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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Genetic toxicity in vitro

Description of key information

The weight of evidence suggests that KTG is not genotoxic.

Link to relevant study records

Referenceopen allclose all

Endpoint:
in vitro gene mutation study in bacteria
Type of information:
read-across based on grouping of substances (category approach)
Adequacy of study:
key study
Justification for type of information:
REPORTING FORMAT FOR THE CATEGORY APPROACH

1. HYPOTHESIS FOR THE CATEGORY APPROACH
This scenario covers the category approach for which the hypothesis is based on transformation to a common compound. For the REACH information requirement under consideration, the effects obtained in studies conducted with different source substances are used to predict the effects that would be observed in a study with the target substance if it were to be conducted. The same type of effect is observed for the different source substances; this may include absence of effects for every member of the category. No relevant differences in strengths of effect are observed for several source substances.
There are no relevant variations in properties among source substances and the same potency is predicted for all target substances. This corresponds to Scenario 5 of the RAAF (ECHA, 2017). The substances ATG, MEATG, KTG, CaTG, and NaTG are different inorganic salts of a common acid, thioglycolic acid (TGA; synonym: 2-mercaptoacetic acid). They dissociate rapidly in aqueous media to the common thioglycolate anion and to their different counter ions. The water solubility of all category members is high.
This approach serves to use existing data on aquatic toxicity endpoints for substances in this category.
It can be predicted with high confidence that the target substances will display the same mode of action and lead to the same type and strength of effects as observed with the source substances.


2. CATEGORY APPROACH JUSTIFICATION
For details, refer to Justification for read-across attached to Iuclid section 13
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across: supporting information
Target gene:
Histidine reversion
Key result
Species / strain:
S. typhimurium TA 98
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
negative
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
cytotoxicity
Remarks:
btw. 1000 - 5000µg/plate
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
not examined
Positive controls validity:
valid
Key result
Species / strain:
S. typhimurium TA 100
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
negative
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
cytotoxicity
Remarks:
1000 - 5000µg/plate
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
not examined
Positive controls validity:
valid
Key result
Species / strain:
S. typhimurium TA 102
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
negative
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
cytotoxicity
Remarks:
1000 - 5000µg/plate
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
not examined
Positive controls validity:
valid
Key result
Species / strain:
S. typhimurium TA 1535
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
negative
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
cytotoxicity
Remarks:
1000 - 5000µg/plate
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
not examined
Positive controls validity:
valid
Key result
Species / strain:
S. typhimurium TA 1537
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
negative
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
cytotoxicity
Remarks:
1000 - 5000 µg/plate
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
not examined
Positive controls validity:
valid
Conclusions:
In analogy to ATG and NaTG, KTG is considered non-mutagenic in bacteria.
Endpoint:
in vitro gene mutation study in mammalian cells
Type of information:
read-across based on grouping of substances (category approach)
Adequacy of study:
key study
Justification for type of information:
see attached justification
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across: supporting information
Key result
Species / strain:
mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
negative
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
other: 4-h experiment (+/-S9): > 1600 µg/ml / 24-h experiment (-S9): >= 800 µg/ml
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
not examined
Positive controls validity:
valid
Remarks on result:
other: all strains/cell types tested
Remarks:
Migrated from field 'Test system'.
Conclusions:
By analogy to ATG, KTG is considered non-mutagenic in mammalian cells.
Endpoint:
in vitro cytogenicity / chromosome aberration study in mammalian cells
Remarks:
Type of genotoxicity: chromosome aberration
Type of information:
read-across based on grouping of substances (category approach)
Adequacy of study:
key study
Justification for type of information:
see attached justification
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across: supporting information
Key result
Species / strain:
lymphocytes: human
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
negative
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
other: With S9 : 1000 µg/ml. Without S9 : 300 µg/ml
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
not examined
Positive controls validity:
valid
Remarks on result:
other: strain/cell type: Human lymphocytes
Remarks:
Migrated from field 'Test system'.
Conclusions:
By analogy to TGA, KTG is considered non-clastogenic.
Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (negative)

Genetic toxicity in vivo

Description of key information

The weight of evidence suggests that KTG is not genotoxic.

Link to relevant study records
Reference
Endpoint:
in vivo mammalian somatic cell study: cytogenicity / erythrocyte micronucleus
Type of information:
read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
Adequacy of study:
supporting study
Justification for type of information:
see attached justification
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across: supporting information
Key result
Sex:
male/female
Genotoxicity:
negative
Toxicity:
yes
Remarks:
clinical signs
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Negative controls validity:
not examined
Positive controls validity:
valid
Conclusions:
By analogy to NaTG, KTG is considered non-mutagenic in vivo.
Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (negative)

Additional information

Additional information from genetic toxicity in vivo:

Several in vitro and in vivo genotoxicity studies were performed with thioglycolic acid and its salts. The conducted genotoxicity studies on thioglycolic acid or its salts described in this chapter can be bridged to each other, because in aquous solutions only the organic thioglycolate anion may have the potential to cause genotoxic effects in vitro or in vivo. All genotoxicity studies conducted to date have either negative results or are of douptful significance. Therefore, the weight of evidence suggests that thioglycolic acid and its salts are non-genotoxic.

Justification for classification or non-classification

Conclusive, but not sufficient for classification.