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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: - | CAS number: -
- 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
Study no 01:The Buehler method in guinea pig (guinea pig skin sensitization) was reported to have induced a sensitization response (in 35%) when challenged with a 5% solution when a 20% concentration in peanut oil was applied. A negative and positive compliance control was employed concurrently.
Study no 02: A generally well-conducted, well-reported, guinea-pig maximization test found that the hydrolysis products of 3-aminopropyl(triethoxy)silane (70% in saline) did not elicit a delayed contact hypersensitivity response in guinea pigs. Appropriate concurrent negative and positive compliance controls were included and the expected responses were observed.
Study no03: A generally well-conducted, well-reported, guinea-pig maximization test found that the hydrolysis products of 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane (CAS 919-30-2)silane (50% aqueous) did not elicit a delayed contact hypersensitivity response in guinea pigs. Observed were appropriate negative and positive compliance controls concurrently in operation.
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
- Remarks:
- Read across data
- Adequacy of study:
- supporting study
- Reliability:
- 4 (not assignable)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- secondary literature
- Justification for type of information:
- data was taken from secondary sources
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 1987
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Skin Sensitisation guideline OECD 406
- Principle of test: Skin senistisation test were carrierd out to determind the erythma and edema score, ny buhlers test
- Short description of test conditions: Erythma and Edema score were noted
- Parameters analysed / observed: - GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- An LLNA study was not performed because there is an existing reliable study for skin sensitisation using the Buehler test method. Furthermore, the LLNA test method is not considered to be suitable for substances that contain silicon.
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Not specified
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- not specified
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Epona Associates, LLC
- Females (if applicable) nulliparous and non-pregnant: [yes/no/not specified] No data available
- Microbiological status of animals, when known: No data available
- Age at study initiation: No data available
- Weight at study initiation: No data available
- Housing: No data available
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): No data available
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): No data available
- Acclimation period: No data available
- Indication of any skin lesions: No data available
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C):No data available
- Humidity (%): No data available
- Air changes (per hr): No data available
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): No data available
- IN-LIFE DATES: From: To: No data available - Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- Induction .5 % intracutaneous
Induction 50 % open epicutaneous
Challenge 50 % open epicutaneous - Day(s)/duration:
- Not specified
- Adequacy of induction:
- not specified
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- INDUCTION
intradermal: 0.5%
dermal: 50%
CHALLENGE
dermal: 50% - Day(s)/duration:
- not specified
- Adequacy of challenge:
- not specified
- No. of animals per dose:
- test: 20
negative controls: 10
positive controls: 20 test; 10 control - Details on study design:
- 1st: Induction .5 % intracutaneous
2nd: Induction 50 % open epicutaneous
3rd: Challenge 50 % open epicutaneous - Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Reading:
- other: 24h 48 h
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
50% aqueous- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Not specified
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- other: 24h 48 h
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
50% aqueous- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Not specified
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- Category 1B (indication of skin sensitising potential) based on GHS criteria
- Conclusions:
- A generally well-conducted, well-reported, guinea-pig maximization test found that the hydrolysis products of 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane (CAS 919-30-2)silane (50% aqueous) did not elicit a delayed contact hypersensitivity response in guinea pigs. Observed were appropriate negative and positive compliance controls concurrently in operation.
- Executive summary:
In accordance with the test guideline 406 Acute skin sensitization test, the RA chemical 3 aminopropyltriethoxysilane ( CAS number: 919-30-2)was studied using a guinea pig (Guinea pig maximization test).
In the induction group, the test sample was applied through intradermal and epicutaneous routes at a concentration range of Induction .5 % intracutaneous, Induction 50 % open epicutaneous, and Challenge 50 % open epicutaneous. using water as a vehicle.
After 24h and 48 hrs of observation in the test chemical group at 50% aqueous group skin sensations was not observed, similar for negative test group No adverse skin reactions were noted at the test material or vehicle control sites of the test or control animals at the 24 or 48 h observations.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Remarks:
- Read across data
- Adequacy of study:
- supporting study
- Reliability:
- 4 (not assignable)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- secondary literature
- Justification for type of information:
- data was taken from another source
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 1995
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Skin Sensitisation guideline OECD 406
- Principle of test: Skin senistisation test were carrierd out to determind the erythma and edema score, ny buhlers test
- Short description of test conditions: Erythma and Edema score were noted
- Parameters analysed / observed:
The full report gives various references for the method, including Magnusson & Kligman 1969. This is of course the reference also given in OECD 406. - GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- An LLNA study was not performed because there is an existing reliable study for skin sensitisation using the Buehler test method. Furthermore, the LLNA test method is not considered to be suitable for substances that contain silicon.
