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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 814-602-3 | CAS number: 190454-06-9
- 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
Skin sensitisation
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 29 June 2018 to 10 August 2018
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 018
- Report date:
- 2018
Materials and methods
Test guidelineopen allclose all
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 1992
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.6 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 2008
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 2003
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: JMAFF Guidelines
- Version / remarks:
- 2000
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- Based on the results of the in vitro test battery, it was considered that there was need to perform an in vivo skin sensitisation study. The guinea pig Maximisation test was selected since the test material is a fatty acid and the Local Lymph Node Assay as preferred alternative has shown to provide false positive results for fatty acids.
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Fatty Acids, C16-18 and C18-unsatd., diesters with 2-(3-hydroxypropyl)-6-[(3-hydroxypropyl)amino]-1H-benz[de]isoquinoline-1,3(2H)-dione)
- EC Number:
- 814-602-3
- Cas Number:
- 190454-06-9
- Molecular formula:
- Variable
- IUPAC Name:
- Fatty Acids, C16-18 and C18-unsatd., diesters with 2-(3-hydroxypropyl)-6-[(3-hydroxypropyl)amino]-1H-benz[de]isoquinoline-1,3(2H)-dione)
- Test material form:
- liquid
- Details on test material:
- - Appearance: Amber liquid
Constituent 1
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Females nulliparous and non-pregnant: yes
- Age at study initiation: approximately 5 weeks old
- Weight at study initiation: 296 to 353 g
- Housing: On arrival and following assignment to the study, animals were group housed (up to 5 animals of the same sex and same dosing group together) in labelled cages (74 cm x 54 cm x 25 cm height) containing sterilised sawdust as bedding material equipped with water bottles.
- For psychological/environmental enrichment, animals were provided with shelters except when interrupted by study procedures/activities.
- Diet: Complete maintenance diet for guinea pigs was provided ad libitum, except during designated procedures. In addition, hay was provided at least twice a week.
- Water: ad libitum
- Acclimation period: at least 5 days
- Indication of any skin lesions: Before the initiation of dosing, a health inspection was performed and any assigned animal considered unsuitable for use in the study were replaced by alternate animals obtained from the same shipment and maintained under the same environmental conditions.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature: 22-24 °C
- Humidity: 39-67 %
- Air changes: Ten or more air changes per hour with 100 % fresh air (no air recirculation)
- Photoperiod: 12-hour light/12-hour dark cycle was maintained
Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Induction
- Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- corn oil
- Concentration / amount:
- Intradermal: 0.1 mL of the test material at 50 %
Epicutaneous: 0.5 mL of 100 % test material - Day(s)/duration:
- Intradermal on Day 1 and epicutaneous on Day 8 for 48 hours
- Adequacy of induction:
- non-irritant substance, but skin pre-treated with 10% SDS
Challenge
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.1 mL of 100 % test material
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 21 for 24 hours
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No. of animals per dose:
- 10 females in the experimental group and 5 females in the control group.
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
- A preliminary irritation study was conducted in order to select test material concentrations to be used in the main study. The selection of concentrations was based on the following criteria: the concentrations are well-tolerated systemically by the animals, for the induction exposures: the highest possible concentration that produced mild to moderate irritation (grades 2 - 3) and for challenge exposure: the maximum non-irritant concentration.
- A series of test material concentrations were tested. Practical feasibility of administration determined the highest starting-concentration for each route. The starting- and subsequent concentrations were taken from the series: 100 (undiluted), 50, 20, 10, 5, 2 and 1 %.
- The test system and procedures were identical to those used during the main study, unless otherwise specified. The four animals selected were 5 weeks old. No body weights were determined.
- Intradermal injections: A series of three test material concentrations was tested (the undiluted test material could not be dosed intradermally). Two animals received one or two different concentrations in duplicate (0.1 mL/site) in the clipped scapular region. The injection sites were assessed for irritation 24 and 48 hours after treatment.
- Epidermal application: A series of four test material concentrations was tested, the highest concentration being the maximum concentration that could technically be applied. Two different concentrations were applied (0.5 mL each or an equivalent amount when dosed with a spatula) per animal to the clipped flank, using Metalline patches (2x3 cm) mounted on Medical tape which were held in place with Micropore tape and subsequently Coban elastic bandage. The animals receiving intradermal injections were treated with the lowest concentrations and two other animals with the highest concentrations. After 24 hours, the dressing was removed and the skin cleaned of residual test material using vehiculum. The treated skin areas were assessed for irritation 24 and 48 hours after removal of the dressings.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- Day 1: The scapular region was clipped and three pairs of intradermal injections (0.1 mL/site) were made in this area as follows:
A) A 1:1 w/w mixture of Freunds' Complete Adjuvant with water for injection.
B) The test material at a 50 % concentration.
C) A 1:1 w/w mixture of the test material, at twice the concentration used in (B) and Freunds' Complete Adjuvant.
Note: One of each pair was on each side of the midline and from cranial A) to caudal C).
- Day 3: The dermal reactions caused by the intradermal injections were assessed for irritation.
- Day 7: The scapular area between the injection sites was clipped and subsequently rubbed with 10 % sodium-dodecyl-sulphate in vaseline using a spatula. This concentration of SDS provokes a mild inflammatory reaction.
- Day 8: The 10 % SDS treated area between the injection sites was treated with 0.5 mL or an equivalent amount when dosed with a spatula of a 100 % test material concentration using a Metalline patch (2x3 cm) mounted on Medical tape, which was held in place with Micropore tape and subsequently Coban elastic bandage. The dressing was removed after 48 hours exposure, the skin cleaned of residual test material using vehicle and the dermal reactions caused by the epidermal exposure were assessed for irritation.
