Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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.
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: 214-170-0 | CAS number: 1107-00-2
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
The Skin Irritation/Corrosion potential of 6FDA was evaluated by obtaining alerts using BfR rule-base profiling models (called “Skin Irritation/Corrosion exclusion rules by BfR” and “Skin Irritation/Corrosion inclusions rules by BfR”) in the OECD QSAR Toolbox and predictions with the OECD QSAR Toolbox “BfR skin irritation/Corrosion” QSAR model and the Danish EPA “Severe Skin Irritation (rabbit in vivo)” QSAR model.
There was no indication of skin irritation in the BfR exclusion rules profiler but acid anhydride function was identified as structural alerts for skin irritation/corrosion in the BfR inclusion rules profiler. However, in the QSAR model for Skin Irritation/Corrosion in the OECD QSAR toolbox, 6FDA Skin Irritation/Corrosion potential was predicted to be negative. This result was supported by the Danish EPA QSAR model for In vivo Skin Irritation in rabbits which also predicted that 6FDA was not irritant to the skin of rabbits. It was therefore concluded that 6FDA would not be expected to induce irritation/corrosion to the skin.
Furthermore, the skin corrosion potential of 4,4’-[2,2,2-trifluoro-1-(trifluoromethyl)ethylidene]diphthalic anhydride was assessed in vitro according to OECD Test Guideline 431 (In Vitro Skin Corrosion: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Test Method).
After a 3 minute and 1 hour exposure on the surface of EpiDermTM reconstructed human epidermis, the viability of the tissues was assessed and compared to a negative control.
The percentage viabilities obtained after 3 minutes and 1hr were 95.929% and 87.082% respectively and therefore 4,4’-[2,2,2-trifluoro-1-(trifluoromethyl)ethylidene]diphthalic anhydride was classified as Non-Corrosive to human skin.
The Eye Irritation potential of 6FDA was evaluated by identifying alerts using BfR rule-base profiling models (called “Eye Irritation/Corrosion exclusion rules by BfR” and “Eye Irritation/Corrosion inclusions rules by BfR”) and “BfR eye irritation/corrosion” QSAR model in the OECD QSAR Toolbox after a review of the literature did not identify usable experimental data.
As no alerts for Eye Irritation were returned from the BfR rule-base profilers and 6FDA Eye Irritation/Corrosion potential was estimated to be negative in “BfR eye irritation/corrosion” QSAR model, it was concluded that 6FDA would not be expected to induce irritation/corrosion to the eyes.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin irritation / corrosion
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin irritation / corrosion, other
- Type of information:
- other: Expert Assessment
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- March 2022
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Skin Irritation/Corrosion potential of 6FDA was evaluated by structural alerts and QSAR models
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- The Skin Irritation/Corrosion potential of 6FDA was evaluated by obtaining alerts using BfR rule-base profiling models (called “Skin Irritation/Corrosion exclusion rules by BfR” and “Skin Irritation/Corrosion inclusions rules by BfR”) in the OECD QSAR Toolbox and predictions with the OECD QSAR Toolbox “BfR skin irritation/Corrosion” QSAR model and the Danish EPA “Severe Skin Irritation (rabbit in vivo)” QSAR model.
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Irritation / corrosion parameter:
- other: QSAR Predictions
- Run / experiment:
- N/A
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- The test item 6FDA is not expected to induce irritation/corrosion to the skin.
- Executive summary:
After a review of the literature which did not identify usable experimental data, the Skin Irritation/Corrosion potential of 6FDA was evaluated by obtaining alerts using BfR rule-base profiling models (called “Skin Irritation/Corrosion exclusion rules by BfR” and “Skin Irritation/Corrosion inclusions rules by BfR”) in the OECD QSAR Toolbox and predictions with the OECD QSAR Toolbox “BfR skin irritation/Corrosion” QSAR model and the Danish EPA “Severe Skin Irritation (rabbit in vivo)” QSAR model.