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Not specified
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- not specified
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source:Epona Associates, LLC
- Females (if applicable) nulliparous and non-pregnant: [yes/no/not specified]
- Microbiological status of animals, when known:
- Age at study initiation: four to six weeks
- Weight at study initiation:300 - 372 grams
- Housing: No data available
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): No data available
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): No data available
- Acclimation period: No data available
- Indication of any skin lesions: No data available
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): No data available
- Humidity (%): No data available
- Air changes (per hr): No data available
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light):No data available
- IN-LIFE DATES: From: To:No data available - Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- physiological saline
- Concentration / amount:
INDUCTION
Intradermal: 0.25%
dermal: 70%
CHALLENGE
dermal: 70%- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- physiological saline
- Concentration / amount:
INDUCTION
Intradermal: 0.25%
dermal: 70%
CHALLENGE
dermal: 70%- Day(s)/duration:
- 24hrd
- Adequacy of challenge:
- not specified
- No. of animals per dose:
- test and vehicle control: 10/sex
positive control: 3/sex - Details on study design:
1st application: Induction 0.25 % intracutaneous
2nd application: Induction 70 % occlusive epicutaneous
3rd application: Challenge 70 % occlusive epicutaneous- Challenge controls:
- Not specified
- Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
70% saline solution- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
reactions: grade 1- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 70% saline
- No. with + reactions:
- 5
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
reactions: grade 1- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
70% saline- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
reactions: grade 1- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
70% in saline- No. with + reactions:
- 4
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
reactions: grade 1- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- Category 1B (indication of skin sensitising potential) based on GHS criteria
- Conclusions:
A generally well conducted, well reported, guinea-pig maximization test found that the hydrolysis products of 3-aminopropyl(triethoxy)silane (70% in saline) did not elicit a delayed contact hypersensitivity response in guinea pigs. Appropriate concurrent negative and positive compliance controls were included and the expected responses observed.- Executive summary:
In accordance with the test guideline 406 Acute skin sensitization test, the RA chemical 3 aminopropyltriethoxysilane ( CAS number: 919-30-2)was studied using a guinea pig (Guinea pig maximization test).
All animals gained weight and survived to study termination. No positive responses were observed at 24 hours or 48 hours in the test group receiving the test article at a 70% concentration in saline, that were greater than those in the vehicle control group. No responses were observed at any vehicle-treated site. The positive control animals induced and challenged with DNCB exhibited the anticipated responses at a challenge, indicating a reliable and valid test.
A generally well-conducted, well-reported, guinea-pig maximization test found that the hydrolysis products of 3-aminopropyl(triethoxy)silane (70% in saline) did not elicit a delayed contact hypersensitivity response in guinea pigs. Appropriate concurrent negative and positive compliance controls were included and the expected responses observed.Since the test article readily hydrolyzes in saline, the test was actually conducted on the hydrolysis products of the test material.
Appropriate concurrent negative and positive compliance controls were included and the expected responses were observed. Under the conditions of this study, the hydrolysis products of gamma-aminopropyltriethoxysilane did not elicit a delayed contact hypersensitivity response in
guinea pigs- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Remarks:
- Guinea pig maximization test
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- Not specified
- Reliability:
- 4 (not assignable)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- secondary literature
- Justification for type of information:
- Data was taken from secondary sources
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
According to SIAR, 2003- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Skin Sensitisation guideline OECD 406
- Principle of test: Skin senistisation test were carrierd out to determind the erythma and edema score, ny buhlers test
- Short description of test conditions: Erythma and Edema score were noted
- Parameters analysed / observed: - GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- Buehler test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
An LLNA study was not performed because there is an existing reliable study for skin sensitisation using the Buehler test method. Furthermore, the LLNA test method is not considered to be suitable for substances that contain silicon.- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Not specified
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- not specified
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Epona Associates, LLC
- Females (if applicable) nulliparous and non-pregnant: [yes/no/not specified] No data available
- Microbiological status of animals, when known:
- Age at study initiation: four weeks
- Weight at study initiation: 308 - 400 grams.
