick and Lazarus (1998) and Hattis et al (1999) were based exclusively on human data and similar values were obtained within each percentile. Considering that the data analysed by these authors included both sexes, a variety of disease states and ages, the use of the 95thpercentile is considered sufficiently conservative to account for intraspecies variability in the general population. Thus, a default assessment factor of 5 was taken for the general population with a lower factor of 3 (i.e. closer to the 90thpercentile) for the more homogenous worker population.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The quality of the whole data base is considered to be adequate for a robust DNEL derivation.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- Substance specific assessment factor: Subchronic administration of the test item resulted in no adverse effects up to and including the limit dose. Since no human relevant organ specific toxicity has been observed, no additional AF covering toxicodynamic differences between rats and humans is considered necessary.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Workers - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Additional information - workers
Short-term exposure - systemic and local effects
Dexpanthenol did not cause any deaths, clinical signs or adverse effects during an inhalation risk test. Since it is a viscous substance of very low vapour pressure, the exposure to Dexpanthenol vapour is very unlikely. Furthermore, Dexpanthenol and its structural analoga DL-Panthenol and Ethylpanthenol (for read across justification please refer to chapter 13) did not induce any relevant systemic adverse effects in acute (oral, dermal, inhalation) and repeated dose studies (oral) and did not cause skin sensitization or irritation to skin and eyes. As the test item did neither show acute systemic nor acute local toxicity, the derivation of acute DNELs for systemic and local effects is not considered mandatory.
Long-term exposure - systemic effects
For Dexpanthenol or its structural analoga DL-Panthenol and Ethylpanthenol(for read across justification please refer to chapter 13) several repeated dose studies are available. In an oral (gavage) 28 days subacute study (OECD 407) and an oral (gavage) 90 days subchronic study (OECD 408) in rats there were no adverse effects observed up to the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. In an reproduction/developmental toxicity screening study (similar to OECD 412) as well as a prenatal developmental toxicity study (OECD 414) in rats no adverse effects occurred in parental animals or pups up to the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. In the absence of a suitable inhalation and dermal toxicity study with repeated exposure, the worker-DNELs long-term for inhalation and dermal route - systemic were derived from the NOAEL obtained in the oral 90 days repeated dose study in rats (WIL 2012) conducted with Ethylpanthenol which is a structural analogon of Dexpanthenol (for read across justification please refer to chapter 13).
Inhalation exposure
A corrected inhalatory NOAEC (NOAECcorr) was calculated using the default respiratory volume for the rat and a correction for the difference between human respiratory rates under standard conditions and under conditions of light activity. As specified by ECHA (2012) a two times higher inhalation absorption rate compared to oral absorption was assumed.
Calculation of the NOAECcorr
- Standard dose descriptor (NOAEL): 1000 mg/kg bw/d
- Standard respiratory volume of the rat (sRVrat) for 8 hours: 0.38 m³/kg bw/d
- Oral absorption of the rat/inhalation absorption of humans (ABSoral-rat)/ABSinhal-human): 50/100
- Standard respiratory volume of humans (sRVhuman) for 8 hours: 6.7 m³
- Worker respiratory volume (wRV) for 8 hours with light physical activity: 10 m³
Corrected inhalatory NOAEC for workers:
= NOAEL * (1/sRVrat) * (ABSoral-rat/ABSinhal-human) *(sRVhuman/wRV)
= 1000 mg/kg bw/d * (1/0.38 m³/kg bw/d)* (50/100) * (6.7 m³/10 m³)
= 881.5 mg/m³
According to ECHA R8 (2012) the following default assessment factors were applied:
exposure duration: 2 (subchronic to chronic)
quality of whole data base: 1 (based on the validity of the well performed OECD guidline studies)
dose response: 1
The following substance specific assessment factors (AF) were applied:
intraspecies differences : 3
remaining differences: 1
Calculation of the worker DNEL for long-term inhalation exposure:
DNEL = NOAECcorr/ AF = 881.5 mg/m³ / (2 * 1 * 1 * 3 * 1) = 146.9 mg/m³
Dermal exposure
Route to route extrapolation: oral – dermal:
Since quantitative data for the skin penetration potential of Dexpathenol are not available, a default value of 50% is chosen for percutaneous penetration and absorption in humans as well as oral bioavailability in rats according to ECHA R8 (2012). The basis for the calculation of the DNEL for systemic effects of dermal long-term exposure is the NOAEL of 1000 mg/kg bw/d derived from the oral (gavage) 90 days subchronic repeated dose toxicity study in rats (WIL 2012).
The oral NOAEL was converted into a corrected dermal NOAEL according to the procedure, recommended in the current guidance document (R8, ECHA 2012).
