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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 288-538-4 | CAS number: 85750-13-6
- 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 Sensitization:
On the basis of available studies for the structurally similar read across substances, the weight of evidence approach was applied to assess the dermal sensitization ptential for target osubstance.
4-[(2-chloro-4-nitrophenyl)diazenyl]-N-ethyl-N-[2-[1-(2-methylpropoxy)ethoxy]ethyl]aniline was estimated to be not sensitizing to skin.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation, other
- Remarks:
- in vivo
- Type of information:
- read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Justification for type of information:
- Weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across: supporting information
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- read-across: supporting information
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: Weight of evidence based on structurally similar substances
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- The weight of evidence report has been prepared based on the read across substances identified based on structural and functional similarity to assess the dermal sensitization potential of 4-[(2-chloro-4-nitrophenyl)diazenyl]-N-ethyl-N-[2-[1-(2-methylpropoxy)ethoxy]ethyl]aniline
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- other: Weight of evidence based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- - Name of test material: 4-((2-Chloro-4-nitrophenyl)azo)-N-ethyl-N-(2-(1-(2-methylpropoxy)ethoxy)ethyl)aniline
- IUPAC name: 4-[(2-chloro-4-nitrophenyl)diazenyl]-N-ethyl-N-[2-[1-(2-methylpropoxy)ethoxy]ethyl]aniline
- Molecular formula: C22H29ClN4O4
- Molecular weight: 448.9481 g/mole
- Smiles : CCN(CCOC(C)OCC(C)C)c1ccc(cc1)/N=N/c2ccc(cc2Cl)[N+](=O)[O-]
- InChl: 1S/C22H29ClN4O4/c1-5-26(12-13-30-17(4)31-15-16(2)3)19-8-6-18(7-9-19)24-25-22-11-10-20(27(28)29)14-21(22)23/h6-11,14,16-17H,5,12-13,15H2,1-4H3/b25-24+
- Substance type: Organic
- Physical state: Solid crystalline powder (white) - Species:
- other: guinea pigs and Mice
- Strain:
- not specified
- Sex:
- not specified
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- Weight of evidence based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- No. of animals per dose:
- The study is based on the weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Details on study design:
- The study is based on the weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Challenge controls:
- The study is based on the weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Vehicle:
- dimethylformamide
- Concentration:
- The study is based on the weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- No. of animals per dose:
- The study is based on the weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Details on study design:
- The study is based on the weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
- Statistics:
- The study is based on the weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Other effects / acceptance of results:
- The study is based on the weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Group:
- test chemical
- Clinical observations:
- no dermal reactions observed
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Parameter:
- SI
- Test group / Remarks:
- test group
- Remarks on result:
- other: not sensitizing
- Cellular proliferation data / Observations:
- The study is based on the weight of evidence approach based on structurally similar read across chemicals
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not sensitizing
- Conclusions:
- On the basis of available studies for the structurally similar read across substances, the weight of evidence approach was applied to assess the dermal sensitization potential for target substance.
4-[(2-chloro-4-nitrophenyl)diazenyl]-N-ethyl-N-[2-[1-(2-methylpropoxy)ethoxy]ethyl]aniline was estimated to be not sensitizing to skin. - Executive summary:
On the basis of available studies for the structurally similar read across substances, the weight of evidence approach was applied to assess the dermal sensitization potential for target substance.
Kligman – Magnusson procedure was used to determine the dermal sensitization potential of the structurally similar chemical.10 female Hartley guinea pigs were used for the study.
Three pairs of injections (0.05 ml each) were administered intradermally into the shaved interscapular area of each guinea pig: Freund’s complete adjuvant (in equal parts water), 0.1% the test chemical, and a mixture of equal parts of the adjuvant and dye. One week later, the sites were shaved again, and a 48-h occlusive patch containing 25% test chemical in petrolatum was applied. Two weeks later, an occlusive challenge patch containing 25% Disperse Black 9 in propylene glycol was applied to the shaved flank of each guinea pig. Sites were evaluated 24, 48, and 72 hours after patch removal.
No signs of dermal sensitization were observed on female guinea pig skin at any time point after challenge exposure.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing to guinea pig skin.