There was no indication of skin irritation in the BfR exclusion rules profiler but acid anhydride function was identified as structural alerts for skin irritation/corrosion in the BfR inclusion rules profiler. However, in the QSAR model for Skin Irritation/Corrosion in the OECD QSAR toolbox, 6FDA Skin Irritation/Corrosion potential was predicted to be negative. This result was supported by the Danish EPA QSAR model for In vivo Skin Irritation in rabbits which also predicted that 6-FDA was not irritant to the skin of rabbits. It was therefore concluded that 6FDA would not be expected to induce irritation/corrosion to the skin.
Reference
No experimental data on the skin irritation/corrosion potential of 6FDA were identified in the experimental database "Skin Irritation" of the OECD QSAR toolbox. Therefore, for the purposes of this endpoint assessment report, predictions regarding the skin irritation/corrosion potential of 6FDA were made in the OECD QSAR toolbox using the BfR rule-based profiling models. These models contain both physicochemical exclusion rules and structure-based inclusion rules (structural alerts).
There was no indication of skin irritation/corrosion in the “Skin Irritation/Corrosion exclusion rules by BfR” profiler but, the acid anhydride function was identified as structural alerts for skin irritation/corrosion in the inclusions rule profiler. However, when running the (Q)SAR model called “BfR skin irritation/corrosion” using the OECD QSAR toolbox, a negative prediction was obtained for Skin Irritation/Corrosion.
The Danish EPA “Severe Skin Irritation (rabbit in vivo)” QSAR model, based on results taken from Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances (RTECs), Hazardous Substances Data Bank (HSDB) and the former official list of EU-classified substances (Annex I of Directive 67/548/EEC, now replaced by Annex VI to the CLP Regulation) was also used to predict the Skin Irritation/Corrosion potential of 6FDA. The predicition was negative.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Eye irritation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- eye irritation, other
- Type of information:
- other: Expert Assessment
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- March 2022
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Expert assessment based on structural alerts and QSAR models
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Predictions regarding the Eye Irritation potential of 6FDA were performed in the OECD QSAR Toolbox using the BfR rule-base profiling models which contains both physico-chemical exclusion rules and structure-based inclusion rules (structural alerts).
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Irritation parameter:
- other: QSAR Prediction
- Run / experiment:
- N/A
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- It was concluded that 6FDA would not be expected to induce irritation/corrosion to the eyes.
- Executive summary:
The Eye Irritation potential of 6FDA was evaluated by identifying alerts using BfR rule-base profiling models (called “Eye Irritation/Corrosion exclusion rules by BfR” and “Eye Irritation/Corrosion inclusions rules by BfR”) and “BfR eye irritation/corrosion” QSAR model in the OECD QSAR Toolbox after a review of the literature did not identify usable experimental data.
As no alerts for Eye Irritation were returned from the BfR rule-base profilers and 6FDA Eye Irritation/Corrosion potential was estimated to be negative in “BfR eye irritation/corrosion” QSAR model, it was concluded that 6FDA would not be expected to induce irritation/corrosion to the eyes.
Reference
No experimental data for the Eye Irritation of 6FDA was identified in the experimental database “Eye irritation ECETOC” in the OECD QSAR Toolbox. Therefore, for the purpose of this endpoint assessment report, predictions regarding the Eye Irritation potential of 6FDA were performed in the OECD QSAR Toolbox using the BfR rule-base profiling models which contains both physico-chemical exclusion rules and structure-based inclusion rules (structural alerts).
There was no indication of eye irritation/corrosion in both BfR rule-base profilers. In addition, when running the QSAR model called “BfR eye irritation/corrosion” using the OECD QSAR toolbox, a negative prediction was obtained for Eye Irritation/Corrosion.
Therefore, based on the results of the BfR rule-base profilers and QSAR model, 6FDA can be expected to not be irritating to the eyes.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Additional information
Justification for classification or non-classification
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.
