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: 946-382-0 | 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
A guinea pig maximisation study conducted according to OECD/EC guidelines (1981) and GLP principles is available (Klimisch 1). The test substance was found to have skin sensitising properties.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Remarks:
- Guinea Pig Maximisation Test
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 16JUN1992 - 18JUL1992
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- (1981)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.6 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- (1992)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Remarks:
- date of inspection: 17 March 1992
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- This guinea pig maximisation study was conducted in 1992, before LLNA was implemented.
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- The test was performed with PEMP product, the registered substance.
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: David Hall Limited, Burton-on-Trent, Staffordshire, united Kingdom
- Age at study initiation: appr. 8-12 weeks old
- Weight at study initiation: 302-391g
- Housing: groups of up to three in solid-floor propylene cages
- Diet: Guinea Pig FD1 Diet (Special Diet Services Limited, Withamm, Essex, United Kingdom), ad libitum
- Water: tap water, ad libitum
- Acclimation period: minimum 5 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 19-22
- Humidity (%): 46-74
- Air changes (per hr): appr. 15
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12
IN-LIFE DATES: From: 16JUN1992 To: 18JUL1992 - Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- arachis oil
- Remarks:
- (or unchanged)
- Concentration / amount:
- Intradermal induction: 1% (w/v)
Topical induction: undiluted
Topical challenge: undiluted and 75% (w/v) - Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- arachis oil
- Remarks:
- (or unchanged)
- Concentration / amount:
- Intradermal induction: 1% (w/v)
Topical induction: undiluted
Topical challenge: undiluted and 75% (w/v) - No. of animals per dose:
- 20 (treated) and 10 (control)
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Intradermal application:
Two animals were intradermally injected with preparations of test material (1% or 5% in arachis oil B.P.). No local necrosis or systemic toxicity were seen after injection with 1% w/v. At 5% w/v, local necrosis was observed at 24 and 48 hours with eschar formation at 72 hours and 7 days (in absence of signs of systemic toxicity).
Topical application:
Two guinea pigs (intradermally injected with Freund's Complete Adjuvant nine days earlier) were occlusively exposed for 48 hours with the undiluted test material and three preparations of the test material (75%, 50% and 25% v/v in arachis oil B.P.). No skin reactions were seen at 25% and 50% concentration. Exposure to 75% and 100% test substance resulted in scattered mild redness. At 100%, the skin reaction remained for up to and including 48 hours in both animals. At 75%, skin reaction was still visible after 48 hours in one animal, in the other all skin reactions resolved after 48 hours.
Furthermore, the flanks of two guinea pigs were treated occlusively for 24 hours with the undiluted test material and three preparations of the test material (75%, 50% and 25% v/v in arachis oil B.P.). This resulted in skin reaction seen in both animals (scattered mild redness at 25% and 50%; moderate and diffuse redness at 75% and 100% ). The skin reactions had resolved after 24 hours.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: single intradermal and single topical exposure
- Exposure period: 48 hours (topical application)
- Site: area of appr. 40 mm x 60 mm on the shoulder region (clipped)
- Frequency of applications: single application
- Concentrations: 1% (w/v) (intradermal) and undiluted (topical)
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: Single application
- Day of challenge: day 21
- Exposure period: 24 hours
- Site: right flank (undiluted sample), left flank (test substance at 75% (v/v))
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24 and 48 hours after challenge - Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene
- Positive control results:
- In a study performed with 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) following the same protocol between 29 November and 26 December, DNCB produced a 89% sensitisation rate.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 100%
- No. with + reactions:
- 12
- Total no. in group:
- 18
- Clinical observations:
- For all positive animals, reactions extended beyond treatment site
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 13
- Total no. in group:
- 18
- Clinical observations:
- For all positive animals, reactions extended beyond treatment site
- Remarks on result:
- other: Clinical observations: For all positive animals, reactions extended beyond treatment site.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 100%
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Scattered mild redness (score 1) limited to treatment site
- Remarks on result:
- other: Clinical observations: Scattered mild redness (score 1) limited to treatment site.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Scattered mild redness (score 1) limited to treatment site
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 100%
- No. with + reactions:
- 4
- Total no. in group:
- 18
- Clinical observations:
- For 5 animals, adverse reactions prevented accurate evaluation of the skin
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 18
- Clinical observations:
- For 13 animals, adverse reactions prevented accurate evaluation of the skin
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 100%
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Scattered mild redness (score 1) limited to treatment site
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- Category 1 (skin sensitising) based on GHS criteria
- Conclusions:
- Based on the results of a guinea pig maximisation study conducted according to OECD/EC guidelines (1981) and GLP principles, the test substance was found to have skin sensitising properties.
- Executive summary:
A guinea pig maximisation study was conducted according to OECD/EC guidelines (1981) and GLP principles. Based on preliminary testing, the concentrations of test material were choosen as follows: 1% (w/v) in arachis oil B.P. (intradermal induction), undiluted (topical induction) and undiluted and 75% (topical challenge). One animal was found dead at day 1 (unknown cause) and one was killed in extremis on day 21. The test material gave a positive response in 12/18 (100%) and 13/18 (75%) animals after 24 hours. At 48 hours, adverse reactions (including desquamination and oedema) prevented accurate evaluation in many animals.
Based on the results of this study, the test substance was found to have skin sensitising properties.
Reference
One test animal was found dead on day 1 with unknown cause of death. One test animal was killed for humane reasons on day 21 (no further details given).
Observations after topical induction:
One hour after removal of dressing, scattered mild redness was seen in 11/19 animals, and 7/19 had moderate and diffuse redness.
In one animal, the adverse reactions prevented accurate evaluation of the skin effects. Furthermore, 8/19 animals had scratched and bleeding test sites. after 24 hours, skin evaluation was not possible in 7/19 guinea pigs, related to dried blood and presence of hardened, dark-brown/ black-colored scabs. No skin reactions were seen in the control animals.
Observations after challenge:
Scattered mild redness and moderate and diffuse redness were elicited by the test material after challenge with 100% and 75% test substance after 24 hours. One animal (challenged with 75% test substance) was observed to have small superficial scattered scabs. In almost all challenged animals, the skin reactions extended beyond treatment site. At 48 hours, adverse reactions prevented accurate evaluation of the skin reactions. In these animals, desquamation was seen, accompanied by slight or well-defined oedema. For most animals, skin reactions extended beyond treatment site (these animals were regarded to give a positive reaction to the test substance).
No skin reactions were seen after treatment of induced animals with vehicle alone.
Body weight gains of the guinea pigs in the test group during the study were comparable to those observed in the control group.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (sensitising)
- Additional information:
A guinea pig maximisation study was conducted according to OECD/EC guidelines (1981) and GLP principles. Based on preliminary testing, the concentrations of test material were choosen as follows: 1% (w/v) in arachis oil B.P. (intradermal induction), undiluted (topical induction) and undiluted and 75% (topical challenge). One animal was found dead at day 1 (unknown cause) and one was killed in extremis on day 21. The test material gave a positive response in 12/18 (100%) and 13/18 (75%) animals after 24 hours. At 48 hours, adverse reactions (including desquamination and oedema) prevented accurate evaluation in many animals.
Based on the results of this study, the test substance was found to have skin sensitising properties.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the available data, PEMP is classified for skin sensitization according to CLP Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008.
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.
