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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 205-187-4 | CAS number: 135-37-5
- 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
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:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2002
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: The study was conducted according to OECD TG 406, EPA TG OPPTS 870.2600, EEC Method B.6, JMAFF Agchem Test Guidelines and in accordance with the Principles of Good Laboratory prcatice (GLP)
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.6 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: JMAFF Agchem Test Guidelines
- Deviations:
- no
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- not applicable
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- Buehler test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The study was done before in 2002 before the LLNA became the required test method
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Hartley
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Hilltop Lan Animals Inc., Scottdale, PA
- Age at study initiation: young adults approximately 8 -9 weeks of age
- Weight at study initiation: males: 469-506 grams and females: 451-493 grams
- Housing: The animals were housed indivdually in suspended stainless steel cages.
- Diet (e.g. ad libitum): PMI certified guinea pig chow #5026 (Purina Mills, Inc.) was provided adlibitum to the animals throughout the study.
- Water (e.g. ad libitum): Municipal tap water treated by reverse osmosis was available ad libitum throughout the study.
- Acclimation period: minimum of 5 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 18-23 °C
- Humidity (%): 32-57%
- Air changes (per hr): 10-15 air changes/hour
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12 hours light/dark cycle - Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- 100% undiluted test material
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- 100% undiluted test material
- No. of animals per dose:
- 10 male + 10 female
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS: The range finding test was conducted at 100, 75, 50 and 25% w/v in deionised water administered topically to 4 guinea pigs (one animal/concentration). The four conentrations were applied to clipped area of each animal. Following chamber application, the trunk of each animal was wrapped with elatic wrap and secured with adhesive tape to prevent removal of the chambers and the animal returned to its cage. Approximately 6 hours after chamber application, the binding materials were removed. The test sites were then wiped with gauze moistened with deionized water followed by dry gauze to remove test material residue and animals returned to their cages. The test sites of these animals were graded for irritation at approximately 24 and 48 hours following chamber application.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 3 (days 0, 7 and 13)
- Exposure period: 3 consecutive induction exposures
- Test groups: 1
- Control group: no control group
- Site: left back side of each animal
- Frequency of applications: once on days 0, 7 and 13
- Duration: once on days 0, 7 and 13
- Concentrations: A dose of 0.3 ml of the test material was placed on a 25 mm Hilltop chamber backed by adhesive tape (occlusive patch) and placed to the clipped surface.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1
- Day(s) of challenge: day 27
- Exposure period: 6 hours
- Test groups: 1
- Control group: 1
- Site: right back side of each animal
- Concentrations: 100% undiluted test material was used
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24 and 48 hours following chamber removal - Challenge controls:
- A group of 5 male + 5 female guinea pigs served as challenge control
- Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- 1-Chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene (DNCB) and alpha-Hexylcinnamaldehyde (HCA)
- Positive control results:
- Following induction at 0.1% w/v DNCB in acetone/ethanol and challenge at levels of 0.1% and 0.05% w/v DNCB in acetone/ethanol, a contact sensitization response was observed, thereby demonstrating the susceptibility of the test system to this sensitizing agent.
Following induction at 5% w/v HCA in ethanol and challenge at levels of 2.5% and 1% w/v HCA in acetone, a contact sensitization response was observed, thereby demonstrating the susceptibility of the test system to this sensitizing agent. - Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 100 % undiluted
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- none
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 100% undiluted
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- none
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 100% undiluted
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- none
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 100% undiluted
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- none
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of the study, XUS 40855.001 is not considered to be a contact skin sensitizer in guinea pigs.
- Executive summary:
The dermal sensitization potential of XUS 40855.01, which contained 27% Na2HEIDA as the active ingredient, was evaluated in Hartley-derived albino guinea pigs. Ten male and ten female guinea pigs were topically treated with 100% XUS 40855.01, once per week, for three consecutive weeks.
Following a two-week rest period, a challenge was performed whereby the twenty test and ten previously untreated (naive) challenge control guinea pigs were topically treated with 100% XUS 40855.01. Challenge responses in the test animals were compared with those of the challenge control animals.
Following challenge with 100% XUS 40855.01, dermal scores of 0 were noted in all of the test and challenge control animals. Group mean dermal scores were noted to be 0.0 in the test and challenge control animals.
Following induction at 0.1% w/v DNCB (1-Chloro-2,4-dinitrobenzene) in acetone/ethanol and challenge at levels of 0.1% and 0.05% w/v DNCB in acetone/ethanol, a contact sensitization response was observed and following induction at 5% w/v HCA (á-Hexylcinnamaldehyde ) in ethanol and challenge at levels of 2.5% and 1% w/v HCA in acetone, a contact sensitization response was observed, thereby demonstrating the susceptibility of the test system to this sensitizing agent.
Based on the results of this study, XUS 40855.01 is not considered to be a contact sensitizer in guinea pigs.
Reference
None
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
A Buehler test conducted with both EDG-Na2 (Dow, 2002) and NTA-Na3 (BASF, 1997) in guinea pigs demonstrates a negative result. A non-irritating substance formulation (50% in water) was used for dermal inductions. According to OECD 406 mild to moderate skin irritation is the prerequisite for this method. If undiluted substance does not cause irritation, a negative result can be used for risk assessment. If a dilution is applied uncertainty remains whether or not undiluted substance would cause the adequate irritation and subsequent sensitization. However, the result suggests a lack of a strong skin sensitisation potential of NTA-Na3.
According to a DerekfW prediction for NTA-Na3 (cited in EU RAR draft 2008), the chemical reactivity and so the binding to proteins is limited. This prediction at its own is has limited weight, because negative findings usually have to be considered out of the applicability domain. However, viewing the alerts present in DerekfW this type of chemicals may be considered negative. Protein binding is considered limited, because the ester-salt is not activated and the amine is tertiary which may be sterically hindered. This conclusion is supported by a TOPKAT models. NTA is within the TOPKAT domain and provides an analogue which is negative. Despite the uncertainty due to a lack of mechanistic reasoning, the analogue approach can add to the overall impression that the chemical is not a sensitizer.It is noted that also EDG-Na2 does not interact with protein, which is considered a requirement for sensitization (needed for haptenisation).The bioavailability is limited as dermal penetration is low. Finally, also decades of use of this substance did not result in any reports of people becoming sensitized.
Migrated from Short description of key information:
Data are available for EDG-Na2 and the structurally related substance NTA-Na3 (see also read across document in section 13).
Justification for selection of skin sensitisation endpoint:
A Buehler test did not show skin sensistising properties which was confirmed by negatibve tests with the structurally related substance NTA-Na3.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
- Additional information:
Because EDG-Na2 is not considered to be a skin sensitiser it is not expected that it would be a respiratory sensitiser as all respiratory sensitisers tested have shown skin sensitising properties in skin sensitisation tests.
Justification for classification or non-classification
Because EDG-Na2 is not considered to be a skin sensitiser no classification is needed for this endpoint.
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.