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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Toxicological information

Carcinogenicity

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
carcinogenicity
Remarks:
subcutaneous
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
weight of evidence
Reliability:
4 (not assignable)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
other: Documentation insufficient for assessment

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
1981

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
no guideline followed
GLP compliance:
not specified

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
Dimethylsulphamoyl chloride
EC Number:
236-412-4
EC Name:
Dimethylsulphamoyl chloride
Cas Number:
13360-57-1
Molecular formula:
C2H6ClNO2S
IUPAC Name:
N,N-dimethylsulfamoyl chloride

Test animals

Species:
rat
Strain:
Wistar
Sex:
male/female

Administration / exposure

Route of administration:
subcutaneous
Vehicle:
peanut oil
Analytical verification of doses or concentrations:
no
Post exposure period:
until natural death, moribound animals were sacrificed.
Doses / concentrations
Remarks:
Doses / Concentrations:

Basis:
nominal conc.
No. of animals per sex per dose:
25 male and 25 female animals per dose.
10 and 100 mg/kg bw
Control animals:
yes, concurrent vehicle

Results and discussion

Any other information on results incl. tables

No differences in state and behaviour between treated and control animals.

No differences in body weight development between treated and control animals.

Survival time in treated animals significantly and dose related shortend in treated animals.

Tumors - fibrosarcoma - at the treatment site were developed in a higher rate and earlier as in control animals:

10 mg/kg : male       22 treated vs. 4 control

female     11 treated vs. 1 control                     of 25 each

100 mg/kg: male 22 treated vs. 4 control

female 17 treated vs. 1 control of 25 each

Appearance of the tumors from week 30 on in treated animals vs. week 95 in control animals.

Number and distribution of other malign and benign tumors did not show a treatment related increase.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Conclusions:
A clear local cancerogenic effect at the application site at higher dosage.