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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 203-989-9 | CAS number: 112-60-7
- 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
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- Prior to or in 1989
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Sensitization study with human volunteers
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- patch test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- Sensitization study with human volunteers
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- clear liquid
- Species:
- human
- Strain:
- not specified
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- Participants ranged in age from 18-85 years old. Participants by sex: 37 males, 360 females.
- Route:
- other: epicutaneous semiocclusive to occlusive
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.2 ml of each test substance was used.
- Route:
- other: epicutaneous semiocclusive to occlusive
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.2 ml of each test substance was used.
- No. of animals per dose:
- 37 males, 360 females
- Details on study design:
- Occlusive or semiocclusive patches applied to the infrascapular area of the back, either to the right or left of the midline. Subjects removed patches at 24 hrs, and new patches were applied at 48 hrs. Induction phase consisted of 9 consecutive applications of 0.2 ml test material. After a two-week rest phase, the challenge phase was initiated. Subjects removed patches 24 hrs after application and sites were graded at 48 and 72 hrs after application.
Dermal application with occlusive patch (nonporous plastic film adhesive bandage) or semiocclusive patch (2 cm x 2 cm Webril pad affixed with Scanpor tape).
Grading scale: No reaction; doubtful response, barely perceptible erythema, only slightly different from surrounding skin; definite erythema, no edema; definite erythema, minimal or doubtful edema; definite erythema, definite edema; definite erythema, definite edema and vesiculation.
Reaction was scored at 48 and 72 hours, and the strongest reaction is used in calculating the irritancy score. - Challenge controls:
- Non-treated sections of skin used as control
- Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Positive control results:
- Not appropriate
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.2 ml of 100%
- No. with + reactions:
- 7
- Total no. in group:
- 397
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.2 ml of 100%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 395
- Interpretation of results:
- not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: expert judgment
- Conclusions:
- TTEG was not a human skin sensitizer.
- Executive summary:
The dermal sensitization potential of tetraethylene glycol was examined in humans. The substance was applied (0.2 ml) semiocclusively or occlusively to the skin of 397 individuals every 48 hours for 9 applications. Subjects removed patches after 24 hours. After a two-week rest phase, the challenge phase was initiated. Subjects removed patches 24 hrs after application and sites were graded at 48 and 72 hrs after application.
TetraEG was not a human skin sensitizer.
Reference
No evidence of sensitization with TTEG.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
The sensitization potential of tetraethylene glycol was examined using the Magnusson and Kligman method with guinea pigs. Under conditions of the study, Tetraethylene Glycol exhibited no potential to produce dermal sensitization in the guinea pig.
The dermal sensitization potential of tetraethylene glycol was examined in humans. TetraEG was applied (0.2 ml) semiocclusively or occlusively to the skin of 397 individuals every 48 hours for 9 applications. Subjects removed patches after 24 hours. After a two-week rest phase, the challenge phase was initiated. Subjects removed patches 24 hrs after application and sites were graded at 48 and 72 hrs after application. TetraEG was not a human skin sensitizer.
Migrated from Short description of key information:
Studies conducted in humans and guinea pigs (Magnussen and Kligmen) were negative.
Justification for selection of skin sensitisation endpoint:
Well conducted, definitive test in large number of subjects.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
- Additional information:
Based on low irritation potential and negative dermal sensitization data, respiratory sensitization from TTEG is not expected to occur.
Migrated from Short description of key information:
Based on low irritation potential and negative dermal sensitization data, respiratory sensitization from TTEG is not expected to occur.
Justification for classification or non-classification
Well conducted animal and human studies (guinea pig maximization test and human patch test) with TTEG found no skin-sensitizing properties. Therefore, classification concerning skin sensitization according to GHS and the Directive 67/548/EEC (DSD) is not warranted.
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.