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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 613-901-4 | CAS number: 6615-00-5
- 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
![](https://echa.europa.eu/o/diss-blank-theme/images/factsheets/A-REACH/factsheet/print_toxicological-information.png)
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 (LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2012
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: According to guideline; under GLP conditions.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.42 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- other: CBA/CaOlaHsD
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Recognised animal supplier.
- Age at study initiation: 8-9 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: 20-24 g
- Housing: housed 5 animals per cage (IVC cages, type II L, polysulphone cages).
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): Altromin 1324 maintainance diet for rats and mice, ad libitum.
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): tap water (sulphur acidified to a pH of 2.8), ad libitum.
- Acclimation period: at least 5 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 22 +/- 3
- Humidity (%): 55 +/- 10
- Air changes (per hr): at least 10/h
- Photoperiod: 12 h light / 12 h dark (artificial light) - Vehicle:
- other: 2% carboxymethylcellulose (CMC)
- Concentration:
- Preliminary screening test: 25% w/w
Main test: 6.25%, 12.5% and 25% w/w - No. of animals per dose:
- Preliminary test: total of 3 animals were used (2 were treated with test material and the remainder served as the negative control).
Main test: 5 mice per dose group. - Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
- Compound solubility: The maximum technically applicable concentration of the test material was found to be 25% in 2% CMC in aqua ad inject
- Irritation: no signs of irritation or systemic toxicity were observed in any animal in the preliminary test.
MAIN STUDY
ANIMAL ASSIGNMENT AND TREATMENT
- Name of test method: animals were randomly selected for dose groups.
- Criteria used to consider a positive response: A substance is regarded as a 'sensitiser' in the LLNA if at least one concentration of the test item results in a 3-fold or greater increase in 3H-methyl thymidine - incorporation into lymph node cells of the test group animals, relative to that recorded for the lymph nodes of control group animals (Stimulation Index equal to or greater than 3.0).
TREATMENT PREPARATION AND ADMINISTRATION:
Preliminary test:
A solubility test and a preliminary screening test were performed to determine maximum concentration and test concentrations to be used in the main test. The maximum technically applicable concentration of the test item was found to be 25% in 2% CMC in aqua ad inject. Mice were treated by daily application of test substance at concentrations of 25% in the vehicle, to the dorsal surface of each ear for 3 consecutive days. An additional animal was treated with 100% of 2% CMC and served as the negative control. Immediately before the first application, approximately 48 hours after the first application and shortly before sacrificing the thickness of both ears of all animals was measured. Additionally clinical signs were recorded during this period.
Main test:
Topical aplication: Five groups of 5 mice were treated with the substance at concentrations of 0% (control), 6,25%, 12.5% or 25% w/v in the vehicle and 25% α-Hexylcinnamaldehyde (positive control) . The preliminary test suggested that the substance would not produce systemic toxicity or excessive local irritation at the highest suitable concentration. The mice were treated by daily topical application of 25µl of the appropriate concentration of the substance to the dorsal surface of each ear for 3 consecutive days.
3H-methyl thymidine administration: Five days after the first topical administration of the substance, all mice were injected via the tail vein with 250µl 3H-methyl thymidine (diluted to a working concentration of 80µCi/ml).
Preparation of single cell suspension: 5 hours after the injection of 3H-methyl thymidine all mice were sacrificed by cervical dislocation. The draining “auricular lymph nodes” were excised, weighed, individually pooled for each animal (2 lymph nodes per animal) and collected in phosphate buffered saline (PBS). A single cell suspension of pooled lymph node cells was prepared by gentle mechanical disaggregation through polyamide gauze (200 mesh size). After washing the gauze with PBS the cell suspension was pelleted in a centrifuge. The supernatant was discarded and the pellets were resuspended with PBS. This washing procedure was repeated. After the final wash each pellet was resuspended in approx. 1 mL 5% TCA at approx. 4° C for approximately 18 hours for precipitation of macromolecules. Each precipitate was once washed again, resuspended in 1 mL 5% TCA and 7 mL scintillation fluid was added. Then this solution was transferred into scintillation vials and stored at room temperature overnight.
Determination of administration3HTdR incorporation: The 3H-methyl thymidine – incorporation was measured in a ß-counter and expressed as the number of disintegrations per minute (DPM). Similarly, background 3H-methyl thymidine levels were also measured (5% TCA). Determination of radioactivity was performed individually for each animal.
Observations:
- Clinical observation: All animals were observed prior to application and daily thereafter. Any signs of toxicity or ill health were recorded.
- Body weights: Recorded prior to dosing and prior to treatment with 3HTdR. - Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
- Positive control results:
- The positive control group achieved the appropriate response with a stimulation index of 10.7. One animal from the positive-control group showed hair loss at the application site on day 6 of the study.
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks on result:
- other: - Negative control: 1.0 - Positive control: 10.7 (mean) - Test substance (6.25%): 1.3 (mean) - Test substance (12.5%): 1.1 (mean) - Test substance (25%): 1.2 (mean)
- Parameter:
- other: disintegrations per minute (DPM)
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- The following have been corrected for background DPM: - Negative control: 1212.6 (mean) - Positive control: 12957.4 (mean) - Test substance (6.25%): 1615.2 (mean) - Test substance (12.5%): 1374.1 (mean) - Test substance (25%): 1459.6 (mean) [background 3H-methyl thymidine levels were measured as 18.2)
- Interpretation of results:
- not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of this study, the test material is not considered to be a dermal sensitiser.