NOAELcorr dermal = 1000 mg/kg bw/d *(50/50) = 1000 mg/kg bw/d
According to ECHA R8 (2012) the following default assessment factors were applied:
exposure duration: 2 (subchronic to chronic)
quality of whole data base: 1 (based on the validity of the well performed OECD guidline studies)
dose response: 1
allometric scaling: 4 (rat to human)
The following substance specific assessment factors (AF) were applied:
intraspecies differences : 3
remaining differences: 1
Calculation of the worker DNEL for long-term dermal exposure:
DNEL = NOAELcorr/ AF = 1000 mg/kg bw/d / (2 * 1 * 1 * 4 * 3 * 1) = 41.6 mg/kg bw/d
Derivation from the standard AF for intraspecies differences and remaining differences:
For Dexpanthenol or its structural analoga DL-Panthenol and Ethylpanthenol(for read across justification please refer to chapter 13) several repeated dose studies are available. In an oral (gavage) 28 days subacute study (OECD 407) and an oral (gavage) 90 days subchronic study (OECD 408) in rats there were no adverse effects observed up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. In an reproduction/ developmental toxicity screening study (similar to OECD 412) as well as a prenatal developmental toxicity study (OECD 414) in rats no adverse effects occurred in parental animals or pups up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. In conclusion, oral exposure did not cause any adverse systemic effects in rats and no human relevant organ specific toxicity up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/day. Thus, no additional AF covering remaining differences is considered to be neccessary. Furthermore, there were no effects observed which are supposed to be dependent on human intraspecies variations in toxicokinetics or toxicodynamics. Although an additional AF for intraspecies differences would not be required, an AF of 3 has been included to cover potential variations within a controlled subpopulation, i.e. healthy workers.
Long-term exposure – local effects
The test item did not induce any local toxic effects. There was no evidence of toxicity in any of the available studies. Thus, the derivation of a long-term DNEL for local effects is not required. This is in line with the ECHA guidance document (2012).
General Population - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 43.47 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 10
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC
- Value:
- 434.78 mg/m³
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The dose response relationship is considered unremarkable, therefore no additional factor is used.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- The default extrapolation factor for exposure duration is used: subchronic (starting point) to chronic (end point). This is in line with the ECHA R8 guidance document.
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- Allometric scaling is not applied, because the ventilation rate directly depends on the basal metabolic rate.
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- Based on the absence of evident systemic/ organ specific toxicity up to and including the limit dose, an additional AF for interspecies differences other than allometric scaling is not considered necessary.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- Substance specific assessment factor: No relevant adverse systemic effects were observed up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. Due to the absence of such effects, intraspecies variations in toxicokinetics or toxicodynamics are not considered relevant. However an AF of 5 has been included to cover for remaining uncertainties of putative subpopulations, based on the following assessment. Additional generic argumentation: In an attempt to evaluate the intraspecies variability within the human population, the distribution of human data for various toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic parameters were examined (Hattis et al 1987, 1999; Hattis and Silver 1994; Renwick and Lazarus, 1998; see ECETOC TR No.86, 2003). These evaluations included data from ‘healthy adults’ of both sexes, as well as limited data from the young and elderly, mixed races and patients with various medical conditions such as cancer and hypertension. The data of Renwick and Lazarus (1998) and Hattis et al (1999) were based exclusively on human data and similar values were obtained within each percentile. Considering that the data analysed by these authors included both sexes, a variety of disease states and ages, the use of the 95thpercentile is considered sufficiently conservative to account for intraspecies variability in the general population. Thus, a default assessment factor of 5 was taken for the general population with a lower factor of 3 (i.e. closer to the 90thpercentile) for the more homogenous worker population.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The quality of the whole data base is considered to be adequate for a robust DNEL derivation.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- Substance specific assessment factor: Subchronic administration of the test item resulted in no adverse effects up to and including the limit dose. Since no human relevant organ specific toxicity has been observed, no additional AF covering toxicodynamic differences between rats and humans is considered necessary.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 25 mg/kg bw/day
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 40
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL
- Value:
- 1 000 mg/kg bw/day
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The dose response relationship is considered unremarkable, therefore no additional factor is used.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- The default extrapolation factor for exposure duration is used: subchronic (starting point) to chronic (end point). This is in line with the ECHA R8 guidance document.
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 4
- Justification:
- The default allometric scaling factor for the differences between rats and humans is used (ECHA R8, 2012).
