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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Administrative data

Description of key information

OECD 442D, in vitro sensitization ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase test. Predicted to be a non-sensitizer. Reliability = 1; Key study

OECD 442C, in chemico sensitization Direct Peptide Reactivity assay. Predicted to be a non-sensitizer. Reliability = 1; Key study

skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA). The test substance does not induce delayed contact hypersensitivity in guinea pigs according to the maximization method of Magnusson and Kligman. Reliability = 2; supporting study

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
Additional information:

The Induction of Antioxidant-Response-Element Dependent Gene Activity in the Keratinocyte ARE- Reporter Cell Line KeratinoSens assay was used to assess the skin sensitization potential of the test article. A test article was predicted to have sensitization potential if: 1) The ECI.5 value fell below 1000 μM in at least 2 of 3 repetitions; 2) At the lowest concentration with a gene induction above 1.5, cellular viability was greater than 70%; and 3) There was an apparent overall dose response which was similar between the three definitive assays. According to the current prediction model, the test article was predicted to be a non-sensitizer.

The test article was evaluated for skin sensitisation potential using the Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay in accordance with OECD Guideline 442C. Synthetic peptides containing cysteine or lysine were reacted with the test articles for 24 ± 2 hours. After that incubation period the extent of peptide depletion was analysed using High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) coupled with ultra-violet (UV) spectrometric detection. The percent depletion of the peptide for the test article was calculated by comparing peak area of the individual test article sample to the mean peak area of the solvent control replicates. This percent depletion correlates to the sensitizing potential of the test article. The Mean Peptide Depletion of Cysteine and Lysine for the test substance was 5% and 0.53%, respectively, and for the positive control, cinnamic aldehyde, 74.60% and 62.52%, respectively. Therefore, the test substance is not predicted to be a skin sensitizer.

An in vivo study in guinea pigs supports the above in vitro and in chemico findings.

Respiratory sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no study available

Justification for classification or non-classification

The test substance was predicted not to be a sensitzer when tested in vitro, in chemico, and in vivo studies. Therefore, no classification is required for skin sensitisation according to EU Classification, Labelling and Packaging of Substances and Mixtures (CLP) Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008.