Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
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: 500-057-6 | CAS number: 27104-30-9
Toxicological Summary
Administrative data
Workers - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 1.15 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- ECHA REACH Guidance
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 10
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC
- Value:
- 11.53 mg/m³
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
- Corrected NOAEC = Oral NOAEL * (1/sRV rat 8h) * (ABS oral-rat / ABS inh-human) * (sRV human 8h / wRV 8h) with oral NOAEL = 6.54 mg/kg bw/d; sRV rat 8h = 0.38 m3/kg bw; ABS oral rat = 100% **; ABS inh-human=100% ; sRV human 8h = 6.7 m3/person; wRV 8h = 10 m3/person. Corrected NOAEC = 11.53 mg/m3
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- NOAEL is used as the starting point
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- Sub-chronic to chronic
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- No allometric scaling used in derivation of inhalation DNEL
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- Standard factor used for interspecies remaining differences is 2.5. Hepatotoxicity was observed in three species (rat, mouse and dog) treated with THPX substances in sub-acute, sub-chronic and chronic studies by oral route. Therefore, This AF is considered = 1. (See Table 1)
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- Default factor used for worker
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- Appropriate completeness and adequacy of the database
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- Not applicable
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- hazard unknown (no further information necessary)
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- hazard unknown (no further information necessary)
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- hazard unknown (no further information necessary)
DNEL related information
Workers - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 1.635 mg/kg bw/day
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
- Route of original study:
- Oral
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- ECHA REACH Guidance
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 40
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL
- Value:
- 65.4 mg/kg bw/day
- Explanation for the modification of the dose descriptor starting point:
- Dermal NOAEL = oral NOAEL * (ABS oral / ABS dermal) with Oral NOAEL = 6.54 mg/kg bw/d; ABS oral = 100%; ABS dermal = 10% (Supported by experimental data from other THP+salts and known reactivity of THPC-urea for amine moeity, see guidance R.7). Dermal NOAEL = 65.4 mg/kg bw/day.
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- NOAEL is used as the starting point
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- Sub-chronic to chronic
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 4
- Justification:
- Standard factor for interspecies differences Rat vs Human
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- Hepatotoxicity was observed in three species (rat, mouse and dog) treated with THPX substances in sub-acute, sub-chronic and chronic studies by oral route. Therefore, This AF is considered = 1. (See Table 1)
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- Default factor used for worker
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- Appropriate completeness and adequacy of the database
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- Not applicable
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- high hazard (no threshold derived)
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- sensitisation (skin)
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- high hazard (no threshold derived)
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- sensitisation (skin)
Workers - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- high hazard (no threshold derived)
Additional information - workers
Hepatotoxicity was observed in three species (rat, mouse and dog) treated with THPX substances in sub-acute, sub-chronic and chronic studies by oral route. Therefore, The AF for other interspecies differences is considered = 1 instead of 2.5. (See Table 1).
Table 1:Database on repeated-dose NOAEL/LOAEL (gavage) on THPX substances characterising the lowest observed effect: hepatotoxicity.Doses mg/kg bw/day expressed as active ingredient content.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hepatotoxicity |
THPC-Urea (Cas N° :27104-30-9) |
THPS (CAS N° : 55566-30-8) |
THPC (CAS N° : 124-64-1) |
Perform ST/STI (CAS N° : 359406-89-6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28 days – Oral (mg AI/kg bw/day) |
NOAEL |
Not achieved |
No histopathology |
No study |
5 |
|
|
LOAEL |
52 |
15 |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90 days - oral – rat (mg AI/kg bw/day) |
NOAEL |
6.54 13.1 |
0.75 |
No study |
2.5 5 |
|
|
LOAEL |
3.75 |
|
||||
|
90 days - oral - rat |
NOAEL |
No study |
5 |
3.75 |
No study |
|
|
LOAEL |
10 |
7.5 |
|
|||
|
90 days - oral - mouse |
NOAEL |
No study |
10 |
4.5 |
No study |
|
|
LOAEL |
20 |
15 |
|
|||
|
90-days - oral – dog (mg AI/kg bw/day) |
NOAEL |
No study |
0.75 |
No study |
No study |
|
|
LOAEL |
4.75 |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 years - oral – rat (mg AI/kg bw/day) |
NOAEL |
No study |
Not achieved |
Not achieved |
No study |
|
|
LOAEL |
5 (other doses: 10 mg/kg bw/day) |
3.75 (other dose: 7.5 mg/kg bw/day) |
|
|||
|
2 years - oral – mouse (mg AI/kg bw/day) |
NOAEL |
No study |
Not achieved |
Not achieved |
No study |
|
|
LOAEL |
5 (other doses: 10 mg/kg bw/day) |
7.5 (other dose: 15 mg/kg bw/day) |
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General Population - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- hazard unknown (no further information necessary)
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- hazard unknown (no further information necessary)
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- hazard unknown (no further information necessary)
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
General Population - Hazard via oral route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Additional information - General Population
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.