This is supported by the study for another structurally similar read across performed on CBA/J female mice according to OECD 429 guideline. The test material was soluble in dimethylformamide (DMF). This vehicle was selected on the basis of the results from a previous solubility study showing that the test chemical was non-soluble in other recommended vehicles, and that 25% (w/v) in DMF was the maximal practicable concentration. The test substance, DMF or HCA was applied in dose concentration 1, 2.5, 5, 10 or 25% (w/v) on the ears (25 μL per ear) of the animals for 3 consecutive days designated as days 1, 2 and 3. After 2 days of resting(day 6), mice received a single intravenous injection of triturated methyl thymidine (3H-TdR). Lymph nodes draining the application sites (auricular nodes) were sampled, pooled per group, and the proliferation of lymphocytes was evaluated by measuring the incorporation of 3H-TdR.The values obtained were used to calculate stimulation indices (SI), and the EC3 was estimated (theoretical concentration resulting in a SI of 3). The irritant potential of HC Yellow n° 7 was assessed by measuring ear thickness on days 1, 2, 3 and 6.
The α hexylcinnamaldehyde at 25% (v/v) in DMF used as positive control. There were no irritation reactions and no lymphoproliferative responses, and the threshold SI of 3 values was not approached in any of the test groups. Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing in mice by LLNA method.
Based on the available data for the structurally similar read across substances and applying the weight of evidence approach, it can be concluded that the target chemical will also tend to behave in a similar that of the read across chemicals. Therefore the target chemical was estimated to be not sensitizing to skin and it can be further classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
On the basis of available studies for the structurally similar read across substances, the weight of evidence approach was applied to assess the dermal sensitization potential for target substance.
Kligman – Magnusson procedure was used to determine the dermal sensitization potential of the structurally similar chemical.10 female Hartley guinea pigs were used for the study.
Three pairs of injections (0.05 ml each) were administered intradermally into the shaved interscapular area of each guinea pig: Freund’s complete adjuvant (in equal parts water), 0.1% the test chemical, and a mixture of equal parts of the adjuvant and dye. One week later, the sites were shaved again, and a 48-h occlusive patch containing 25% test chemical in petrolatum was applied. Two weeks later, an occlusive challenge patch containing 25% Disperse Black 9 in propylene glycol was applied to the shaved flank of each guinea pig. Sites were evaluated 24, 48, and 72 hours after patch removal.
No signs of dermal sensitization were observed on female guinea pig skin at any time point after challenge exposure.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing to guinea pig skin.
This is supported by the study for another structurally similar read across performed on CBA/J female mice according to OECD 429 guideline. The test material was soluble in dimethylformamide (DMF). This vehicle was selected on the basis of the results from a previous solubility study showing that the test chemical was non-soluble in other recommended vehicles, and that 25% (w/v) in DMF was the maximal practicable concentration. The test substance, DMF or HCA was applied in dose concentration 1, 2.5, 5, 10 or 25% (w/v) on the ears (25 μL per ear) of the animals for 3 consecutive days designated as days 1, 2 and 3. After 2 days of resting(day 6), mice received a single intravenous injection of triturated methyl thymidine (3H-TdR). Lymph nodes draining the application sites (auricular nodes) were sampled, pooled per group, and the proliferation of lymphocytes was evaluated by measuring the incorporation of 3H-TdR.The values obtained were used to calculate stimulation indices (SI), and the EC3 was estimated (theoretical concentration resulting in a SI of 3). The irritant potential of HC Yellow n° 7 was assessed by measuring ear thickness on days 1, 2, 3 and 6.
The α hexylcinnamaldehyde at 25% (v/v) in DMF used as positive control. There were no irritation reactions and no lymphoproliferative responses, and the threshold SI of 3 values was not approached in any of the test groups. Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing in mice by LLNA method.
Based on the available data for the structurally similar read across substances and applying the weight of evidence approach, it can be concluded that the target chemical will also tend to behave in a similar that of the read across chemicals. Therefore the target chemical was estimated to be not sensitizing to skin and it can be further classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
The results of the experimental studies from the structurally similar read across substances indicate a possibility that 4-[(2-chloro-4-nitrophenyl)diazenyl]-N-ethyl-N-[2-[1-(2-methylpropoxy)ethoxy]ethyl]aniline can be not sensitizing to skin.
Hence by applying the weight of evidence approach, 4-[(2-chloro-4-nitrophenyl)diazenyl]-N-ethyl-N-[2-[1-(2-methylpropoxy)ethoxy]ethyl]aniline can be considered to be not sensitizing to skin. It can be classified under the category “Not Classified” as per CLP regulation.
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.