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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 935-783-6 | 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
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- migrated information: read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: The study was performed similar to OECD guideline 406 (GPMT) at a time GLP was not enacted. Minor deviations from OECD guideline 406 occured.
- Qualifier:
- equivalent or similar to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- yes
- Remarks:
- concentration used for induction was not irritating
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Remarks:
- study was conducted prior to the enactment of GLP principles
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- other: Pirbright White
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Lippische Versuchstierzucht, Extertal, Germany
- Sex: ♂ (1st experiment), ♀ (2nd experiment)
- Weight at study initiation: 400 g (1st experiment); 300 g (2nd experiment) - Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- other: Lutrol 300/ethanol (3:1)
- Concentration / amount:
- Intradermal induction (Day 0): 25% (1st experiment) and 1% CMK (2nd experiment) in vehicle and in Freund's adjuvant, respectively
Topical induction (Day 7): 25% (1st experiment) and 1% CMK (2nd experiment) in vehicle
Topical challenge (Day 21):
1st experiment: 25% (right flank), 12.5% CMK (left flank) in vehicle
2nd experiment: 50% (right flank), 25% CMK (left flank) in vehicle - Route:
- other: epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- other: Lutrol 300/ethanol (3:1)
- Concentration / amount:
- Intradermal induction (Day 0): 25% (1st experiment) and 1% CMK (2nd experiment) in vehicle and in Freund's adjuvant, respectively
Topical induction (Day 7): 25% (1st experiment) and 1% CMK (2nd experiment) in vehicle
Topical challenge (Day 21):
1st experiment: 25% (right flank), 12.5% CMK (left flank) in vehicle
2nd experiment: 50% (right flank), 25% CMK (left flank) in vehicle - No. of animals per dose:
- 15
- Details on study design:
- The skin irritating potential of the test substance was assessed in a pre-test with concentrations of 12.5%, 25%, 50% and 100% applied for 24 h under occlusive conditions.
The study followed the Magnusson-Kligman method which is basically compliant with OECD Guideline 406 (GPMT). However, this guideline was not available when the study was conducted.
The study comprised of two experiments each conducted on 15 Pirbright White guinea pigs. In the 1st experiment, male animals received intradermal (in vehicle and in Freund´s adjuvant) and topical induction treatments (in vehicle) with 25% test substance. In the 2nd experiment, females were induced with a 1% test substance via the same procedure. Both experiments included respective vehicle control groups (Lutrol 300/ethanol (3:1) with 15 animals each. The topical induction exposure lasted 48 h. The challenge treatment two weeks after the last induction application was performed with 25% (right flank) or 12.5% (left flank) test item in vehicle in the 1st experiment and with 50% (right flank) or 25% (left flank) test item in vehicle in the 2nd experiment. Each challenge exposure lasted 6 h. Animals of the control groups were challenged in the same way. The Magnusson-Kligman scoring system was used to rate the skin reactions. Scoring of the treated skin was performed 24 and 48 h after challenge. - Challenge controls:
- Yes
- Positive control substance(s):
- no
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- other: challenge control
- Dose level:
- 0% (12.5+25% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: other: challenge control. Dose level: 0% (12.5+25% challenge). No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 25% (12.5% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 25% (12.5% challenge). No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 25% (25% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 7
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 25% (25% challenge). No with. + reactions: 7.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- other: challenge control
- Dose level:
- 0% (12.5% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: other: challenge control. Dose level: 0% (12.5% challenge). No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- other: challenge control
- Dose level:
- 0% (25% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: other: challenge control. Dose level: 0% (25% challenge). No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 25% (12.5% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 3
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 25% (12.5% challenge). No with. + reactions: 3.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 25% (25% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 13
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 25% (25% challenge). No with. + reactions: 13.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- other: challenge control
- Dose level:
- 0% (25 + 50% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: other: challenge control. Dose level: 0% (25 + 50% challenge). No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 1% (25% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 1% (25% challenge). No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 1% (50% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 4
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 1% (50% challenge). No with. + reactions: 4.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- other: challenge control
- Dose level:
- 0% (25 + 50% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: other: challenge control. Dose level: 0% (25 + 50% challenge). No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 1% (25% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 1% (25% challenge). No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 1% (50% challenge)
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 15
- Clinical observations:
- No findings
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 1% (50% challenge). No with. + reactions: 2.0. Total no. in groups: 15.0. Clinical observations: No findings.
- Interpretation of results:
- sensitising
- Remarks:
- Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- CLP: Skin sens 1B, H317
DSD: Xi, R43
Reference
The highest non-irritating concentration after topical dermal application for 24 h was determined as 50%. An short overview of the results is given in the table below.
Table 1: Animals with skin reactions after the challenge phase:
|
Control |
Experiment 1 |
Control |
Experiment 2 |
||||
Induction concentration |
0% |
25% |
0% |
1% |
||||
Challenge concentration |
12.5% |
25% |
12.5% |
25% |
25% |
50% |
25% |
50% |
Time after challenge |
|
|||||||
24 h |
0/15 |
0/15 |
1/15 |
7/15 |
0/15 |
0/15 |
0/15 |
0/15 |
48h |
0/15 |
1/15 |
3/15 |
13/15 |
0/15 |
0/15 |
4/15 |
2/15 |
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (sensitising)
- Additional information:
The relevant data on skin sensitisation for Preventol KMX and the read across substance 4-chloro-3-methylphenol are summarized in the table below. The read across justification and additional data for m-cresol are attached to the Chemical Safety Report in Annex I. As m-cresol is only a minor component of Preventol KMX these data are not considered for the assessment of the irritating potential of Preventol KMX.
