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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 270-185-2 | CAS number: 68412-38-4 This substance is identified in the Colour Index by Colour Index Constitution Number, C.I. 77899.
- Life Cycle description
- Uses advised against
- Endpoint summary
- Appearance / physical state / colour
- Melting point / freezing point
- Boiling point
- Density
- Particle size distribution (Granulometry)
- Vapour pressure
- Partition coefficient
- Water solubility
- Solubility in organic solvents / fat solubility
- Surface tension
- Flash point
- Auto flammability
- Flammability
- Explosiveness
- Oxidising properties
- Oxidation reduction potential
- Stability in organic solvents and identity of relevant degradation products
- Storage stability and reactivity towards container material
- Stability: thermal, sunlight, metals
- pH
- Dissociation constant
- Viscosity
- Additional physico-chemical information
- Additional physico-chemical properties of nanomaterials
- Nanomaterial agglomeration / aggregation
- Nanomaterial crystalline phase
- Nanomaterial crystallite and grain size
- Nanomaterial aspect ratio / shape
- Nanomaterial specific surface area
- Nanomaterial Zeta potential
- Nanomaterial surface chemistry
- Nanomaterial dustiness
- Nanomaterial porosity
- Nanomaterial pour density
- Nanomaterial photocatalytic activity
- Nanomaterial radical formation potential
- Nanomaterial catalytic activity
- Endpoint summary
- Stability
- Biodegradation
- Bioaccumulation
- Transport and distribution
- Environmental data
- Additional information on environmental fate and behaviour
- Ecotoxicological Summary
- Aquatic toxicity
- Endpoint summary
- Short-term toxicity to fish
- Long-term toxicity to fish
- Short-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Long-term toxicity to aquatic invertebrates
- Toxicity to aquatic algae and cyanobacteria
- Toxicity to aquatic plants other than algae
- Toxicity to microorganisms
- Endocrine disrupter testing in aquatic vertebrates – in vivo
- Toxicity to other aquatic organisms
- Sediment toxicity
- Terrestrial toxicity
- Biological effects monitoring
- Biotransformation and kinetics
- Additional ecotoxological information
- Toxicological Summary
- Toxicokinetics, metabolism and distribution
- Acute Toxicity
- Irritation / corrosion
- Sensitisation
- Repeated dose toxicity
- Genetic toxicity
- Carcinogenicity
- Toxicity to reproduction
- Specific investigations
- Exposure related observations in humans
- Toxic effects on livestock and pets
- Additional toxicological data
Skin sensitisation
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2020-09-02 to 2020-09-22
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 020
- Report date:
- 2021
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 442B (Skin Sensitization: Local Lymph Node Assay: BrdU-ELISA)
- Version / remarks:
- 2018-06-25
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Remarks:
- GLP certificate signed 2019-10-14
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA): BrdU-ELISA
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Chrome tungsten titanium buff rutile
- EC Number:
- 269-054-2
- EC Name:
- Chrome tungsten titanium buff rutile
- Cas Number:
- 68186-92-5
- IUPAC Name:
- Chromium tungsten titanium rutile
- Test material form:
- solid: particulate/powder
- Details on test material:
- - Test item identification: Chrome tungsten titanium buff rutile
- C.I. name: Pigment Yellow 163
- Substance type: inorganic pigment
- Storage conditions: At room temperature, under moisture protection
Constituent 1
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- not specified
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- CBA:J
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Elevage Janvier Labs (F-53941 Le Genest Saint Isle)
- Females nulliparous and non-pregnant: yes
- Age at study initiation (main study): 8 weeks
- Weight at study initiation (main study): 21.0 - 24.4 g
- Housing: individually housed in suspended solid-floor polypropylene cages furnished with softwood woodflakes (individual housing is used to avoid ingestion of test item by licking of the ear of the other animals); enrichment item (Tunnel) was provided, which was considered not to contain any contaminant of a level that might have affected the purpose or integrity of the study.
