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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 233-241-7 | CAS number: 10099-67-9
- 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 vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- From August 19th, 2016 to November 29th, 2016
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Remarks:
- Performed under GLP compliance
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 016
- Report date:
- 2016
Materials and methods
Test guidelineopen allclose all
- 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
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Remarks:
- September 22nd, 2015
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The skin sensitisation potential test method (OECD Guideline 406) was preferred above LLNA (OECD Guideline 429) since previous experience with several water soluble Rare Earth compounds learned that their irritating potential may confound the results of LLNA tests.
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Lutetium trinitrate
- EC Number:
- 233-241-7
- EC Name:
- Lutetium trinitrate
- Cas Number:
- 10099-67-9
- Molecular formula:
- HNO3.1/3Lu
- IUPAC Name:
- lutetium trinitrate
- Test material form:
- solid: crystalline
- Details on test material:
- - Name of test material: Lutetium trinitrate
Constituent 1
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- other: CRL:HA
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Charles River Laboratories, Research Models and Services, Germany GmbH, Sandhofer Weg 7, D-97633 Sulzfeld
- Justification of species: The guinea pig is the standard species used for skin sensitisation studies.
- Femalesnulliparous and non-pregnant: yes
- Age at study initiation: Young adult
- Weight at study initiation: 337 - 423 g
- Housing: Animals were housed in macrolon cages size IV, with 5 animals/cage to allow socialization
- Diet: Animals received Cunigra Diet for Rabbits (produced by Bonafarm-Bábolna Ta karmány Ltd., Hungary), ad libitum. This diet is classified as being suitable for Guinea pigs as the vitamin D level is high enough to meet the needs of this species.
- Water: Animals received tap water from municipal supply as for human consumption, containing at least 50 mg/100 mL ascorbic acid, ad libitum. The drinking water is routinely analysed and is considered not to contain any contaminants that could reasonably be expected to affect the purpose or integrity of the study.
- Acclimation period: 26 days
- Healt status of animals: Only animals in acceptable health conditions were used for the test. Health status was certified by the Veterinarian.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 17.2 - 22.5 °C
- Humidity (%): 32 - 80%
- Air changes (per hr): 15-20 air exchange/hour
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12 hours daily, from 6.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m.
IN-LIFE DATES: From: August 30th To: October 14th, 2016
Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Inductionopen allclose all
- Route:
- intradermal
- Vehicle:
- physiological saline
- Concentration / amount:
- - control group: saline only
- test group: 0.1% w/v test item formulated in saline - Day(s)/duration:
- Not applicable
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- physiological saline
- Concentration / amount:
- - control group: saline only
- test group: 100% w/v test item formulated in saline - Day(s)/duration:
- 48 h
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
Challenge
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- physiological saline
- Concentration / amount:
- Challenge exposure:
Control group and test group: 25% w/v test item formulated in saline - Day(s)/duration:
- 24 h
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No. of animals per dose:
- Preliminary test: 8 female animals
Main test: 10 in the test group and 5 in the control group - Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Test item concentrations:
- intradermal injection: 0.1, 0.5, 1, 2.5 and 5% (w/v)
- dermal application: 25, 50, 75 and 100% (w/v)
Time of observations for local effects:
- 1, 24, 48 and 72 hours after the treatment or after patch removal
Test item application and observations:
- For the intradermal application, 0.1 mL per concentration was injected intra-dermally into the hair free skin of the animals. Two concentrations were injected on the right side and another two concentrations on the left side of the animals. The highest concentration (5%) was also tested in a 1:1 mixture (v/v) of Freund's Complete Adjuvant and physiological saline solution. Each concentration was injected in duplicate. Two animals were used per concentration.
0.5, 1, 2.5 and 5% (w/v) test item concentrations caused extensive skin lesions at the treatment site, with significant redness (erythema) around the edges, but no erythema in the coloured area (apparently with no blood flow). At these concentrations it was considered that the degree of local effect was more than “mild-to-moderate erythema”. However, 0.1% (w/v) test item in the vehicle caused only no more than mild-to-moderate erythema (score 0 or 1), without any observable skin lesions during the observation period, therefore this concentration could be used in the main study.