- Executive summary:
The study was performed to assess the skin sensitisation potential of the test material in CBA/CaOlaHsD mice following topical application to the dorsal surface of the ear. The study was performed to GLP and the method was designed to meet the requirements of OECD 429 guideline, EPA OPPTS 870.2600 and EU Method B.42.
In a preliminary screening test in two mice, daily application of 25µL of substance at concentrations of 25% w/v in the vehicle to the dorsal surface of each ear was performed for 3 consecutive days. Prior to the first application, approximately 48 hours after the first application and shortly before sacrificing the thickness of both ears of all animals was measured. Additionally clinical signs were recorded during this period. Body weights were recorded on Day 1 (prior to dosing) and, for the surviving mouse, on Day 6. Neither signs of systemic toxicity nor signs of irritation at the application site could be detected in any animal. Based on the preliminary test, the concentrations selected for the main test were 0%, 6.25%, 12.5% and 25% w/w.
Five groups of 5 mice were treated with the test substance at concentrations of 0% (control), 6.25%, 12.5% or 25% w/v and 25% α-Hexylcinnamaldehyde (positive control) in the vehicle. The mice were treated by daily application of 25µl of the appropriate concentration of the substance to the dorsal surface of each ear for 3 consecutive days. Five days after the first topical administration of the substance, all mice were injected via the tail vein with 3H-methyl thymidine. All animals were observed prior to application and daily thereafter and any signs of toxicity or ill health were recorded. Recorded prior to dosing and prior to treatment with 3HTdR. At test termination, five hours after administration of 3HTdR, the test animals were sacrificed. The draining auricular lymph nodes from each mouse were excised and individually pooled for each animal (2 lymph nodes per animal). Following appropriate preparation, 3HTdR incorporation was measured by β-scintillation counting and the number of radioactive disintegrations per minute (dpm) was measured.
The proliferation response of lymph node cells was expressed as the number of radioactive disintegrations per minute per lymph node (dpm/node) and as the ratio of3HTdR incorporation into lymph node cells of test nodes relative to that recorded for the control nodes. The substance was regarded as sensititising if at least one concentration of the substance resulted in a 3-fold or greater increase in3HTdR incorporation compared to control values. Any substance failing to produce a 3-fold or greater increase in3HTdR incorporation was classified as non-sensitising. In the main test, there were no deaths or signs of systemic toxicity, and body weights were unaffected. A stimulation index (SI) of less than 3 was noted at each of the three test material concentrations evaluated. Accordingly, the test material was considered to be non-sensitising under the conditions of the test.
Reference
All animals survived throughout the test period and no clinical signs were observed in any animal belonging to the test substance or negative control groups. Body weights were unaffected in all dose groups.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
The study was performed to assess the skin sensitisation potential of the test material in CBA/CaOlaHsD mice following topical application to the dorsal surface of the ear. The study was performed to GLP and the method was designed to meet the requirements of OECD 429 guideline, EPA OPPTS 870.2600 and EU Method B.42.
In a preliminary screening test in two mice, daily application of 25µL of substance at concentrations of 25% w/v in the vehicle to the dorsal surface of each ear was performed for 3 consecutive days. Prior to the first application, approximately 48 hours after the first application and shortly before sacrificing the thickness of both ears of all animals was measured. Additionally clinical signs were recorded during this period. Body weights were recorded on Day 1 (prior to dosing) and, for the surviving mouse, on Day 6. Neither signs of systemic toxicity nor signs of irritation at the application site could be detected in any animal. Based on the preliminary test, the concentrations selected for the main test were 0%, 6.25%, 12.5% and 25% w/w.
Five groups of 5 mice were treated with the test substance at concentrations of 0% (control), 6.25%, 12.5% or 25% w/v and 25% α-Hexylcinnamaldehyde (positive control) in the vehicle. The mice were treated by daily application of 25µl of the appropriate concentration of the substance to the dorsal surface of each ear for 3 consecutive days. Five days after the first topical administration of the substance, all mice were injected via the tail vein with 3H-methyl thymidine. All animals were observed prior to application and daily thereafter and any signs of toxicity or ill health were recorded. Recorded prior to dosing and prior to treatment with 3HTdR. At test termination, five hours after administration of 3HTdR, the test animals were sacrificed. The draining auricular lymph nodes from each mouse were excised and individually pooled for each animal (2 lymph nodes per animal). Following appropriate preparation, 3HTdR incorporation was measured by β-scintillation counting and the number of radioactive disintegrations per minute (dpm) was measured.
The proliferation response of lymph node cells was expressed as the number of radioactive disintegrations per minute per lymph node (dpm/node) and as the ratio of3HTdR incorporation into lymph node cells of test nodes relative to that recorded for the control nodes. The substance was regarded as sensititising if at least one concentration of the substance resulted in a 3-fold or greater increase in3HTdR incorporation compared to control values. Any substance failing to produce a 3-fold or greater increase in3HTdR incorporation was classified as non-sensitising. In the main test, there were no deaths or signs of systemic toxicity, and body weights were unaffected. A stimulation index (SI) of less than 3 was noted at each of the three test material concentrations evaluated. Accordingly, the test material was considered to be non-sensitising under the conditions of the test.
Migrated from Short description of key information:
Skin sensitisation: non-sensitising, female mice, OECD 429, Schmid 2012
Justification for selection of skin sensitisation endpoint:
One study available; GLP compliant and has a Klimisch score 1.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
The substance does not meet classification criteria under EU Directive 67/548/EEC for skin sensitisation.
The substance does not meet classification criteria under Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 for skin sensitisation.
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.
![ECHA](/o/diss-blank-theme/images/factsheets/A-REACH/factsheet/echa_logo.png)