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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 500-151-7 | CAS number: 61791-12-6 1 - 6.5 moles ethoxylated
- 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
The skin sensitization potential of test chemical was assessed in various experimental studies conducted on guinea pigs. Based on the available data for the target and supporting studies, it can be concluded that the test chemical is unable to cause skin sensitization and thus can be considered as not sensitizing. Comparing the above annotations with the criteria of CLP regulation, it can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
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
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- data from handbook or collection of data
- Justification for type of information:
- data is from peer reviewed journals
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: Guinea pig maximization test
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Guinea pig maximization test was performed to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- Currently no LLNA study is available for assessment. The Guinea Pig Maximization Test (GPMT) has been carried out as an animal test to predict human sensitization for over a decade and is recommended by international test guidelines such as OECD.
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: IffaCredo, l'Arbresle, France
- Weight at study initiation: 300 to 400 g
The guinea pigs were maintained under standard test conditions - Route:
- intradermal
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- two intradermal injections of Freund's complete adjuvant
10 repeated intradermal applications of the substance (0.5 ml per animal) - Day(s)/duration:
- no data available
- Adequacy of induction:
- not specified
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.5 ml
- Day(s)/duration:
- 48 h
- Adequacy of induction:
- not specified
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.5ml
- Day(s)/duration:
- 48 hours
- Adequacy of challenge:
- other: guineapigs were challenged on the abdomen, using the maximum dose which had not caused any orthoergic skin reaction in preliminary studies
- No. of animals per dose:
- Groups of 10 male and female guinea pigs.
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS: no data available
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
Intradermal exposure
- No. of exposures: 10
- Exposure period: no data available
- Test groups: 10
- Control group: no data available
- Site: back
- Frequency of applications: 2 intradermal injections of FCA, 10 repeated intradermal applications of the substance (0.5 ml per animal)
- Duration: 48 hours
- Concentrations: 2 intradermal injections of FCA, 10 repeated intradermal applications of the substance (0.5 ml per animal)
Epicutaneous, Occlusive exposure
- No. of exposures: single
- Exposure period: no data available
- Test groups: 10
- Control group: no data available
- Site: back
- Frequency of applications: single
- Duration: 48 hours
- Concentrations: 0.5 ml
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: single
- Day(s) of challenge:
- Exposure period: no data available
- Test groups: 10
- Control group:
- Site: abdomen
- Concentrations: Guineapigs were challenged on the abdomen, using the maximum dose which had not caused any orthoergic skin reaction in preliminary studies, 0.5 ml
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 48 hours
OTHER: The macroscopic cutaneous response was evaluated, according to a classical scale for erythematous and oedematous lesions (Draize, Woodgard and Calvery, 1944). The macroscopic
examination was negative (no allergy) when the score was equal to or less than the score obtained following the first intradermal application. Otherwise, the examination was considered doubtful and a histological examination was undertaken to obtain specific evidence of an allergic reaction, such as skin infiltration with lymphocytes and plasmocytes. - Challenge controls:
- no data available
- Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.5 ml
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- The test chemical was found to be deviod of sensitizing capacity
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not sensitizing
- Conclusions:
- The test chemical was found to be deviod of sensitizing capacity 48 hours after challenge exposure.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing to skin. - Executive summary:
Guinea pig maximization test was performed to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical.
Groups of 10 male and female young adult Dunkin Hartley guinea pigs were used for the study.All animals were submitted to an intradermal sensitization test, performed with two intradermal injections of Freund's complete adjuvant.
During the induction period, 10 repeated intradermal applications of the substance (0.5 ml per animal) were performed on the skin on the back of the guineapigs. An occlusive bandage was applied for 48 h. After a 12-day rest period, guineapigs were challenged on the abdomen, using the maximum dose which had not caused any orthoergic skin reaction in preliminary studies. Doses per animal used for challenge were 0.5 ml for the test chemical. This dose was the maxima which did not cause any orthoergic response in preliminary studies.
Fortyeight hours later, the macroscopic cutaneous response was evaluated according to a classical scale for erythematous and oidematous lesions.The macroscopic examination was negative (no allergy) when the score was equal to or less than the score obtained following the first intradermal application, otherwise the score was considered as doubtful and a histological examination was performed to obtain the specific evidence of skin sensitization.
The test chemical was found to be deviod of sensitizing capacity 48 hours after challenge exposure.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing to skin.
Reference
Table: Skin-sensitizing potential of Althesin and its constituents in guinea pigs. Doses per animal used for challenge were 0.5 ml for the test chemical.
This dose was the maxima which did not cause any orthoergic response in preliminary studies
Substance |
Macroscopic examination (% doubtful) |
Histological examination (% positive) |
Conclusion |
Test chemical |
|
|
|
Female |
50 |
0 |
Not sensitizing |
Male |
60 |
0 |
Not sensitizing |
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
Various studies were performed on guinea pigs to assess the dermal sensitization potential of Test chemical. The studies are summarized as follows:
The Guinea pig maximization test was performed to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical. Groups of 10 male and female young adult Dunkin Hartley guinea pigs were used for the study. All animals were submitted to an intradermal sensitization test, performed with two intradermal injections of Freund's complete adjuvant. During the induction period, 10 repeated intradermal applications of the substance (0.5 ml per animal) were performed on the skin on the back of the guinea pigs. An occlusive bandage was applied for 48 h. After a 12-day rest period, guinea pigs were challenged on the abdomen, using the maximum dose which had not caused any orthoergic skin reaction in preliminary studies. Doses per animal used for challenge were 0.5 ml for the test chemical. This dose was the maxima which did not cause any orthoergic response in preliminary studies. Fortyeight hours later, the macroscopic cutaneous response was evaluated according to a classical scale for erythematous and edematous lesions. The macroscopic examination was negative (no allergy) when the score was equal to or less than the score obtained following the first intradermal application, otherwise the score was considered as doubtful and a histological examination was performed to obtain the specific evidence of skin sensitization. The test chemical was observed to be devoid of sensitizing capacity 48 hours after challenge exposure. Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing to skin.
The above results was supported by a sub-cutaneous skin sensitization study which carried out to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical. During the study, 10 daily injections wi th 0.1% test chemical (1*0.05 mL; 9*0 .1 mL ) were administered to guinea pigs (number not specified ) on their backs. After a rest period of 13 days, the guinea pigs were challenged with 0.05 ml of 0.1% test chemical injection on the neck. The treated sites were observed for signs of irritation and sensitization through out the study period. Reddening occurred around the injection sites during induction ,but no sign of sensitization was present. Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing to skin when exposed sub-cutaneously.
The above results were further supported by another maximization study conducted to assess the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical. The flanks of 10 guinea pigs were shaved, degreased with ether, and 50% test chemical was applied to the left flank of each animal(painted 3 times sequentially with a saturated cotton swab) for 10 consecutive days. The right flank were left untreated and served as control. After a rest period of 12 days, 5% test chemical in acetone was applied to the right flank (after degreasing with ether). The skin was observed for signs of irritation after 12 hours. A control group of 3 guinea pigs was untreated during the induction phase of the experiment but was given a single application of 5% test chemical. Slight reddening of the skin was observed during the induction phase but no signs of irritation were observed after the challenge exposure. Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing to skin.
All these studies lead to a conclusion that test chemical is indeed not sensitizing to skin. Hence, comparing the above annotations with the criteria of CLP regulation, Test chemical can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
The skin sensitization potential of test substance was observed in various experimental studies. From the results obtained from these studies it is concluded that the chemical is not likely to cause skin sensitization and hence can be classified as non-skin sensitizer.
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.