- Control group: The control animals were treated as described for the experimental animals except that, instead of the test material, the vehicle was administered.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- Day 21: One flank of all animals was clipped and treated by epidermal application of a 100 % test material concentration and the vehicle (0.1 mL each or an equivalent amount when dosed with a spatula, using Patch Test Plasters. The patches were held in place with Micropore tape and subsequently Coban elastic bandage. The dressing was removed after 24 hours exposure and the skin cleaned of residual test material and vehicle using vehicle. The treated sites were assessed for challenge reactions 24 and 48 hours after removal of the dressing. After termination, animals were sacrificed using isoflurane and an intracardial injection of Euthasol® 20 %.
OBSERVATIONS AND MEASUREMENTS
- Mortality/Moribundity Checks: Throughout the study, animals were observed for general health/mortality and moribundity twice daily, in the morning and at the end of the working day. Animals were not removed from cage during observation, unless necessary for identification or confirmation of possible findings.
- Toxicity: Observations for toxicity were performed once daily throughout the study.
- Body Weights: Animals were weighed individually on Day 1 (pre-dose) and at termination of the study.
- Irritation: Irritation observations were performed as described in according to the following numerical scoring system:
Grading Irritation Reactions:
Erythema and eschar formation:
No erythema = 0
Slight erythema (barely perceptible) = 1
Well-defined erythema = 2
Moderate erythema = 3
Severe erythema (beet redness) to slight eschar formation (injuries in depth) = 4
Oedema formation:
No oedema = 0
Slight oedema (barely perceptible) = 1
Well-defined oedema (edges of area well-defined by definite raising) = 2
Moderate oedema (raised approximately 1 millimetre) = 3
Severe oedema (raised more than 1 millimetre and extending beyond the area of exposure) = 4
* Intradermal reactions will be scored for erythema only or, if necrosis is present, the diameter of necrosis.
Grading Challenge Reactions:
No visible change = 0
Discrete or patchy erythema = 1
Moderate and confluent erythema = 2
Moderate erythema and swelling = 3
Intense erythema and swelling = 4
- Terminal Procedures: No necropsy for gross macroscopic examination was performed according to study plan.
OTHER:
TEST MATERIAL FORMULTIONS
- Test material dosing formulations (w/w) were homogenised to visually acceptable levels at appropriate concentrations to meet dose level requirements.
- The dosing formulations were kept at room temperature until dosing. The dosing formulations and vehicle were stirred until and during dosing.
- No adjustment was made for specific gravity of the vehicle. No correction was made for the purity/composition of the test material.
- Any residual volumes were discarded. - Challenge controls:
- Challenge animals were treated with the vehicle alone in the induction phase but the test material in the challenge phase.
- Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- Alpha- Hexylcinnamaldehyde
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- The skin reactions observed in all experimental animals in response to the 50 % positive control substance concentration in the challenge phase were considered indicative of sensitisation, based on the absence of any response in the control animals. These results lead to a sensitisation rate of 100 percent to the 50 % concentration. From these results, it was concluded that the female guinea pig of the Dunkin Hartley strain is an appropriate animal model for the performance of studies designed to evaluate the sensitising potential of a test material in a Maximisation type of test.
In vivo (non-LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 100 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 100 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 100 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 100 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 50 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 10
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 50%
- No. with + reactions:
- 10
- Total no. in group:
- 10
Any other information on results incl. tables
Preliminary Irritation Study
- Staining by the test material prevented scoring for erythema at the intradermal injection sites. As no signs of necrosis were present, a 50 % concentration was selected for the intradermal induction in the main study. A 100 % concentration was selected for the epidermal induction exposure.
- No signs of irritation were observed to the highest test material concentration epidermally tested. Therefore, the test site of all animals of the main study were treated with 10 % SDS approximately 24 hours before the epidermal induction, to provoke a mild inflammatory reaction.
- A 100% test material concentration was selected for the challenge phase.
Main study
- Induction Phase: The reactions noted in the experimental and control animals after the epidermal induction exposure were considered to be enhanced by the SDS treatment.
- Challenge Phase: No skin reactions were evident after the challenge exposure in the experimental and control animals. Yellow staining was observed at the test material treated skin sites, 24 and 48 hours after challenge. This staining did not hamper the scoring of the skin reactions.
- Toxicity / Mortality: No mortality occurred and no symptoms of systemic toxicity were observed in the animals of the main study.
- Body Weights: Body weights and body weight gain of experimental animals remained in the same range as controls over the study period.
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- other: Not classified in accordance with EU criteria
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of this study, the test material did not cause skin hypersensitivity in the guinea pig, since no responses were observed in the experimental animals in response to a 100 % test material concentration in the challenge phase. This result indicates a sensitisation rate of 0 per cent.
- Executive summary:
The skin sensitisation potential of the test material was investigated in accordance with the standardised guidelines OECD 406, EU Method B.6, OPPTS 870.2600 and JMAFF Guidelines, under GLP conditions.
The objective of the study was to evaluate whether the test material induces contact hypersensitivity in guinea pigs after intradermal and epidermal exposure.
Test material concentrations selected for the main study were based on the results of a preliminary study.
In the main study, ten experimental animals were intradermally injected with a 50 % concentration and epidermally exposed to a 100 % concentration. Five control animals were similarly treated, but with vehicle alone (corn oil). Approximately 24 hours before the epidermal induction exposure all animals were treated with 10 % SDS.
Two weeks after the epidermal application all animals were epidermally challenged with a 100 % test material concentration and the vehicle.
No skin reactions were evident after the challenge exposure in the experimental and control animals.
Under the conditions of this study, the test material did not cause skin hypersensitivity in the guinea pig, since no responses were observed in the experimental animals in response to a 100 % test material concentration in the challenge phase. This result indicates a sensitisation rate of 0 per cent.
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.