- Diet (ad libitum): ENVIGO 2016
- Water (ad libitum): tap water from public distribution system
- Acclimation period: at least five days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature: 19°C to 25°C
- Humidity: 30% to 70%,
- Air changes (per hr): at least 10 changes/hour
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12
Study design: in vivo (LLNA)
- Vehicle:
- propylene glycol
- Concentration:
- 10 %, 35 % and 70 % concentrations
- No. of animals per dose:
- 4 female mice
- Details on study design:
- PRE-SCREEN TESTS:
A preliminary screening test was performed using one mouse with the highest technically possible concentration. The mouse was treated by daily application of 25 μL of the test item diluted at 70% in propylene glycol to the dorsal surface of each ear for three consecutive days (Days 1, 2, 3). The vehicle was chosen as it produced the most suitable formulation at the required concentration.
The mouse was observed daily from Day 1 to Day 6. Body weights were recorded pre-test and prior to termination (Day 6). One ear was observed for erythema and scored according to OECD guideline scale (Draize scale). Ear thickness was recorded using a thickness gauge (digital micrometer) on Day 1 (pre-dose), on Day 3 (approximately 48 hours after the first dose) and on Day 6. Any signs of toxicity or excessive local irritation noted during this period were recorded.
Additionally, on Day 6, ear thickness was determined by ear punch weight determinations, which was performed after the animal was humanely killed. Exessive local irritation was indicated by an erythema score ≥ 3 and/or ear thickness of ≥ 25% on any day of measurement. The highest dose selected for the main LLNA:BrdU-Elisa study was the next dose in the pre-screen concentration series that did not induce systemic toxicity and/or excessive local skin irritation.
Results:
No mortality was noted at the tested concentration of 70%.
No signs of systemic toxicity were observed at the tested concentration of 70%.
No signs of excessive irritation was noted at the tested concentration of 70%.
Therefore, 70% was chosen as the highest concentration for the main study.
MAIN STUDY
- Days 1, 2 and 3:
The mice were treated by daily application of 25 μL of the appropriate concentration of the test item to the dorsal surface of each ear for three consecutive days (Days 1, 2 and 3). A further group of four mice received the vehicle alone in the same manner.
- Day 5: 0.5 mL (5 mg/mouse) of BrdU (10 mg/mL) solution was injected by intra-peritoneal route.
- Day 6: on day 6 (end of the test, approximately 24 hours after BrdU injection), the animals were euthanized with sodium pentobarbital (Dolethal®). The draining auricular lymph nodes of each mouse were excised and processed separately on phosphate buffered saline (PBS). for each mouse.
From each mouse, a single-cell suspension of lymph node cells (LNC) excised bilaterally was prepared by gentle mechanical disaggregation through a disposable plastic pestle to crush the lymph nodes followed by passage through a #70 nylon mesh in 15 mL of DPBS (Ca2+ / Mg2+ - free) into a well of a multi-well 6. The optimized volume was based on achieving a mean absorbance of the negative control group within 0.1- 0.2.
BrdU was measured by ELISA using a commercial kit (Roche Applied Science, Mannheim, Germany, Catalogue Number 11 647 229 001 – Batch No. 43507600). Briefly, 100 μL of the LNC suspension was added to the wells of a flat-bottom microplate in triplicate. After fixation and denaturation of the LNC, anti-BrdU antibody was added to each well and allowed to react. Subsequently the anti-BrdU antibody was removed by washing and the substrate solution was then added and allowed to produce chromogen. After 5 to 30 minutes, 30 μL of 1 M H2SO4 was added in each well, then shaken for one minute. Absorbance at 450 nm with a reference wavelength of 690 nm was then measured.
The BrdU labelling index was defined as:
BrdU labelling index = (ABS em – ABS blank em) – (ABS ref – ABS blank ref)
(em = emission wavelength; and ref = reference wavelength)
Results were expressed as the Stimulation Index (SI).
Results for each treatment group were expressed as the mean SI. The SI was derived by dividing the mean BrdU labelling index/mouse within each test group by the mean BrdU labelling index for the control group.
The EC1.6 value (theoretical concentration resulting in a SI value of 1.6) was determined by linear interpolation of points on the dose-response curve, immediately above and below the 1.6-fold threshold. The equation used for calculation of EC1.6 was:
EC1.6 = c + [(1.6 – d) / (b – d)] x (a – c)
a = the lowest concentration giving stimulation index > 1.6
b = the actual stimulation index caused by a
c = the highest concentration failing to produce a stimulation index of 1.6
d = the actual stimulation index caused by c
DATA ANALYSIS:
The test item will be regarded as a sensitiser if at least one concentration of the test item results is equal or greater than 1.6 compared to control values. However, the strength of the dose-response relationship, the statistical significance and the consistency of the solvent/vehicle and positive control responses may also be used when determining whether a borderline result (i.e. SI value between 1.6 and 1.9) is declared positive.
