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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 947-589-9 | 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
Acute Toxicity: dermal
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- acute toxicity: dermal
- Data waiving:
- study scientifically not necessary / other information available
- Justification for data waiving:
- the study does not need to be conducted because the substance does not meet the criteria for classification as acute toxicity or STOT SE by the oral route and no systemic effects have been observed in in vivo studies with dermal exposure (e.g. skin irritation, skin sensitisation)
Cross-reference
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- data waiving: supporting information
Reference
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- From Dec. 11, 2017 to Apr. 03, 2018
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 1992
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: EC No 440/2008, part B. “Skin Sensitization: Guinea-Pig Maximization Test (GPMT)”
- Version / remarks:
- 2008
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 2003
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The Guinea Pig Maximization Test was selected since the test substance is a surfactant and the Local Lymph Node Assay as preferred alternative has shown to provide false positive results for surfactants
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Charles River France, L’Arbresle, France; Charles River Deutschland, Sulzfeld, Germany
- Age at the Initiation of Dosing: Young adult animals (approximately 4 weeks old).
- Weight at the Initiation of Dosing: 258 to 289 g.
- Acclimation: 5 d before the commencement of dosing.
- Housing: Up to 5 animals of the same sex and same dosing group together in labeled Noryl cages containing sterilized sawdust as bedding material
- Diet: Complete maintenance diet for guinea pigs (MS-H, SSNIFF® Spezialdiäten GmbH, Soest, Germany) was provided ad libitum
- Water: Municipal tap-water was freely available to each animal via water bottles.
- Other: Nulliparous and non-pregnant animals were included in the study
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature: 18 to 24°C
- Humidity: 40 to 70%
- Air changes: Ten or greater air changes per hour with 100% fresh air
- Photoperiod: 12 hour light/12 hour dark cycle
ANIMAL ENRICHMENT: For psychological/environmental enrichment, animals were provided with shelters, Play tunnels, Datesand, except when interrupted by study procedures/activities. - No. of animals per dose:
- Experimental group: 10 females
Control group: 5 females - Details on study design:
- VEHICLE: Water (Elix, Millipore S.A.S., Molsheim, France).
PREPARATION OF TEST SUBSTANCE
Test substance dosing formulations (w/w) were homogenized to visually acceptable levels at appropriate concentrations to meet dose level requirements.
The dosing formulations were kept at room temperature until dosing. The dosing formulations were stirred until and during dosing.
No adjustment was made for specific gravity of the vehicle. No correction was made for the purity/composition of the test substance.
Any residual volumes were discarded.
Analysis of test substance in vehicle for concentration, stability, homogeneity was not performed.
ANIMAL SELECTION, IDENTIFICATION AND ASSIGNMENT TO EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS
- Animal Identification: At study assignment, each animal was identified using an ear tattoo.
- Assignment to experimental groups: Animals were assigned to the study at the discretion of the coordinating biotechnician according to body weights, with all animals within ± 20% of the sex mean. Animals in poor health or at extremes of body weight range were not assigned to the study.
- Before the initiation of dosing, a health inspection was performed and any assigned animal considered unsuitable for use in the study were replaced by alternate animals obtained from the same shipment and maintained under the same environmental conditions.
RANGE FINDING TESTS:
A preliminary irritation study was conducted in order to select test substance concentrations to be used in the main study. The selection of concentrations was based on the following criteria:
- The concentrations are well-tolerated systemically by the animals.
- For the induction exposures: the highest possible concentration that produced mild to moderate irritation (grades 2 - 3).
- For challenge exposure: the maximum non-irritant concentration.
Series of test substance concentrations were tested. Practical feasibility of administration determined the highest starting-concentration for each route. The starting- and subsequent concentrations were taken from the series: 100%, 50%, 20%, 10%, 5%, 2%, 1% and if needed, further lower concentrations using the same steps.
The test system and procedures were identical to those used during the main study, unless otherwise specified. The six animals selected were between 4 and 9 weeks old. No body weights were determined.
- Intradermal injections:
Initially, a series of four test substance concentrations was tested; the highest concentration was the maximum concentration that could technically be injected. Each of two animals received two different concentrations in duplicate (0.1 mL/site) in the clipped scapular region. The resulting dermal reactions were assessed 24 and 48 h after treatment.
Based on the results in the initially treated animals, two additional animals were treated in a similar manner with four lower concentrations at a later stage.
