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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 262-134-8 | CAS number: 60270-33-9
- 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 (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2004-03-01 to 2001-04-01
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- comparable to guideline study with acceptable restrictions
- Justification for type of information:
- DIMAPDO lactate is a surface active chemical with the alkyl moieties being composed of C22 residues.
In recently published articles in peer reviewed journals (see reference list below, and publications cited in the revised OECD guideline 429 (July 2010)) it is clearly demonstrated that for the realistic assessment of the skin sensitization potential of surfactants the LLNA (OECD 429) is much less suitable than the Magnusson & Kligman method (OECD 406) and could lead to confounding results.
In particular, the OECD 429 guideline specifies that “In addition, test substance classes or substances containing functional groups shown to act as potential confounders (Basketter et al., 2009) may necessitate the use of guinea pig tests”.
Consequently, in the evaluation of such surface active substances for sensitising properties, the LLNA is not an appropriate assay and would not represent an optimum use of test animals. The mechanism underlying confounding or false positive result is not fully understood, but it may be that an unspecific, non-immunologically triggered mechanism may be the cause of an increased lymphocyte proliferation.
In contrast to the GPMT, the LLNA focuses on the induction process of skin sensitisation (i.e. lymphocyte proliferation), and does not capture the process of elicitation which checks if the organism had actually been sensitized or not. The design of the LLNA does not allow to assess whether lymphocyte proliferation is a specific response or unspecific (false positive) response.
References:
Kreiling, R et al., Food and Chemical Toxicology 46 (2008): 1896-1904: Comparison of the skin sensitizing potential of unsaturated compounds as assessed by the local lymph node assay (LLNA) and the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT)
Basketter, D et al., Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 55 (2009): 90-96: Application of a weight of evidence approach to assessing discordant sensitisation data sets: Implications for REACH
Garcia, C et al., Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 58 (2010): 301-307: Comparative testing for the identification of skin sensitizing potentials of nonionic sugar lipid surfactants
Ball, N et al., Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 60 (2011): 389-400: Evaluating the sensitizing potential of surfactants: integrating data from the local lymph node assay, guinea pig maximization test, and in vitro methods in a weight-of-evidence approach
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 004
- Report date:
- 2004
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 1992
- Deviations:
- yes
- Remarks:
- no positve control
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- DIMAPDO lactate is a surface active chemical with the alkyl moieties being composed of C22 residues.
In recently published articles in peer reviewed journals (see field "Justification for type of information") it is clearly demonstrated that for the realistic assessment of the skin sensitization potential of surfactants the LLNA (OECD 429) is much less suitable than the Magnusson & Kligman method (OECD 406) and could lead to confounding results.
In particular, the OECD 429 guideline specifies that “In addition, test substance classes or substances containing functional groups shown to act as potential confounders (Basketter et al., 2009) may necessitate the use of guinea pig tests”.
Consequently, in the evaluation of such surface active substances for sensitising properties, the LLNA is not an appropriate assay and would not represent an optimum use of test animals. The mechanism underlying confounding or false positive result is not fully understood, but it may be that an unspecific, non-immunologically triggered mechanism may be the cause of an increased lymphocyte proliferation.
In contrast to the GPMT, the LLNA focuses on the induction process of skin sensitisation (i.e. lymphocyte proliferation), and does not capture the process of elicitation which checks if the organism had actually been sensitized or not. The design of the LLNA does not allow to assess whether lymphocyte proliferation is a specific response or unspecific (false positive) response.
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- N-[3-(dimethylamino)propyl]docosanamide;2-hydroxypropanoic acid
- Cas Number:
- 221446-54-4
- Molecular formula:
- C30H62N2O4
- IUPAC Name:
- N-[3-(dimethylamino)propyl]docosanamide;2-hydroxypropanoic acid
- Details on test material:
- - Name of test material: DIMAPDO lactate
- Physical state: solid
- Analytical purity: 99%
Constituent 1
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Hartley
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Age at study initiation: 5 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: 336 g (mean at induction)
- Housing: in groups of 5 animals in aluminum cages (W350 x D400 x H230: Natsume Seisakusho Co., Ltd.)