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- Based on the absence of evident systemic/ organ specific toxicity up to and including the limit dose, an additional AF for interspecies differences other than allometric scaling is not considered necessary.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- Substance specific assessment factor: No relevant adverse systemic effects were observed up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. Due to the absence of such effects, intraspecies variations in toxicokinetics or toxicodynamics are not considered relevant. However an AF of 5 has been included to cover for remaining uncertainties of putative subpopulations, based on the following assessment. Additional generic argumentation: In an attempt to evaluate the intraspecies variability within the human population, the distribution of human data for various toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic parameters were examined (Hattis et al 1987, 1999; Hattis and Silver 1994; Renwick and Lazarus, 1998; see ECETOC TR No.86, 2003). These evaluations included data from ‘healthy adults’ of both sexes, as well as limited data from the young and elderly, mixed races and patients with various medical conditions such as cancer and hypertension. The data of Renwick and Lazarus (1998) and Hattis et al (1999) were based exclusively on human data and similar values were obtained within each percentile. Considering that the data analysed by these authors included both sexes, a variety of disease states and ages, the use of the 95thpercentile is considered sufficiently conservative to account for intraspecies variability in the general population. Thus, a default assessment factor of 5 was taken for the general population with a lower factor of 3 (i.e. closer to the 90thpercentile) for the more homogenous worker population.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The quality of the whole data base is considered to be adequate for a robust DNEL derivation.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- Substance specific assessment factor: Subchronic administration of the test item resulted in no adverse effects up to and including the limit dose. Since no human relevant organ specific toxicity has been observed, no additional AF covering toxicodynamic differences between rats and humans is considered necessary.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
General Population - Hazard via oral route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 25 mg/kg bw/day
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 40
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The dose response relationship is considered unremarkable, therefore no additional factor is used.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- The default extrapolation factor for exposure duration is used: subchronic (starting point) to chronic (end point). This is in line with the ECHA R8 guidance document.
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 4
- Justification:
- The default allometric scaling factor for the differences between rats and humans is used (ECHA R8, 2012).
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- Based on the absence of evident systemic/ organ specific toxicity up to and including the limit dose, an additional AF for interspecies differences other than allometric scaling is not considered necessary.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- Substance specific assessment factor: No relevant adverse systemic effects were observed up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. Due to the absence of such effects, intraspecies variations in toxicokinetics or toxicodynamics are not considered relevant. However an AF of 5 has been included to cover for remaining uncertainties of putative subpopulations, based on the following assessment. Additional generic argumentation: In an attempt to evaluate the intraspecies variability within the human population, the distribution of human data for various toxicokinetic and toxicodynamic parameters were examined (Hattis et al 1987, 1999; Hattis and Silver 1994; Renwick and Lazarus, 1998; see ECETOC TR No.86, 2003). These evaluations included data from ‘healthy adults’ of both sexes, as well as limited data from the young and elderly, mixed races and patients with various medical conditions such as cancer and hypertension. The data of Renwick and Lazarus (1998) and Hattis et al (1999) were based exclusively on human data and similar values were obtained within each percentile. Considering that the data analysed by these authors included both sexes, a variety of disease states and ages, the use of the 95thpercentile is considered sufficiently conservative to account for intraspecies variability in the general population. Thus, a default assessment factor of 5 was taken for the general population with a lower factor of 3 (i.e. closer to the 90thpercentile) for the more homogenous worker population.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The quality of the whole data base is considered to be adequate for a robust DNEL derivation.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- Substance specific assessment factor: Subchronic administration of the test item resulted in no adverse effects up to and including the limit dose. Since no human relevant organ specific toxicity has been observed, no additional AF covering toxicodynamic differences between rats and humans is considered necessary.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Additional information - General Population
Short-term exposure - systemic and local effects
Dexpanthenol did not cause any deaths, clinical signs or adverse effects during an inhalation risk test. Since it is a viscous substance of very low vapour pressure, the exposure to Dexpanthenol vapour is very unlikely. Furthermore, Dexpanthenol and its structural analoga DL-Panthenol and Ethylpanthenol (for read across justification please refer to chapter 13) did not induce any relevant systemic adverse effects in acute (oral, dermal, inhalation) and repeated dose studies (oral) and did not cause skin sensitization or irritation to skin and eyes. As the test item did neither show acute systemic nor acute local toxicity, the derivation of acute DNELs for systemic and local effects is not considered mandatory.
Long-term exposure - systemic effects
For Dexpanthenol or itsstructural analoga DL-Panthenol and Ethylpanthenol(for read across justification please refer to chapter 13) several repeated dose studies are available. In an oral (gavage) 28 days subacute study (OECD 407) and an oral (gavage) 90 days subchronic study (OECD 408) in rats there were no adverse effects observed up to the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. In an reproduction/developmental toxicity screening study (similar to OECD 412) as well as a prenatal developmental toxicity study (OECD 414) in rats no adverse effects occurred in parental animals or pups up to the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. In the absence of a suitable inhalation and dermal toxicity study with repeated exposure, the DNELs long-term for inhalation and dermal route - systemic were derived from the NOAEL obtained in the oral 90 days repeated dose study in rats (WIL 2012) conducted with Ethylpanthenol which is a structural analogon of Dexpanthenol (for read across justification please refer to chapter 13).
