Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
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: 241-460-4 | CAS number: 17439-11-1
- 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:
- supporting study
- Study period:
- 2013-02-12 to 2013-03-15
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: GLP guideline study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 013
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- adopted 1992-07-17
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- Dipotassium hexafluorotitanate
- EC Number:
- 240-969-9
- EC Name:
- Dipotassium hexafluorotitanate
- Cas Number:
- 16919-27-0
- Molecular formula:
- F6Ti.2K
- IUPAC Name:
- dipotassium hexafluorotitanate(2-)
- Test material form:
- solid: particulate/powder
- Details on test material:
- - Name of test material (as cited in study report): Potassium hexafluorotitanate (K2TiF6)
- Physical state: white powder
- Storage condition of test material: the test article was stored at room temperature and humidity.
Constituent 1
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Hartley
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS - Hartley Albino guinea pigs
- Age at study initiation: 2 - 3.5 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: males: 277 - 345 g; females: 285 - 332 g
- Housing: individually housed in suspended wire cages
- Diet (ad libitum): Fresh PMI Guinea Pig Chow (Diet #5025)
- Water (ad libitum): water
- Acclimation period: at least five days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS - temperature controlled rooms
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12
Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Inductionopen allclose all
- Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- Intradermal induction: 1% concentration
Topical induction: 75% concentration
Challenge: 10% concentration
Challengeopen allclose all
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- Intradermal induction: 1% concentration
Topical induction: 75% concentration
Challenge: 10% concentration
- No. of animals per dose:
- Test article group: 10 males / 10 females
- Details on study design:
- SITE PREPARATION
The day prior to the screen, intradermal induction, topical induction, or challenge, the sites (back or sides) were clipped free of hair with an electric clipper. Upon examination prior to the screen or intradermal induction, animals with skin irregularities or irritation were eliminated from the study.
RANGE FINDING TESTS:
The preliminary screen was conducted to determine the concentration for intradermal injection, which was not necrotic, ulcerogenic or toxic. For the topical application, the concentration of the test article must be well tolerated systemically and produce no more than mild to moderate skin irritation.
The test article was prepared in distilled water, to the following five concentrations: 1, 10, 25, 50 and 75%. Three guinea pigs were dosed intradermally with 0.1 ml of each of the following test article concentrations: 1, 10, 25, and 50%. Three other guinea pigs were dosed topically with 0.1 ml of each of the following test article concentrations: 10, 25, 50 and 75%. For the topical applications, 0.1 ml of the test article mixture was applied to 2 x 2 cm squares of Whatman’s #1 filter paper, which were applied to the skin. The patches, occluded with plastic and fastened with nonirritating tape, remained in place for 24 hours.
The intradermal sites were scored 24 hours and 3 days after dosing.
The topical sites were scored 24 and 48 hours after patch removal.
Erythema was evaluated using the Magnusson and Kligman grading scale. Additional signs were described.
The screen animals were weighed pretest and observed daily for mortality and toxicity.
Results:
Based on the results of the intradermal injections, a 1% concentration was chosen for intradermal induction.
Based on the results of the topical doses, a 75% concentration was chosen for topical induction.
Based on the results of the topical doses, a 10% concentration was chosen for the challenge.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
Intradermal induction: Six intradermal injections were made on the 4 x 6 cm prepared site as follows:
- One site received 0.1 ml of 50% Freunds Complete Adjuvant (FCA) in distilled water on both sides of the midline
- One site received 0.1 ml of a 1% concentration of the test article mixture on both sides of the midline
- One site received 0.1 ml of a mixture containing equal parts of 50% FCA and a 1% concentration of the test article on both sides of the midline
Topical induction: because a 75% concentration of the test article did not produce irritation in the preliminary screen, the animals were pretreated with 0.5 ml of a 10% mixture of sodium dodecyl sulfate approximately 24 hours prior to topical induction and the sites remained unoccluded. At least two hours prior to topical induction, any residual sodium dodecyl sulfate was removed with distilled water. Seven days after intradermal induction, the guinea pigs in the test article group were dosed topically using 2 x 4 cm patches of Whatman’s #1 filter paper, saturated with 0.2 ml of the 75% concentration. The patches, occluded with plastic and fastened with adhesive tape, remained in place for 48 hours. The guinea pigs in the control group were dosed in the same manner with the vehicle control.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
Fourteen days after topical induction, the test and control animals were challenged topically using 2 x 2 cm patches of Whatman’s #1 filter paper, saturated with 0.1 ml of a 10% concentration of the test article one one side. The vehicle was applied topically on the other side. All sites were occluded with plastic and secured with non-irritating tape for 24 hours.