- For the dermal application, the volume of the formulations was 0.5 mL. A closed patch exposure was performed by means of an occlusive bandage using similar treatment procedures as for the main study. The time of exposure for the dermal application was 48 hours. One concentration was used on the right side and another concentration on the left side of animals.
Two animals per concentrations were used.
Slight or well defined erythema (scores 1 and 2) was observed at concentrations of 50, 75 and 100% (w/v). As the highest tested concentration (100%) caused no more than mild-to moderate skin irritation, this was used for the dermal induction. However, at a concentration of 25% (w/v), no reaction on the skin of guinea pigs was seen. The concentration used for the challenge exposure should be the highest non-irritant dose; therefore 25% (w/v) test item formulated in saline was decided to be used for the challenge treatment.
MAIN STUDY
A. INTRADERMAL INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- Day of treatment: 1
- No. of exposures: 1
- Test group:
• 2 injections of Freund's Complete Adjuvant and physiological saline solution in a 1:1 (v/v) mixture,
• 2 injections of 0.1% test item in saline,
• 2 injections of 0.1% test item formulated in a 1:1 mixture (v/v) of Freund's Complete Adjuvant and physiological saline solution
- Control group:
• 2 injections of Freund's Complete Adjuvant and physiological saline solution in a 1:1 (v/v) mixture,
• 2 injections of saline,
• 2 injections of saline formulated in a 1:1 mixture (v/v) of Freund's Complete Adjuvant and physiological saline solution.
- Site: scapular region
- Time of observations: 24 hours after the treatment
B. DERMAL INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- Day of treatment: 8
- No. of exposures: 1
- Exposure period: 48 hours
- Test group and contro group: A 2.5x2.5 cm sterile gauze patch (4 layers of porous gauze pads) was saturated with approximately 0.5 mL of 100% (w/v) test item in saline and placed over the injection sites. The control group was treated with saline only.
The gauze patches were kept in contact with the skin by a patch with a surrounding adhesive hypoallergenic plaster. The treated areas were covered with a fully occlusive foil (Closed Patch Test). After the patch removal any remaining test item was removed with a wet gauze swab.
- Site: scapular region
- Time of observations: 1, 24, 48 and 72 hours after the patch removal
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- Day of challenge: 22
- No. of exposures: 1
- Exposure period: 24 hours
- Test group and control group: A 2.5x2.5 cm patch of sterile gauze patch was saturated with 25% (w/v) test item in saline and applied to the left side of all animals (both the test and the control). The right shaved side of all animals was treated with vehicle only.
The volume of formulated test item was 0.5 mL. Treatment was performed as described in the previous chapter (Closed Patch Test). After the patch removal any remaining test item was removed with a wet gauze swab.
- Site: left and right sides
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24 and 48 hours after the patch removal
- Challenge controls:
- As described in details on study design
- Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- 2-Mercaptobenzothiazole
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- Challenge with reference item 2-Mercaptobenzothiazole resulted in a positive response in test animals previously sensitised. The net response values at the 24 and 48 hours observations represented an incidence rate of 80% and 70% and net score values of 0.80 and 0.70 respectively. In the control animals no visible changes were found either at the 24 or 48 hours examinations following challenge with the reference item.
The dermal scores represented discrete erythema (score 1) developed on the skin of sensitised guinea pigs.
On the basis of the results of the reliability check study, the reference item 2-Mercaptobenzothiazole was classified as a skin sensitizer. This demonstrated that the experimental procedure and the test system were appropriate.
In vivo (non-LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- left side: 25% (w/v) test item formulated in saline; right side: saline only
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Dermal response scores (for erythema) equal to 0 for all animals and for both sides.
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- left side: 25% (w/v) test item formulated in saline; right side: saline only
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Dermal response scores (for erythema) equal to 0 for all animals and for both sides.
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- Left side: 25% (w/v) test item formulated in saline, right side: saline only.
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- Dermal response scores (for erythema) equal to 0 for all animals and for both sides.
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- Left side: 25% (w/v) test item formulated in saline, right side: saline only
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Clinical observations:
- Dermal response scores (for erythema) equal to 0 for all animals and for both sides. Dry skin was recorded in one animal.