Inhalation exposure
A corrected inhalatory NOAEC (NOAECcorr) was calculated using the default respiratory volume for rat and humans. As specified by ECHA (2012) a two times higher inhalation absorption rate compared to oral absorption was assumed.
Calculation of the NOAECcorr
- Standard dose descriptor (NOAEL): 1000 mg/kg bw/d
- Standard respiratory volume of the rat (sRVrat) for 24 hours: 1.15 m³/kg bw/d
- Oral absorption of the rat/inhalation absorption of humans (ABSoral-rat)/ABSinhal-human): 50/100
Corrected inhalatory NOAEC for the general population:
= NOAEL * (1/sRVrat) * (ABSoral-rat/ABSinhal-human)
= 1000 mg/kg bw/d * (1/1.15 m³/kg bw/d)* (50/100)
= 434.78 mg/m³
According to ECHA R8 (2012) the following default assessment factors were applied:
exposure duration: 2 (subchronic to chronic)
quality of whole data base: 1 (based on the validity of the well performed OECD guidline studies)
dose response: 1
The following substance specific assessment factors (AF) were applied:
intraspecies differences : 5
remaining differences: 1
Calculation of the general population DNEL for long-term inhalation exposure:
DNEL = NOAECcorr/ AF = 434.78 mg/m³ / (2 * 1 * 1 * 5 * 1) = 43.47 mg/m³
Dermal exposure
Route to route extrapolation: oral – dermal:
Since quantitative data for the skin penetration potential of Dexpathenol are not available, a default value of 50% is chosen for percutaneous penetration and absorption in humans as well as oral bioavailability in rats according to ECHA R8 (2012). The basis for the calculation of the DNEL for systemic effects of dermal long-term exposure is the NOAEL of 1000 mg/kg bw/d derived from the oral (gavage) 90 days subchronic repeated dose toxicity study in rats (WIL 2012).
The oral NOAEL was converted into a corrected dermal NOAEL according to the procedure, recommended in the current guidance document (R8, ECHA 2012).
NOAELcorr dermal = 1000 mg/kg bw/d *(50/50) = 1000 mg/kg bw/d
According to ECHA R8 (2012) the following default assessment factors were applied:
exposure duration: 2 (subchronic to chronic)
quality of whole data base: 1 (based on the validity of the well performed OECD guidline studies)
dose response: 1
allometric scaling: 4 (rat to human)
The following substance specific assessment factors (AF) were applied:
intraspecies differences : 5
remaining differences: 1
Calculation of the general population DNEL for long-term dermal exposure:
DNEL = NOAELcorr/ AF = 1000 mg/kg bw/d / (2 * 1 * 1 * 4 * 5 * 1) = 25 mg/kg bw/d
Oral exposure
The basis for the calculation of the DNEL for systemic effects of oral long-term exposure is the NOAEL of 1000 mg/kg bw/d derived from the oral (gavage) 90 days subchronic repeated dose toxicity study in rats (WIL 2012).
According to ECHA R8 (2012) the following default assessment factors were applied:
exposure duration: 2 (subchronic to chronic)
quality of whole data base: 1 (based on the validity of the well performed OECD guidline studies)
dose response: 1
allometric scaling: 4 (rat to human)
The following substance specific assessment factors (AF) were applied:
intraspecies differences : 5
remaining differences: 1
Calculation of the general population DNEL for long-term oral exposure:
DNEL = NOAEL / AF = 1000 mg/kg bw/d / (2 * 1 * 1 * 4 * 5 * 1) = 25 mg/kg bw/d
Derivation from the standard AF for intraspecies differences and remaining differences:
For Dexpanthenol or itsstructural analoga DL-Panthenol and Ethylpanthenol(for read across justification please refer to chapter 13) several repeated dose studies are available. In an oral (gavage) 28 days subacute study (OECD 407) and an oral (gavage) 90 days subchronic study (OECD 408) in rats there were no adverse effects observed up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. In an reproduction/ developmental toxicity screening study (similar to OECD 412) as well as a prenatal developmental toxicity study (OECD 414) in rats no adverse effects occurred in parental animals or pups up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/d. In conclusion, oral exposure did not cause any adverse systemic effects in rats and no human relevant organ specific toxicity up to and including the limit dose of 1000 mg/kg bw/day. Thus, no additional AF covering remaining differences is considered to be neccessary. Furthermore, there were no effects observed which are supposed to be dependent on human intraspecies variations in toxicokinetics or toxicodynamics. Although an additional AF for intraspecies differences would not be required, an AF of 5 has been included to cover potential variations in the general population.
Long-term exposure – local effects
The test item did not induce any local toxic effects. There was no evidence of toxicity in any of the available studies. Thus, the derivation of a long-term DNEL for local effects is not required. This is in line with the ECHA guidance document (2012).
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.