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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: - | CAS number: -
- 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 test substance showed no evidence for sensitizing properties in guinea pigs.
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
- Study period:
- From 22 July 2014 (allocation of the animals to the preliminary phase) to 15 January 2015 (termination of the second main phase)
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Remarks:
- The potential of the test item, Reactive Brown DYHY 0331/0334, to induce and elicit delayed dermal sensitisation was assessed by a guinea pig model using the maximisation test of Magnusson and Kligman. This test system has been used as former experience with the development of reactive dyes showed that the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) is not a suitable test system. In the past the LLNA led to nonsensically high SI-values (up to 70) while no reactions at all were seen in the guinea pig. Hence, it was concluded that for reactive dyes, the maximisation test of Magnusson and Kligman is the relevant test to test for skin sensitising properties.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The potential of the test item, Reactive Brown DYHY 0331/0334, to induce and elicit delayed dermal sensitisation was assessed by a guinea pig model using the maximisation test of Magnusson and Kligman. This test system has been used as former experience with the development of reactive dyes showed that the murine local lymph node assay (LLNA) is not a suitable test system. In the past the LLNA led to nonsensically high SI-values (up to 70) while no reactions at all were seen in the guinea pig. Hence, it was concluded that for reactive dyes, the maximisation test of Magnusson and Kligman is the relevant test to test for skin sensitising properties.
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Harlan Nederland, Krenzelweg 53, Horst NL-5960 AD Host, the Netherlands
- Age at study initiation: 6 - 7 weeks (at allocation)
- Weight at study initiation: 409 - 450 g (I); 425 - 460 g (II)
- Housing: up to 5
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): ad libitum
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): ad libitum
- Acclimation period: approximately 2 weeks
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 22 °C +/- 2 °C
- Humidity (%): 55% +/- 15%
- Air changes (per hr): Approximately 15 to 25 air changes per hour
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): Artificial (fluorescent tubes), daily light/dark cycle of 12/12 hours
IN-LIFE DATES: From: 22 July 2014 (allocation of the animals to the preliminary phase) To: 15 January 2015 (termination of the main phase II) - Route:
- intradermal
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 5% in FCA or sterile water; 0.1 mL each
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 1
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 50% in sterile water; 0.4 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 8 - 48 h
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 10% in sterile water; 0.2 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 22 - 24 h
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No.:
- #2
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 10% in sterile water; 0.2 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 22 - 24 h - second group
- Adequacy of challenge:
- other: irritating concentration
- No.:
- #3
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 5% in sterile water; 0.2 mL
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 29 - 24 h - second group
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No. of animals per dose:
- Main phase I
Control group: 5 females
Test group: 10 females
Main phase II
Control group: 5 females
Test group: 10 females - Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Intradermal injection: Six sites were selected on each animal over the shaved scapulae. Each site was injected with a single concentration of the test item. Concentrations of 50, 20, 10, 5, 1 and 0.5% in sterile water were selected.
Topical application: Seven days after the intradermal injection of emulsified Freund's complete adjuvant, the flanks of each animal, each animal was dosed with 2 concentrations of the test item, 1 on each flank such that a total of 5 concentrations (50, 20,10, 5 and 1% in sterile water) of the test item were each dosed in duplicate.
MAIN STUDY I
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1 for intradermal injection; 1 for topical application
- Exposure period: 48 hours of topical application
- Test groups: 1 of 10 animals
- Control group: 1 of 5 animals
- Site: 3 sites (anterior, median, posterior) for intradermal injection; 1 site (over the injection sites) for topical application
- Concentrations: 5% for intradermal injection; 50% for topical application.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1
- Day(s) of challenge: 1
- Exposure period: 24 hours
- Test groups: 1 of 10 animals
- Control group: 1 of 5 animals
- Site: centre of right or left flank
- Concentrations: 10%
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24 and 48 hours after the exposure period.
MAIN STUDY II
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1 for intradermal injection; 1 for topical application
- Exposure period: 48 hours of topical application
- Test groups: 1 of 10 animals
- Control group: 1 of 5 animals
- Site: 3 sites (anterior, median, posterior) for intradermal injection; 1 site (over the injection sites) for topical application
- Concentrations: 5% for intradermal injection; 50% for topical application.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 2
- Day(s) of challenge: 2
- Exposure period: 24 hours
- Test groups: 1 of 10 animals
- Control group: 1 of 5 animals
- Site: centre of right or left flank
- Concentrations: 10%
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24 and 48 hours after the exposure period.
- Re-Challenge Concentration: 5%
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24 and 48 hours after the exposure period. - Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- α-HEXYLCINNAMALDEHYDE
- Positive control results:
- CONCENTRATION:
INDUCTION (INJECTION) - 20% in corn oil
(TOPICAL) - 50% in corn oil
CHALLENGE - 10% in acetone
RESULTS: 90% response in test group and 0% response in control group at challenge.