- Housing: No data available
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): No data available
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): No data available
- Acclimation period: No data available
- Indication of any skin lesions: No data available
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): No data available
- Humidity (%):No data available
- Air changes (per hr): No data available
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light):No data available
- IN-LIFE DATES: From: To: No data available - Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- peanut oil
- Concentration / amount:
- Induction 20 % occlusive epicutaneous
Challenge 5 % occlusive epicutaneous - Day(s)/duration:
- 7 days
- Adequacy of induction:
- not specified
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- peanut oil
- Concentration / amount:
induction: 20%
challenge: 5%- Day(s)/duration:
- Not specified
- Adequacy of challenge:
- not specified
- No. of animals per dose:
- test group: 10/sex
negative control: 5/sex
positive control: 3/sex - Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 3
- Exposure period: 6hrs
- Test groups: 10 males, 10 females
- Control group : vehicle: 5 males, 5 females; positive: 3 males, 3 females
- Frequency of applications: 7-days between applications
- Duration:
- Concentrations: test groups 20% TS in peanut oil; positive control 0.3% DNCB in 80% ethanol
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1
- Day(s) of challenge: challenge exposure 14 days following last induction
- Exposure period: 6hrs
- Test groups: 10 males, 10 females
- Control group: vehicle: 5 males, 5 females; positive: 3 males, 3 females
- Site: test group TS 5% left flank; vehicle control group TS 5% left flank, vehicle right flank; positive control group DNCB 0.02% left flank, 0.2% right flank
- Concentrations:test group 5% TS in peanut oil; vehicle control 5% TS in peanut oil; positive control 0.02 and 0.2% DNCB in acetone
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24 and 48h
OTHER: - Challenge controls:
- vehicle control group: 5/sex
- Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- 1-chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene (DNCB)
- Positive control results:
- The sensitization incidence index of 100% from tests with the know n sensitizer DNCB at 0.2% confirms the validity of the test method.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
Peanut oil- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Not specified
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 0.02%DNCB
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 6
- Clinical observations:
- Not specified
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 0.02% DNCB
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 6
- Clinical observations:
- Not specified
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 0.2% DNCB
- No. with + reactions:
- 6
- Total no. in group:
- 6
- Clinical observations:
- Not specified
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 7
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- slight or moderate erythema
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 3
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Slight erythema
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- other: Not classified
- Conclusions:
- The Buehler method in guinea pig (guinea pig skin sensitization) was reported to have induced a sensitization response (in 35%) when challenged with a 5% solution when a 20% concentration in peanut oil was applied. A negative and positive compliance control was employed concurrently.
- Executive summary:
In accordance with the test guideline 406 Acute skin sensitization test, the RA chemical 3 aminopropyltriethoxysilane (CAS number: 919-30-2)was studied using a guinea pig (Guinea pig maximization test).
There were no signs of systemic toxicity during the study. All animals gained weight during the study and there was no significant test -article-related differences in vehicle and test group mean body weight.
No positive responses were observed in the peanut oil control animals at either the vehicle or test article sites at the 24-hour grading. In the peanut oil control animals at the 48-hour grading, one animal exhibited a positive response at the test article site, a grade of one (1). Of the twenty animals induced with the test article at 20% and challenged at 5%, three animals were observed with a positive response of one (1) at the 24-hour grading, and three exhibited a positive response of one (1) and four exhibited a positive response of two (2) at the 48-hour grading. The positive control animals induced and challenged with DNCB exhibited the anticipated responses at the challenge, indicating a reliable and valid test. Hence the chemical can fall under the unclassified category as per the GHS classification
Referenceopen allclose all
No adverse skin reactions were noted at the test material or vehicle control sites of the test or control animals at the 24 or 48 h observations.
All animals gained weight and survived to study termination. No positive responses were observed at 24 hours or 48 hours in the test group receiving test article at a 70% concentration in saline, that were greater than those in the vehicle control group. No responses were observed at any vehicle treated site. The positive control animals induced and challenged with DNCB exhibited the anticipated responses at challenge, indicating a reliable and valid test.
GROUP | MATERIAL | INTERVAL | DERMAL SCORES* | SENSITIZATION INCIDENCE INDEX** | SEVERITY INDEX*** | ||||
0 | ± | 1 | 2 | 3 | |||||
Test | TS 5% | 24h | 14/20 | 3/20 | 3/20 | 0/20 | 0/20 | 3/20 | 0.2 |
48h | 4/20 | 9/20 | 3/20 | 4/20 | 0/20 | 7/20 | 0.8 | ||
Positive control | DNCB 0.2% | 24h | 0/6 | 0/6 | 1/6 | 3/6 | 2/6 | 6/6 | 2.2 |
48h | 0/6 | 0/6 | 1/6 | 3/6 | 2/6 | 6/6 | 2.2 | ||
DNCB 0.02% | 24h | 2/6 | 4/6 | 0/6 | 0/0 | 0/0 | 0/6 | 0.3 | |
48h | 0/6 | 5/6 | 1/6 | 0/0 | 0/0 | 1/6 | 0.6 | ||
Vehicle control | TS 5% | 24h | 9/10 | 1/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0.1 |
48h | 7/10 | 2/10 | 1/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 1/10 | 0.2 | ||
Peanut oil | 24h | 10/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0 | |
48h | 10/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0/10 | 0 |
Table 1: Incidence of dermal response to challenge dosing
*Skin reactions were graded:
0 no reaction or very slight dispersed redness. No swelling.