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 50% (w/v) 2-Mercaptobenzothiazole
- No. with + reactions:
- 8
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Discrete erythema (score 1) on the skin of the animals
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 50% (w/v) 2-Mercaptobenzothiazole
- No. with + reactions:
- 7
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Discrete erythema (score 1) on the skin of the animals
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
Any other information on results incl. tables
Body weight: There were no notable differences between the test animal group and the control group. On Day 25 prior to euthanasia, control and test animals presented a mean body weight of 419.2 g and 434.1 g, respectively.
Clinical observations and mortality: No signs of systemic or local toxicity were observed in any animals.
No mortality was observed during the study. There were no overt signs of an adverse clinical response to treatment with the test item during the course of the study.
Skin effects after the induction exposure:
* Test group: At the 24-hour examination after the intradermal induction exposure to 0.1% (w/v) test item formulated in saline, very slight (barely perceptible) erythema (Draize score: 1) were observed in seven animals. No oedema was observed in any animals.
At the 1-hour examination after the dermal induction exposure to 100% (w/v) test item, very slight (barely perceptible) erythema (Draize score: 1) were observed in three animals; giving a mean of the scores of 0.3. No oedema was observed in any animals examined at this time. At the 24-, 48- and 72-hour examinations after the dermal induction exposure to 100% (w/v) test item, no erythema was observed anymore in test animals and no oedema was observed.
* Control group: At the 24-hour examination after the intradermal induction exposure to saline, neither erythema nor oedema was observed in control animals.
At all examinations (1, 24, 48 and 72 hours) after the dermal induction exposure to saline, neither erythema nor oedema was observed in control animals.
Table 1: Summary of the result after the challenge exposure
Groups and animals |
24 hours after patch removal |
48 hours after patch removal |
||
Left side* |
Right side** |
Left side* |
Right side** |
|
Control – Animal 1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 !1 |
Control – Animal 2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Control – Animal 3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Control – Animal 4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Control – Animal 5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Mean scores |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Dosed – Animal 6 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Dosed – Animal 7 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Dosed – Animal 8 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Dosed – Animal 9 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Dosed – Animal 10 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Dosed – Animal 11 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Dosed – Animal 12 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Dosed – Animal 13 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Dosed – Animal 14 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Dosed – Animal 15 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Mean scores |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
*: Left side was treated with 25% (w/v) test item formulated in saline, **: Right side was treated with saline only.
!1: Minor dry skin on the left side
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Remarks:
- No indication of skin sensitisation
- Conclusions:
- Challenge with test item (Lutetium trinitrate) evoked no positive responses in the test animals previously sensitised with the test item or in the control group. The net response value represented an incidence rate of 0% and the net score value of 0.00.
In conclusion, under the conditions of the present assay the test item Lutetium trinitrate was shown to have no sensitisation potential and classified as a nonsensitizer. - Executive summary:
A skin sensitisation study was performed in the guinea pig according to the Magnusson and Kligman method, using a maximisation method with Freund's Complete Adjuvant to evaluate the sensitisation potential of test item. The study was performed according to OECD Guideline No. 406 (adopted in 1992) and in compliance with GLP guidelines.
Based on the results of a preliminary test, ten test animals were subjected to sensitization procedures in a two-stage process, named induction phase: i.e. an intradermal treatment and a 48-hour topical application (dermal treatment under an occlusive dressing). The test item was used at a concentration of 0.1% (w/v) in saline for intradermal injections and at a concentration of 100% (w/v) in saline for topical sensitization treatment. Five control guinea pigs were simultaneously exposed to vehicle only during the sensitisation phase; saline being used for both intradermal and dermal treatments.
Two weeks after the last induction exposure, a challenge dose at a concentration of 25% (w/v) test item formulated in saline was administered on the left side of all animals for 24 hours. The right side of the animals was treated with vehicle only (saline). Challenge was performed by dermal application of the test item. Test and control animals were treated in the same way.
Skin reactions were measured 24 and 48 hours after patch removal.
Results
No signs of systemic toxicity were observed in any animal.
Incidence rate:
After the challenge exposure, no signs of contact sensitisation were detected in guinea pigs previously exposed to the test item during the induction phase of the experiment.
Intensity of sensitisation response:
In the control and treated animals the mean of the scores was 0.00 according to the 24 and 48-hour results.
In conclusion, under the conditions of the present assay the test item Lutetium trinitrate was shown to have no sensitisation potential and classified as a non-sensitizer.
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.