Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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.
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: 202-627-7 | CAS number: 98-01-1
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
Animal data
Joseph (2003d) reported a GLP compliant guinea pig maximization test (according to OECD 406) on furfural (99.62% purity). The induction phase involved intradermal injections of 5% furfural in propylene glycol; then furfural was applied undiluted for the subsequent topical induction. At challenge, furfural was applied at a concentration of 25% in distilled water. Positive erythema skin reactions were observed in 3/20 treated animals 24 hours after challenge and in 2/20 after 48 hours. No positive responses were seen in controls animals. The sensitivity of the assay was confirmed using the positive control substance, 2-mercaptobenzothiazole. Furfural was not a skin sensitiser in this maximisation assay.
This study is supported by a Buehler assay reported by Kern (1997). This was a GLP and guideline compliant study; although no negative controls were used at induction phase. A group of 10 male and 10 female Hartley guinea pigs received undiluted furfural for both the induction and challenge phases. Very slight skin reactions were recorded at challenge but the reaction in test animals was not increased over that of control. Overall furfural was not a skin sensitiser in this assay.
Human data
Despite opportunities for skin exposure, there are no reliable reported cases of allergic contact dermatitis in humans. In a specific study involving regular medical exminations of employees at the Jugotanin plant in Slovenia (Medicinski Center, 1989), none of the employees had any skin changes which were considered to have been a consequence of daily contact with furfural.
Conclusion: Two GLP compliant guideline guinea pig assays indicate furfural does not have skin sensitising potential. Despite opportunities for skin exposure, there are no reported cases of allergic contact dermatitis in humans.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
There is no reported evidence of respiratory tract sensitisation in use.
Justification for classification or non-classification
Furfural is concluded not to warrant classification CLP for potential skin or respiratory 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.