± slight patchy erythema (equates to a score of 0.5)
1 slight confluent or moderately patchy erythema
2 moderate erythema
3 severe erythema with or without edema
** Sensitization incidence index: number of animals with dermal scores greater than those of the negative control group at 24h or 48h, divided by the number of animals tested. Grades of 1 or greater are considered indicative of sensitization in the positive control group.
There were no signs of systemic toxicity during the study. All animals gained weight during the study and there was no significant test -article-related differences in vehicle and test group mean body weight.
No positive responses were observed in the peanut oil control animals at either the vehicle or test article sites at the 24-hour grading. In the peanut oil control animals at the 48-hour grading one animal exhibited a positive response at the test article site, a grade of one (1). Of the twenty animals induced with the test article at 20% and challenged at 5%, three animals were observed with a positive response of one (1) at the 24-hour grading, and three exhibited a positive response of one (1) and four exhibited a positive response of two (2) at the 48-hour grading. The positive control animals induced and challenged with DNCB exhibited the anticipated responses at the challenge, indicating a reliable and valid test.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
Study no 01:
In accordance with the test guideline 406 Acute skin sensitization test, the RA chemical 3 aminopropyltriethoxysilane (CAS number: 919-30-2)was studied using a guinea pig (Guinea pig maximization test). There were no signs of systemic toxicity during the study. All animals gained weight during the study and there was no significant test -article-related differences in vehicle and test group mean body weight.No positive responses were observed in the peanut oil control animals at either the vehicle or test article sites at the 24-hour grading. In the peanut oil control animals at the 48-hour grading, one animal exhibited a positive response at the test article site, a grade of one (1). Of the twenty animals induced with the test article at 20% and challenged at 5%, three animals were observed with a positive response of one (1) at the 24-hour grading, and three exhibited a positive response of one (1) and four exhibited a positive response of two (2) at the 48-hour grading. The positive control animals induced and challenged with DNCB exhibited the anticipated responses at the challenge, indicating a reliable and valid test. Hence the chemical can fall under the unclassified category as per the GHS classification.
Study no 02:In accordance with the test guideline 406 Acute skin sensitization test, the RA chemical 3 aminopropyltriethoxysilane ( CAS number: 919-30-2)was studied using a guinea pig (Guinea pig maximization test). All animals gained weight and survived to study termination. No positive responses were observed at 24 hours or 48 hours in the test group receiving the test article at a 70% concentration in saline, that were greater than those in the vehicle control group. No responses were observed at any vehicle-treated site. The positive control animals induced and challenged with DNCB exhibited the anticipated responses at a challenge, indicating a reliable and valid test. A generally well-conducted, well-reported, guinea-pig maximization test found that the hydrolysis products of 3-aminopropyl(triethoxy)silane (70% in saline) did not elicit a delayed contact hypersensitivity response in guinea pigs. Appropriate concurrent negative and positive compliance controls were included and the expected responses were observed. Since the test article readily hydrolyzes in saline, the test was actually conducted on the hydrolysis products of the test material.
Appropriate concurrent negative and positive compliance controls were included and the expected responses were observed. Under the conditions of this study, the hydrolysis products of gamma-aminopropyltriethoxysilane did not elicit a delayed contact hypersensitivity response in guinea pigs.
Study no 03:In accordance with the test guideline 406 Acute skin sensitization test, the RA chemical 3 aminopropyltriethoxysilane ( CAS number: 919-30-2)was studied using a guinea pig (Guinea pig maximization test).In the induction group, the test sample was applied through intradermal and epicutaneous routes at a concentration range of Induction .5 % intracutaneous, Induction 50 % open epicutaneous, and Challenge 50 % open epicutaneous. using water as a vehicle. After 24h and 48 hrs of observation in the test chemical group at 50% aqueous group skin sensations were not observed, similar to the negative test group No adverse skin reactions were noted at the test material or vehicle control sites of the test or control animals at the 24 or 48 h observations.
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the all the above studies of the RA chemical, it may conclude that the given test chemical which has the same structure as that of RA can belong to the unclassified category as per CLP criteria of GHS classification
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.