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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 275-108-6 | CAS number: 71002-20-5
- 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 vitro
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- 2018
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 017
- Report date:
- 2018
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 442D (In Vitro Skin Sensitisation: ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test Method)
- Version / remarks:
- of February 2015
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- activation of keratinocytes
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Octasodium 2,2'-[1,4-phenylenebis[imino(6-chloro-1,3,5-triazine-4,2-diyl)imino(1-hydroxy-3,6-disulphonatonaphthalene-2,8-diyl)azo]]bisnaphthalene-1,5-disulphonate
- EC Number:
- 275-108-6
- EC Name:
- Octasodium 2,2'-[1,4-phenylenebis[imino(6-chloro-1,3,5-triazine-4,2-diyl)imino(1-hydroxy-3,6-disulphonatonaphthalene-2,8-diyl)azo]]bisnaphthalene-1,5-disulphonate
- Cas Number:
- 71002-20-5
- Molecular formula:
- C52H26Cl2N14Na8O26S8
- IUPAC Name:
- octasodium 3-({4-chloro-6-[(4-{[4-chloro-6-({8-[(1E)-2-(1,5-disulfonatonaphthalen-2-yl)diazen-1-yl]-1-hydroxy-3,6-disulfonatonaphthalen-2-yl}amino)-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl]amino}phenyl)amino]-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl}amino)-5-[(1E)-2-(1,5-disulfonatonaphthalen-2-yl)diazen-1-yl]-4-hydroxynaphthalene-2,7-disulfonate
- Test material form:
- solid
Constituent 1
In vitro test system
- Details on the study design:
- Skin sensitisation (In vitro test system) - Details on study design:
The study was conducted to investigate the potential of the test item to induce genes that are regulated by the antioxidant response element (ARE). The data may be used as part of an integrated approach to testing and assessment (IATA) to support the discrimination between skin sensitisers and non-sensitisers for the purpose of hazard classification and labelling.
The ARE-Nrf2 luciferase test method utilises an immortalised adherent cell line derived from HaCaT human keratinocytes. The cell line is stably transfected with a plasmid containing a luciferase gene under the transcriptional control of the SV40 promoter fused with the ARE from a gene known to be up-regulated by contact sensitisers.
The luciferase signal reflects the activation by sensitisers of endogenous Nrf2 dependent genes and the dependence of the luciferase signal in the recombinant cell line on Nrf2 has been demonstrated. This allows quantitative measurement (by luminescence detection) of luciferase gene induction, using well established light producing luciferase substrates, as an indicator of the activity of the Nrf2 transcription factor in cells following exposure to electrophilic substances.
Specifications:
KeratinoSens™ cell line supplied by Givaudan Schweiz, Zurich, Switzerland as specified in OECD Test Guideline 442D (batch number 42, passage 12 for Experiment 1 and batch number 45, passage 12 for Experiment 2).
Preparation of Cultures:
A fresh vial of cells was used for each experimental occasion and cultured using Dulbecco’s modified Eagle medium (DMEM) containing 9% foetal bovine serum and 1% Geneticin.
Treatment:
In 96-well plates, incubated at 37±1°C, 5% (v/v) CO2, for 48±1 hours in medium with serum but without Geneticin. For each test article and positive control, one experiment was needed to derive a prediction (positive or negative), consisting of at two independent repetitions each containing three replicates of each concentration.
Cytotoxicity Assessment:
After the 48-hour exposure period, the medium was replaced with fresh medium containing MTT (3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide).The plate was sealed and incubated for 4 hours at 37±1°C, 5% (v/v) CO2. The MTT medium was removed and SDS (at 10% w/v) added per well. The plate was sealed and placed into an incubator at 37±1°C, 5% (v/v) CO2 in air and left overnight. After the overnight incubation, the plate was shaken to ensure homogeneity of the solution in the wells and then absorption read at 600 nm using a SpectraMax M2e.
Luciferase Activity Measurements:
After the 48-hour exposure period, the cells were washed with phosphate buffered saline and lysis buffer for luminescence readings was added to each well. The plates were then incubated for 20 minutes at 25±2°C, loaded into the luminescence plate reader and read using the following parameters: 100 µL injection (Luciferase assay substrate), 15 second delay, 7 second luminescence integration time.
