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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 228-845-2 | CAS number: 6362-79-4
- 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
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- September 25, 2013 - October 21, 2013
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: This study has been performed according to OECD and/or EC guidelines and according to GLP principles.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Version / remarks:
- (2010)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.42 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Version / remarks:
- (2008)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- (2003)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- other: CBA/J
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- - Source: Janvier, Le Genest-Saint-Isle, France
- Age at study initiation: Young adult female animals (approx. 11 weeks old)
- Weight at study initiation: Body weight variation was within +/- 20% of the sex mean (21-25 g)
- Housing: Animals were group housed in labeled makrolon cages.
- Diet: Free access to pelleted rodent diet (SM R/M-Z from SSNIFF® Spezialdiäten GmbH, Soest, Germany).
- Water: Free access to tap water.
- Acclimation period: At least 5 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 18 – 24
- Humidity (%): 40 - 70
- Air changes (per hr): approx 15
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12
IN-LIFE DATES: September 25, 2013 - October 21, 2013 - Vehicle:
- propylene glycol
- Concentration:
- 0, 10, 25, 50%
- No. of animals per dose:
- 5
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
- Two test substance concentrations were tested; a 50% and 25% concentration.
- Two young adult animals per concentration were selected (in the range of 8 to14 weeks old).
- Each animal was treated with one concentration on three consecutive days.
- Ear thickness measurements were conducted using a digital thickness gauge prior to dosing on Days 1 and 3, and on Day 6.
MAIN STUDY
ANIMAL ASSIGNMENT AND TREATMENT
- Name of test method: Local Lymph Node Assay
- Criteria used to consider a positive response: DPM values are presented for each animal and for each dose group. A Stimulation Index (SI) is calculated for each group. The SI is the ratio of the DPM/group compared to DPM/vehicle control group. If the results indicate a SI ≥ 3, the test substance may be regarded as a skin sensitizer, based on the test guideline and recommendations done by ICCVAM.
ANIMAL ASSIGNMENT
Three groups of five animals were treated with one test substance concentration per group. One group of five animals was treated with vehicle.
TREATMENT PREPARATION AND ADMINISTRATION:
- Test substance preparation: The test substance formulations (w/w) were prepared within 4 hours prior to each dosing. No adjustment was made for specific gravity of the vehicle. Homogeneity was obtained to visually acceptable levels.
- Rationale for vehicle: The vehicle was selected on the basis of maximizing the solubility using the test substance data provided by the sponsor and trial formulation results performed at WIL Research Europe.
Induction - Days 1, 2 and 3; Excision of nodes - Day 6; Tissue processing for radioacitivity - Day 6; Radioactivity measurements - Day 7; Performed according to test guidelines.
Observations:
Mortality/Viability: Twice daily.
Body weights: On Day 1 (pre-dose) and Day 6 (prior to necropsy).
Clinical signs: Once daily on Days 1-6 (on Days 1-3 between 3 and 4 hours after dosing).
Irritation: Once daily on Days 1-6 (on Days 1 - 3 within 1 hour after dosing) according to the numerical scoring system of OECD 404. Furthermore, a description of all other (local) effects was recorded according to guidelines.
Necropsy: No necropsy was performed - Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
- Positive control results:
- - In the latest performed reliability check, in April 2013, the SI values calculated for the substance concentrations 5, 10 and 25% were 1.2, 1.6 and 7.7 respectively. An EC3 value of 13.4% was calculated using linear interpolation.
- The six-month reliability check with Alpha-hexylcinnamicaldehyde (HCA) therefore indicates that the Local Lymph Node Assay as performed at WIL Research Europe is an appropriate model for testing for contact hypersensitivity. The results of the 6 monthly HCA reliability checks of the recent years were 16.0, 11.9, 16.9, 14.4, 16.5, 14.5 and 16.5%. - Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 2.8
- Test group / Remarks:
- 50%
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.6
- Test group / Remarks:
- 25%
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.3
- Test group / Remarks:
- 10%
- Cellular proliferation data / Observations:
- Mean DPM/animal values for the experimental groups treated with test substance concentrations 10, 25 and 50% were 219, 254 and 457 DPM respectively. The mean DPM/animal value for the vehicle control group was 163 DPM. The SI values calculated for the substance concentrations 10, 25 and 50% were 1.3, 1.6 and 2.8 respectively.