OBSERVATIONS:
- Intradermal injections: the treated site of each animal was examined and scored for dermal reactions at 24 and 48 hours after injection.
- Topical induction: the treated site of each animal was examined and scored at 48 hours after application of the saturated patch.
- Challenge: the challenge sites, both test article and control, of each animal were examined and scored at 24 and 48 hours after patch removal.
Erythema was evaluated using the Magnusson and Kligman grading scale. Additional signs were described.
Clinical signs: animals were observed once daily for mortality and toxicity
Body Weights: body weights were recorded pretest and at study termination. - Challenge controls:
- Vehicle control group (100% distilled water): 5 males / 5 females
During challenge they received the test article as a 10% concentration. - Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- 2-mercaptobenzothiazole 98% (5% in acetone for intradermal induction; 50% in acetone for topical induction; 25% in acetone for challenge)
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- Dermal observations:
- Test article group:
Intradermal induction: erythema was absent to intense with pale areas
Topical induction: erythema was absent to moderate
Challenge: erythema was absent to moderate on the test article site and absent on the vehicle control site
-Vehicle control group:
Intradermal induction: erythema was absent to moderate
Topical induction: erythema was absent to moderate
Challenge: erythema was absent in both the test article and vehicle control site
2-mercaptobenzothiazole 98% was considered to have a skin sensitising potential.
Body weight:
All animals gained weight during the study.
Systemic observations:
One male of the vehicle control group appeared emaciated. All other animals appeared normal.
In vivo (non-LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10% concentration of test article
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- One male of the test article group had soiling of the anogenital area; all other animals appeared normal.
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 10% concentration of test article. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: One male of the test article group had soiling of the anogenital area; all other animals appeared normal..
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10% concentration of test article
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 10% concentration of test article. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 100% distilled water
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 100% distilled water. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 100% distilled water
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 100% distilled water. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 10% concentration of test article
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- All animals appeared normal.
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 10% concentration of test article. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0. Clinical observations: All animals appeared normal..
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 10% concentration of test article
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 10% concentration of test article. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 100% distilled water
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 100% distilled water. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 100% distilled water
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: negative control. Dose level: 100% distilled water. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 25% concentration of test article
- No. with + reactions:
- 8
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- One male of the negative (vehicle) control group appeared emaciated. All other animals appeared normal.
- Remarks on result:
- other: see Remark
- Remarks:
- Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: positive control. Dose level: 25% concentration of test article. No with. + reactions: 8.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: One male of the negative (vehicle) control group appeared emaciated. All other animals appeared normal..
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 25% concentration of test article
- No. with + reactions:
- 8
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: positive control. Dose level: 25% concentration of test article. No with. + reactions: 8.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 100% acetone
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: positive control. Dose level: 100% acetone. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 100% acetone
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: positive control. Dose level: 100% acetone. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- other: negative control in the separately conducted positive control study
- Dose level:
- 25% concentration of test article
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: other: negative control in the separately conducted positive control study. Dose level: 25% concentration of test article. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- other: negative control in the separately conducted positive control study
- Dose level:
- 25% concentration of test article
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: other: negative control in the separately conducted positive control study. Dose level: 25% concentration of test article. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- other: negative control in the separately conducted positive control study
- Dose level:
- 100% acetone
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: other: negative control in the separately conducted positive control study. Dose level: 100% acetone. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- other: negative control in the separately conducted positive control study
- Dose level:
- 100% acetone
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: other: negative control in the separately conducted positive control study. Dose level: 100% acetone. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 10.0.
Any other information on results incl. tables
Dermal observations:
- Test article group:
Intradermal induction: erythema was absent to intense
Topical induction: erythema was absent to moderate
Challenge: erythema was absent in both the test article site and the vehicle control site
-Vehicle control group:
Intradermal induction: erythema was absent to discrete
Topical induction: erythema was discrete to moderate
Challenge: erythema was absent in both the test article and vehicle control site
Body weights:
All animals gained weight during the study.
Systemic observations:
One male of the test article group had soiling of the anogenital area; all other animals appeared normal.
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- The test material is not considered to be a skin sensitiser. The test material produced a 0% (0/20) sensitisation rate.
According to 67/548/EC and subsequent regulations,dipotassium hexafluorotitanate is not classified as a skin sensitiser.
According to the EC Regulation No. 1272/2008 and subsequent regulations, dipotassium hexafluorotitanate is not classified as a skin sensitiser.
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.