Positive controls:
Cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No. 14371-10-9), supplied by Sigma Aldrich Chemical Co. Ltd. was used as the positive control.
Negative controls:
The negative control was diluted into culture medium containing serum so that the final concentration was 1%. An aqueous solvent was used, therefore DMSO was added to the treatment solutions at 1% (final concentration).
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- The assay aceptance criteria for the positive controls were met: Luciferase activity induction obtained with the positive control was statistically significant above the threshold of 1.5 at concentrations of 16 to 64 µM in Experiments 1 and 2.
The EC1.5 values for the positive control were 8.51 and 8.50 µM in Experiments 1 and 2, respectively. The average induction for the positive control at 64 µM was 4.97 in Experiment 1 and 17.47 in Experiment 2. Although the latter value was above the range specified in the protocol, the assay was considered valid as there was a clear dose response with increasing luciferase activity induction.
In vitro / in chemico
Resultsopen allclose all
- Run / experiment:
- other: experiment 1
- Parameter:
- other: Imax
- Value:
- 1.2
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Run / experiment:
- other: experiment 2
- Parameter:
- other: Imax
- Value:
- 3.94
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Run / experiment:
- other: experiment 1 and 3
- Parameter:
- other: EC1.5
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- no statistically significant increases
- Run / experiment:
- other: experiment 1 and 3
- Parameter:
- other: dose response for luciferase induction
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- no apparent overall dose response observed
- Run / experiment:
- other: 2
- Parameter:
- other: EC1.5
- Value:
- 8.66
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Run / experiment:
- other: 3
- Parameter:
- other: Imax
- Value:
- 2.09
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- other: Not statistically significant
- Run / experiment:
- other: experiment 2
- Parameter:
- other: dose response for luciferase induction
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- other: Yes until toxic concentrations reached
- Other effects / acceptance of results:
- OTHER EFFECTS:
- Visible damage on test system: none
DEMONSTRATION OF TECHNICAL PROFICIENCY: proven
ACCEPTANCE OF RESULTS:
- Acceptance criteria met for negative control: yes
- Acceptance criteria met for positive control: yes
- Acceptance criteria met for variability between replicate measurements: yes
The average coefficient of variation of the luminescence reading for the negative control (DMSO) was 10.32%, 11.85% and 7.82% in Experiments 1, 2 and 3, respectively.
Any other information on results incl. tables
All acceptance criteria were met in each experiment, with the exception that in Experiment 1 the EC1.5 value for the positive control was 3.25 and the average induction at 64 μM was 8.25. However, the assay was considered valid as there was a clear dose response with increasing luciferase activity induction with the positive control.
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Executive summary:
The study was conducted to investigate the potential of Bayscript Magenta BB to induce genes that are regulated by the antioxidant response element (ARE).
The test article was dissolved in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) to the final concentration of the stock solution (200 mM). Serial dilutions were then made using DMSO to obtain 12 master concentrations of the test article (0.098, 0.196, 0.391, 0.781, 1.563, 3.125, 6.25, 12.5, 25, 50, 100 and 200 mM).
After the 48-hour exposure period, the medium in the luciferase plates was replaced with fresh medium containing 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium romide (MTT).The plate was sealed and incubated for 4 hours at 37±1°C, 5% (v/v) CO2. The MTT medium was then removed and SDS (at 10% w/v) added per well. The plate was sealed and placed into an incubator at 37±1°C, 5% (v/v) CO2 in air and left overnight. After the overnight incubation, the plate was shaken to ensure homogeneity of the solution in the wells and then absorption read at 600 nm.
The acceptance criteria were met in each experiment, with the exception that in Experiment 1 the EC1.5 for the positive control was 3.25 and the average induction for the positive control at 64 μM was 8.25. However, the assay was considered valid as there was a clear dose response with increasing luciferase activity induction with the positive control.
None of the four criteria specified in the prediction model for a positive prediction (Imax > 1.5-fold, cell viability > 70%, EC1.5 value < 1000 μM, dose response) were met in Experiment 1, whereas all four criteria were met in Experiment 2 and only one was met in Experiment 3. It is therefore considered that the test article is predicted as negative in the assay based on 2 out of the 3 experiments giving negative results.
The test article, Bayscript Magenta BB, was considered to be negative in the Luciferase Test ARE-Nrf2 cells derived from HaCaT human keratinocytes.
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.