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): solid food (RC4: Oriental Yeast Co., Ltd.), ad libitum
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): filtered tap water, ad libitum
- Acclimation period: 6 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 23 ± 2°C
- Humidity (%): 50 ± 10%
- Air changes (per hr): 17
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12
Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Inductionopen allclose all
- Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- other: for intradermal induction: physiological saline; for epicutaneous induction and challenge 50% ethanol in water
- Concentration / amount:
- intradermal induction: 0.01%
epicutaneous induction: 30%
challenge: 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 30%
Concentration selection based on a preliminary dose range finding study.
Challengeopen allclose all
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- other: for intradermal induction: physiological saline; for epicutaneous induction and challenge 50% ethanol in water
- Concentration / amount:
- intradermal induction: 0.01%
epicutaneous induction: 30%
challenge: 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 30%
Concentration selection based on a preliminary dose range finding study.
- No. of animals per dose:
- 8 (preliminary study); 10 (test group); 5 (control group)
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
pilot experiment with 8 animals to determine which concentration of the test substance
- led to slight irritation after intradermal application (determination of the maximum compatible dose); concentrations tested: 0.01%, 0.03%, 0.05%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 1% and 5% (w/w)
- led to slight irritation after dermal application; concentrations tested: 0.3%, 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5% and 10% (w/w)
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
Intradermal induction (day 0)
- No. of exposure sites: 2
- Test groups: test substance
- Control group: vehicle
- Site: left and right back
- Frequency of applications: 1
- Concentrations:
0.1 mL FCA (mixed at a ratio of 1+1 in vehicle)
0.1 mL 0.01% test substance (or physiological saline in control)
0.1 mL 0.02% test substance (or physiological saline in control) + FCA (mixed at a ratio of 1+1 in vehicle)
Epicutaneous induction (day 8)
- No. of exposures: 1
- Exposure period: 48 h
- Test groups: test substance
- Control group: vehicle
- Site: back, same region as for intradermal induction
- Frequency of applications: 1
- Concentrations: 30% test substance (or 50% ethanol in water in control)
- Since the test substance is non-irritating, 0.5 g of 10% SDS (vaseline base) was applied on day 7
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1
- Day(s) of challenge: 21
- Exposure period: 24 h
- Test groups: 0.05 mL of the test substance soaked in the cloth portion of an adhesive plaster for patch test
- Control group: same as test group
- Site: lateral abdomen
- Concentrations: 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 30% test substance (w/w)
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 3h, 24 h, 48 h - Challenge controls:
- yes, vehicle only during induction phase
- Positive control substance(s):
- no
Results and discussion
In vivo (non-LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 30%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- No
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 30%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- No
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 30%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- No
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 30%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- No
- Group:
- positive control
- Remarks on result:
- not measured/tested
Any other information on results incl. tables
Reading | Hours after challenge | Group | Dose level | No. with + reactions | Total no. in group | Clinical observations |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Additional reading | 3 | test group | 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 30% | 0 | 10 | No |
Additional reading | 3 | negative control | 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 30% | 0 | 5 | No |
No abnormality in the general conditions was observed after induction or challenge during the study period and the animals showed satisfactory body weight increases.
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- DIMAPDO lactate is not a dermal sensitizer in this Guinea pig maximisation test.
- Executive summary:
In a dermal sensitization study with DIMAPDO lactate 23 young female Albino Hartley guinea pigs (8 preliminary study, 10 in test group, 5 in control group) were tested using the method of Guinea pig maximization test equivalent to OECD Guideline 406 (1992). No positive control was reported.
Concentration selection was based on a preliminary dose range finding study:
intradermal induction: 0.01% in physiological saline
epicutaneous induction: 30% in 50% ethanol in water
challenge: 0.5%, 1%, 3%, 5%, 10%, 30% in 50% ethanol in water
One day prior to epicutaneous induction the sites were pretreated with SDS to create local skin irritation.
There were no signs of erythema or oedema in any dose group 3, 24 and 48 hours after patch removal. Therefore, DIMAPDO lactate is not a dermal sensitizer in this study.
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.