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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Endpoint:
basic toxicokinetics in vitro / ex vivo
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
29 Aug - 30 Nov 2012
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
comparable to guideline study with acceptable restrictions

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
2012
Report date:
2012

Materials and methods

Objective of study:
other: hydrolysis in intestinal fluid simulant
Test guideline
Qualifier:
equivalent or similar to guideline
Guideline:
other: EFSA Note for Guidance for Food Contact Materials Annex 1 to Chapter III MEASUREMENT OF HYDROLYSIS OF PLASTICS MONOMERS AND ADDITIVES IN DIGESTIVE FLUID SIMULANTS
Deviations:
yes
Remarks:
no hydrolysis test in saliva and gastric juice simulants, limited details in reporting
GLP compliance:
not specified

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
Propane-1,2,3-triyl 3,5,5-trimethylhexanoate
EC Number:
260-257-1
EC Name:
Propane-1,2,3-triyl 3,5,5-trimethylhexanoate
Cas Number:
56554-53-1
Molecular formula:
C30H56O6
IUPAC Name:
1,3-bis[(3,5,5-trimethylhexanoyl)oxy]propan-2-yl 3,5,5-trimethylhexanoate
Radiolabelling:
no

Test animals

Species:
other: not specified; presumably pig in accordance with the test method used
Strain:
not specified
Sex:
not specified
Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
TEST DIGESTIVE SIMULANTS
INTESTINAL FLUID SIMULANT
- Description: intestinal fluid simulant according to “Note of Guidance for Food Contact Materials”, no further details given.

Administration / exposure

Route of administration:
other: mixing
Vehicle:
other: acetonitrile
Details on exposure:
HYDROLYSIS WITH INTESTINAL-FLUID SIMULANT:
A triplicate was performed. For the hydrolysis investigation the esters were dissolved in acetonitrile. These solutions were added to the intestinal-fluid simulant tempered to 37 °C. The concentration of acetonitrile in the reaction mixture was about 0.1%. Samples were taken after 0, 1, 2 and 4 hours.
Duration and frequency of treatment / exposure:
0, 1, 2 and 4 h
Doses / concentrations
Dose / conc.:
24.34 ppm
No. of animals per sex per dose / concentration:
triplicate determinations
Control animals:
no
Details on dosing and sampling:
DETERMINATION OF HYDROLYSIS PRODUCTS
- Principle: Following incubation, a naphthalene solution in acetone was added as an internal standard to the samples and the enzyme was precipitated by the addition of ice-cold acetone. After filtration the acetone was evaporated. The aqueous solutions were acidified with 0.1 M hydrochloric acid (pH 1.2) and were extracted three times with dichloromethane. After addition of an alkane standard (tridecane) and derivatization with N-Methyl-N-(trimethylsilyl) trifluoroacetamide (MSTFA) at 60°C for one hour the concentrated dichloromethane solutions were analysed by gas chromatography coupled with a mass spectrometer (GC/MS). Quantification of the esters and the hydrolysis products was performed specifically by external calibration curves.
- Recovery assays: A duplicate of three different concentrations of the acid (hydrolysis product) were performed. For the recovery investigations the acid was dissolved in acetonitrile. These solutions were added to the intestinal-fluid simulant tempered to 37°C. After 4 hours a naphthalene solution in acetone was added as an internal standard to the samples and the enzyme was precipitated by the addition of ice-cold acetone. Work-up and quantification was performed as described above.
Recovery of the ester was determined using a hydrolysis sample analogue to the "0 hour" assay.
Statistics:
Mean values of triplicate determinations were calculated.

Results and discussion

Main ADME results
Type:
other: ester hydrolysis in intestinal fluid simulant
Results:
19, 23.3 and 29.2% after 1, 2 and 4 h, respectively.

Toxicokinetic / pharmacokinetic studies

Details on absorption:
Not applicable
Details on distribution in tissues:
Not applicable
Details on excretion:
Not applicable

Metabolite characterisation studies

Metabolites identified:
yes
Details on metabolites:
The following esters of glycerol were quantitatively determined (in ppm) after 0, 1, 2 and 4 h hydrolysis in intestinal fluid simulant, respectively:
Diester with 3,5,5-trimethylhexanoic acid (sum of two stereoisomers): 0.96, 1.07, 1.10 and 1.13 ppm
Triester with 3,5,5-trimethylhexanoic acid (parent substance): 24.34, 19.72, 18.67 and 17.22 ppm
(No monoester was detected)

The following free fatty acid was quantitatively determined (in ppm) after 0, 1, 2 and 4 h hydrolysis in intestinal fluid simulant, respectively:
3,5,5-trimethylhexanoic acid: 0.35, 1.90, 3.07 and 4.56 ppm

Any other information on results incl. tables

Table 1. Hydrolysis of Propane-1,2,3-triyl-3,5,5-trimethylhexanoate with intestinal-fluid simulant

Contact time (h)

Results (1)

Triester (ppm)

Triester (%)

Diester (ppm) (2)

Acid (ppm)

0

24.34

100.0

0.96

0.35

1

19.72

81.0

1.07

1.90

2

18.67

76.7

1.10

3.07

4

17.22

70.8

1.13

4.56

 

(1) No Monoester was detected.

(2) Sum of two stereo isomers

 

Table 2. Mass balance of the ester hydrolysis

Contact time (h)

Results (1)

Triester (µmol)

Diester (µmol)

Acid (µmol) (calc.) (1)

Acid (µmol) (exp.)

0

0.233

0.013

0.000

0.011

1

0.192

0.014

0.094

0.060

2

0.182

0.015

0.124

0.097

4

0.168

0.015

0.165

0.144

 

(1) Amount of diester is considered; one ester reacts to three acids.

 

Table 3. Recoveries of ester and acid

Results

ppm (calc.)

ppm (exp.)

Recovery (%)

Ester

23.91

28.32

118.5

Acid

9.86

10.89

110.4

21.92

25.57

116.7

38.36

43.67

113.8

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:
Interpretation of results: bioaccumulation potential cannot be judged based on study results