Any test item failing to produce a SI > 1.6 will be classified as a "non-sensitiser".
OBSERVATIONS:
- clinical signs: all animals were observed daily on Days 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Any signs of toxicity or signs of ill health during the test were recorded.
- body weights: body weight of each mouse was recorded on Day 1 (prior to dosing) and Day 6 (prior to termination).
- skin irritation assessment: On day 1 and on day 3 (before application) as well as on day 6 (after sacrifice) of each experiment, the thickness of the right ear of each animal of the vehicle control and treated groups was measured by a micrometer in order to determine the iritant effect of the test item. Furthermore, on day 6, punch biopsies (8 mm) in diameter of the apical area of both ears were prepared and weighed in order to assess the irritation potential of the test item and the two lymph nodes per mouse were weighed.
Any irritation reaction (erythema and oedema scored using the Draize scale as stated in the OECD guideline) was recorded in parallel. Any other observation (dryness, presence of residual test item…) was noted.
The test item should be considered as an excessive irritant if the score of erythema is higher or equal to 3. Furthermore, if ear thickness is increased by equal to or greater than 25% between day 1 and day 3 and/or between day 1 and day 6, the test item is considered to be an excessive irritant. - Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- The positive control substance produced SI values (mean ± SD) of 1.40 ± 0.26, 1.51 ± 0.33 and 2.14 ± 0.36 for 5 %, 10 % and 25 % concentrations, respectively. Therefore, the positive control substance is considered to be a skin sensitiser, since one dose had a SI value above 1.6.
In vivo (LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 0.95
- Variability:
- Standard deviation: 0.09
- Test group / Remarks:
- 10 % concentration of test item
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 0.87
- Variability:
- Standard deviation: 0.08
- Test group / Remarks:
- 35 % concentration of test item
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 0.91
- Variability:
- Standard deviation: 0.03
- Test group / Remarks:
- 70 % concentration of test item
- Cellular proliferation data / Observations:
- CELLULAR PROLIFERATION DATA
The following BrdU-index was determined for the control group and treatment groups (mean values):
- control group: 1.062
- 10 % concentration: 1.008
- 35 % concentration: 0.929
- 70 % concentration: 0.968
Please also refer to the field "Attached background material" below.
DETAILS ON STIMULATION INDEX CALCULATION
Results for each treatment group were expressed as the mean SI. The SI was derived by dividing the mean BrdU labelling index/mouse within each test group by the mean BrdU labelling index for the control group.
EC3 CALCULATION
No stimulation index higher than 1.6 was recorded for any concentration. Therefore, the EC1.6 cannot be determined due to the absence of a SI value higher than 1.6.
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS / MORTALITY / LOCAL IRRITATION:
No mortality was noted in the test and control animals during the test.
No signs of systemic toxicity were noted in the test animals treated at 10%, 35%, 70% and control animals during the test.
No erythema was observed in animals treated at 10%, 35% and 70%, respectively.
No increase in ear thickness (≥ 25 %) and in ear weight was noted in animals treated at 10%, 35% and 70%, respectively.
Therefore, the test item has to be considered as not excessively irritant at these concentrations.
Please also refer to the field "Attached background material" below.
BODY WEIGHTS
No statistical significant change in body weight was noted for all treated groups versus control group (Student’s test).
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- The substance is not a skin sensitiser.
According to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 and subsequent adaptations, the substance does not require classification as skin sensitiser.
Information on Registered Substances comes from registration dossiers which have been assigned a registration number. The assignment of a registration number does however not guarantee that the information in the dossier is correct or that the dossier is compliant with Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 (the REACH Regulation). This information has not been reviewed or verified by the Agency or any other authority. The content is subject to change without prior notice.
Reproduction or further distribution of this information may be subject to copyright protection. Use of the information without obtaining the permission from the owner(s) of the respective information might violate the rights of the owner.