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- In an LLNA skin sensitisation study, performed according to OECD/EC test guidelines, the substance was considered not be a skin sensitiser, as the SI was found not to be ≥ 3 when tested up to 50%.
- Executive summary:
In accordance with OECD 429 (2010) and according to GLP principles, contact hypersensitivity to the substance was assessed by open application of the substance (in concentrations 0, 10, 25 and 50% w/w in propylene glycol) on three sequential days to the outer ear of mice (5/ dose). The SI was calculated by the ratio of the DPM/group compared to DPM/vehicle control group. No irritation of the ears was observed in any of the animals examined. The majority of auricular lymph nodes were considered normal in size, except for the nodes of two animals treated at 50% which were enlarged in one or both ears. No macroscopic abnormalities of the surrounding area were noted in any of the animals. Results of the latest reliability check were adequate. The SI values calculated for the substance concentrations 10, 25 and 50% were 1.3, 1.6 and 2.8, respectively. Since the test substance did not elicit an SI ≥ 3 when tested up to and including 50% w/w, the substance was considered not to be a skin sensitizer.
Reference
Results Pre-screen test:
- No irritation and no signs of systemic toxicity were observed in any of the animals
- White test substance remnants were present on the dorsal surface of the ears of all animals between Days 1 and 3, this did not hamper scoring of the skin reactions.
- Variations in ear thickness during the observation period were less than 25% from Day 1 pre-dose values (≤7%)
- Based on these results, the highest test substance concentration selected for the main study was a 50% concentration.
Other results - main study:
- No irritation of the ears was observed in any of the animals
- Test substance remnants were present on the dorsal surface of the ears of all animals treated at 25% between Days 1 and 2 and two animals on Day 3 and all animals treated at 50% between Days 1 and 3. The remnants did not hamper scoring of the skin reactions.
- The majority of auricular lymph nodes were considered normal in size, except for the nodes of two animals treated at 50% which were enlarged in one or both ears.
- No macroscopic abnormalities of the surrounding area were noted in any of the animals.
- No mortality occurred and no clinical signs of systemic toxicity were observed
- Body weights and body weight gains of experimental animals remained in the same range as controls over the study period.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
In accordance with OECD 429 (2010) and according to GLP principles, contact hypersensitivity to the substance was assessed by open application of the substance (in concentrations 0, 10, 25 and 50% w/w in propylene glycol) on three sequential days to the outer ear of mice (5/ dose). The SI was calculated by the ratio of the DPM/group compared to DPM/vehicle control group. No irritation of the ears was observed in any of the animals examined. The majority of auricular lymph nodes were considered normal in size, except for the nodes of two animals treated at 50% which were enlarged in one or both ears. No macroscopic abnormalities of the surrounding area were noted in any of the animals. Results of the latest reliability check were adequate. The SI values calculated for the substance concentrations 10, 25 and 50% were 1.3, 1.6 and 2.8, respectively. Since the test substance did not elicit an SI ≥ 3 when tested up to and including 50% w/w, the substance was considered not to be a skin sensitizer.
In a Freund's complete adjuvant test, a group of 10 male and female guinea pigs were treated intradermally during an induction phase with a 0.1% suspension of the subject material in 80% water with a 20% mixture of acetone, dioxane and guinea pig fat (1:1:3). The challenge was epicutaneous (open). There was no evidence of sensitization noted. However, it is unknown whether sufficiently high concentrations were used for both induction and challenge.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the available data, the substance does not have to be classified for skin sensitization according to the CLP Regulation.
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.