INTERPRETATION: Incidence at challenge acceptable. Test system regarded as valid. - Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10%
- No. with + reactions:
- 3
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay I - Slight dark coloration of the treatment sites
- Remarks on result:
- other: result questionable
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay I - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 10%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay I - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 10%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay I - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10% - second test group
- No. with + reactions:
- 7
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay II - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Remarks on result:
- not determinable
- Remarks:
- positive reactions in negative control
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10% - second test group
- No. with + reactions:
- 6
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay II - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Remarks on result:
- not determinable
- Remarks:
- positive reactions in negative control
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 10% - second control group
- No. with + reactions:
- 4
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay II - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Remarks on result:
- not determinable
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 10% - second control group
- No. with + reactions:
- 4
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay II - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Remarks on result:
- not determinable
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 5% - second test group
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay II - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 5% - second test group
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay II - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 5% - second control group
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay II - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 5% - second control group
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- Main Assay II - Slight dark coloration of the treatment site not preventing evaluation of erythema
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- Intradermal induction:20% in corn oil; epidermal induction: 50% in corn oil; challenge: 10% in acetone
- No. with + reactions:
- 9
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- Intradermal induction:20% in corn oil; epidermal induction: 50% in corn oil; challenge: 10% in acetone
- No. with + reactions:
- 9
- Total no. in group:
- 19
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- Irritation was observed at challenge with a concentration of 10% of Reactive Brown DYHY 0331/0334. At 5% test item concentration, 2/10 animals showed a slight positive reaction. However, since the incidence of the animals showing a positive reaction is lower than 30%, the test item is considered not to be a skin sensitiser and a classification is not required.
- Executive summary:
The potential of the test item, Reactive Brown DYHY 0331/0334, to induce and elicit delayed dermal sensitisation was assessed by a guinea pig model using the maximisation test of Magnusson and Kligman.
The concentrations of the test item used in the main study were determined by the results of preliminary screening tests. The main sensitisation test was undertaken using a test group of 10 animals and a control group of 5 animals. In an attempt to induce sensitisation, test animals were intradermally injected with an emulsion of Freund’s complete adjuvant (anterior sites), the test item at 5% concentration in the selected vehicle (sterile water) (middle sites) and the test item at 5% concentration in an emulsion of Freund’s complete adjuvant (posterior sites). One week later, animals were boosted by topical application of the test item at 50% concentration over the injection sites.
Control group animals were treated in the same manner but the selected vehicle (sterile water) was used in place of the test item. Two weeks after the second induction stage, all animals were challenged by topical application of both the vehicle (sterile water) and the test item at 10% concentration. At the challenge with the test item at concentration of 10% in sterile water, very slight reaction was observed in 3/10 animals of the test group (30%) at 24 hours after test item removal only. No response to the test item was observed in animals of the control group or in the test item treated group at 48 hours after test item removal. No reaction to the vehicle alone was observed in any animal.
In order to confirm the border-line results obtained at challenge, the test was extended to a further test group of 10 animals and control group of 5 animals. Animals of this additional phase of the study (from a new batch of guinea pigs) were treated in the same manner at the same concentrations selected for the previous phase of the study. At challenge with the test item at 10% concentration, reaction was observed in 7/10 animals of the test group (70%) at the 24 hour examination, remaining in 6/10 animals at the 48 hour examination. Reaction was also observed in 4/5 (80%) animals of the control group, indicating that irritation has occurred following dosing with the test item at 10% in sterile water. Therefore, a re-challenge was performed one week later in the same animals with the test item at a concentration of 5% in sterile water. Reaction was observed at this second challenge in 2/10 animals of the test group. No response was observed in animals of the control group.
The above results indicate that irritation was observed at challenge with a concentration of 10% of Reactive Brown DYHY 0331/0334. At 5% test item concentration, 2/10 animals showed a slight positive reaction. However, since the incidence of the animals showing a positive reaction is lower than 30%, the test item is considered not to be a skin sensitiser and a classification is not required.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
The potential of the test item, Reactive Brown DYHY 0331/0334, to induce and elicit delayed dermal sensitisation was assessed by a guinea pig model using the maximisation test of Magnusson and Kligman.
The concentrations of the test item used in the main study were determined by the results of preliminary screening tests. The main sensitisation test was undertaken using a test group of 10 animals and a control group of 5 animals. In an attempt to induce sensitisation, test animals were intradermally injected with an emulsion of Freund’s complete adjuvant (anterior sites), the test item at 5% concentration in the selected vehicle (sterile water) (middle sites) and the test item at 5% concentration in an emulsion of Freund’s complete adjuvant (posterior sites). One week later, animals were boosted by topical application of the test item at 50% concentration over the injection sites.
Control group animals were treated in the same manner but the selected vehicle (sterile water) was used in place of the test item. Two weeks after the second induction stage, all animals were challenged by topical application of both the vehicle (sterile water) and the test item at 10% concentration. At the challenge with the test item at concentration of 10% in sterile water, very slight reaction was observed in 3/10 animals of the test group (30%) at 24 hours after test item removal only. No response to the test item was observed in animals of the control group or in the test item treated group at 48 hours after test item removal. No reaction to the vehicle alone was observed in any animal.
In order to confirm the border-line results obtained at challenge, the test was extended to a further test group of 10 animals and control group of 5 animals. Animals of this additional phase of the study (from a new batch of guinea pigs) were treated in the same manner at the same concentrations selected for the previous phase of the study. At challenge with the test item at 10% concentration, reaction was observed in 7/10 animals of the test group (70%) at the 24 hour examination, remaining in 6/10 animals at the 48 hour examination. Reaction was also observed in 4/5 (80%) animals of the control group, indicating that irritation has occurred following dosing with the test item at 10% in sterile water. Therefore, a re-challenge was performed one week later in the same animals with the test item at a concentration of 5% in sterile water. Reaction was observed at this second challenge in 2/10 animals of the test group. No response was observed in animals of the control group.
The above results indicate that irritation was observed at challenge with a concentration of 10% of Reactive Brown DYHY 0331/0334. At 5% test item concentration, 2/10 animals showed a slight positive reaction. However, since the incidence of the animals showing a positive reaction is lower than 30%, the test item is considered not to be a skin sensitiser and a classification is not required.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
The test substance was negative in in vivo skin sensitisation test and therefore no classification is required for sensitisation according to EC criteria (67/548/EEC) and CLP criteria (EC 1272/2008).
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.