Table 1: Comparison of relevant data on irritation/corrosion of Preventol KMX and 4-chloro-3-methylphenol
Endpoint
Preventol KMX
4-chloro-3-methylphenol
Skin sensitisation
Read across to 4-chloro-3-methylphenol: Sensitising
Sensitising
Skin sensitisation:
No data on skin sensitisation for Preventol KMX (reaction mass of 6-chloro-m-cresol, 2-chloro-m-cresol and m-cresol) are available. The possibility of a read-across to Preventol CMK (4-chloro-3-methylphenol) in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 Annex XI 1.5. Grouping of substances and read-across approach was assessed. There it is given that a read-across approach is possible for substances, whose physicochemical, toxicological and ecotoxicological properties are likely to be similar or follow a regular pattern as a result of structural similarity. Preventol KMX contains of approximately 58% 6-chloro-m-cresol, 30% 2-chloro-m-cresol, 9% m-cresol and smaller amounts of p-cresol (approx. 2.5%), 4-chloro-3-methylphenol (approx. 0.5%) and other impurities (approx. 0.5%). A literature search and QSAR predictions were performed for 2-chloro-m-cresol, 6-chloro-m-cresol using m-cresol and 4-chloro-3-methylphenol as reference substances. Next to physico-chemical properties, environmental fate, ecotoxicity, toxicity, and metabolism of chlorocresols and chlorophenols in various databases, special emphasis was set on determining the effects of different positions of chlorine on aromatic ring structures as this is the determinant difference between the 3 chlorocresol constituents, which may influence outcome in physicochemical and toxicological behaviour. The aim was to evaluate the read-across from 4-chloro-3-methylphenol to Preventol KMX and to ensure a safe and legally valid analogue approach.
The chlorocresols are found to be similar in structure and the available data shows that the substances are similar in physico-chemical properties, environmental fate, metabolism and predicted affected pathways. Literature revealed no evidence of relevant influence of the position of chlorination on ring structures on the toxicological properties of a substance. Thus, the position of the chlorination is not regarded to significantly modulate the toxic effects of the chlorocresols. Since the discussed chlorocresols differ only in the position of the chlorination, the toxicological properties of the substances can be expected to be similar. This assumption is also supported by the fact that results of available studies are in the same range for Preventol KMX compared to results of 4-chloro-3-methylphenol. Hence, 4-chloro-3-methylphenol is determined as a suitable read-across substance to predict toxicity endpoints in the chemical risk assessment of reaction mass of 6-chloro-m-cresol, 2-chloro-m-cresol and m-cresol (Preventol KMX). A detailed justification for the read-across is provided in the technical dossier (see IUCLID Section 13), as well as in the Chemical Safety Report (see Part B).
Relevant study of interest for 4-chloro-3-methylphenol:
Skin sensitisation:
A reliable study performed similar to OECD Guideline 406 (GPMT) was performed with 4-chloro-3-methylphenol. The study followed the Magnusson-Kligman method and comprised of two experiments each conducted on 15 Pirbright White guinea pigs. In the 1st experiment, male animals received intradermal (in vehicle and in Freund´s adjuvant) and topical induction (in vehicle) treatments with 25% test substance. In the 2nd experiment, female animals were induced with a 1% test substance via the same procedure. The topical induction exposure lasted 48 h and both experiments included respective vehicle control groups (Lutrol 300/ethanol (3:1)) with 15 animals each. The challenge treatment two weeks after the last induction application was performed with 25% (right flank) or 12.5% (left flank) test item in vehicle in the 1st experiment and with 50% (right flank) or 25% (left flank) test item in vehicle in the 2nd experiment. Each challenge exposure lasted 6 h. Animals of the control groups were challenged in the same way. The Magnusson-Kligman scoring system was used to rate the skin reactions. Scoring of the treated skin was performed 24 and 48 h after challenge. In a pre-experiment the highest non-irritating concentration after topical dermal application for 24 h was determined as 50%.
Skin reactions in experiment 2 which was performed with 1 % test item in the induction phase were seen on max. 4/15 animals (= 27%). Thereforeaccording to CLP 1272/2008/EC and directive 67/548/EECthe test substance would not be in need for classification. Upon induction with 25% skin reactions were observed on 7/15 and 13/15 animals 24 and 48 h after challenge with 25%. Therefore the test substance has to be classified as may cause an allergic skin reaction: H317,category 1B according to CLP 1272/2008/EC and as Xi, R43 according to the dangerous substance directive 67/548/EEC.
Migrated from Short description of key information:
No data on skin sensitisation for Preventol KMX are available. However, a read-across approach to 4-chloro-3-methylphenol was judged to be scientifically reliable (for details see Discussion below). In a reliable study performed similar to OECD Guideline 406 (GPMT) skin reactions were observed on more than 30% of the guinea pigs upon intradermal induction with a concentration above 1%. Thus the test substance is classified as H317: may cause an allergic skin reaction, category 1B according to CLP 1272/2008/EC and as Xi, R43 according to the dangerous substance directive 67/548/EEC.
Justification for selection of skin sensitisation endpoint:
The key study was selected.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Preventol KMX has to be classified according to the dangerous substance directive 67/548/EEC as skin sensitizing Xi, R43 and according to CLP 1272/2008/EC as skin sensitizing category 1B, H317.
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.