- Epidermal application:
A series of four test substance concentrations was tested; the highest concentration being the maximum concentration that could technically be applied. Two different concentrations were applied (0.5 mL each or an equivalent amount when dosed with a spatula) per animal to the clipped flank, using Metalline patches# (2x3 cm) mounted on Medical tape, which were held in place with Micropore tape and subsequently Coban elastic bandage. The initially used animals receiving intradermal injections were treated with the lowest concentrations and two other animals with the highest concentrations. After 24 h, the dressing was removed and the skin cleaned of residual test substance using water.
The resulting dermal reactions were assessed for irritation 24 and 48 h after removal of the dressings.
MAIN STUDY
The concentrations and induction method were selected based on the results of the preliminary irritation study.
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE (Experimental animals)
- Day 1: The scapular region was clipped and three pairs of intradermal injections (0.1 mL/site) were made in this area as follows:
a) A 1:1 w/w mixture of Freunds' Complete Adjuvant (Sigma-Aldrich, Steinheim, Germany) with water for injection (Fresenius AG, Bad Homburg, Germany).
b) The test substance at a 2% concentration.
c) A 1:1 w/w mixture of the test substance, at twice the concentration used in (b) and Freunds' Complete Adjuvant.
Note: One of each pair was on each side of the midline and from cranial a) to caudal c).
- Day 3: The dermal reactions caused by the intradermal injections were assessed for irritation.
- Day 7: The scapular area between the injection sites was clipped and subsequently rubbed with 10% sodium-dodecyl-sulfate (SDS, Boom, Meppel, The Netherlands) in vaseline using a spatula. This concentration of SDS provokes a mild inflammatory reaction.
- Day 8: The 10% SDS treated area between the injection sites was treated with 0.5 mL or an equivalent amount when dosed with a spatula of a 100% test substance concentration using a Metalline patch (2x3 cm) mounted on Medical tape, which was held in place with Micropore tape and subsequently Coban elastic bandage.
- CONTROL ANIMALS: The control animals were treated as described for the experimental animals except that, instead of the test substance, the vehicle was administered.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE (Experimental and Control animals)
- Day 21: One flank of all animals was clipped and treated by epidermal application of a 100% test substance concentration and the vehicle (0.1 mL each, using Patch Test Plasters (Curatest F®, Lohmann, Almere, The Netherlands). The patches were held in place with Micropore tape and subsequently Coban elastic bandage.
- The dressing was removed after 24 h exposure and the skin cleaned of residual test substance and vehicle using water. The treated sites were assessed for challenge reactions 24 and 48 h after removal of the dressing.
TERMINATION
- After termination, animals were sacrificed using isoflurane (Abbott B.V., Hoofddorp, The Netherlands) and an intra-peritoneal injection of Euthasol® 20% (AST Farma BV, Oudewater, The Netherlands). - Challenge controls:
- Control animals were treated similar to test animals in 'CHALLENGE EXPOSURE'. For details refer to the section 'Details on study design'
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 100% test substance concentration
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- No skin reactions were noted for any animal 24 h after exposure
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 100% test substance concentration
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- No skin reactions were noted for any animal 48 h after exposure
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 100% test substance concentration
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 100% test substance
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Remarks on result:
- not measured/tested
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- Under the study conditions, test substance was determined to be non-sensitising.
- Executive summary:
A study was conducted to determine the skin sensitisation potential of the test substance using the Guinea-Pig Maximisation Test method (GPMT) according to OECD Guideline 406, in compliance with GLP. Test substance concentrations selected for the main study were based on the results of a preliminary study. In the main study, 10 experimental animals were intradermally injected with a 2% concentration and epidermally exposed to a 100% concentration (undiluted). Five control animals were similarly treated, but with vehicle alone. Approximately 24 h before the epidermal induction exposure, all animals were treated with 10% SDS. Two weeks after the epidermal application all animals were epidermally challenged with undiluted test substance (100% concentration) and the vehicle. There was no evidence that the test substance caused skin hypersensitivity in the guinea pig, since no responses were observed in the experimental or control animals in response to a 100% test substance concentration in the challenge phase. No mortality occurred and no symptoms of systemic toxicity were observed in the animals of the main study. Under the study conditions, the test substance was determined to be non-sensitising (Van Sas, 2018).
PRELIMINARY IRRITATION STUDY
Based on the results, the test substance concentrations selected for the main study were a 2% concentration for the intradermal induction and a 100% concentration for the epidermal induction exposure. Only very slight erythema was observed to the highest test substance concentration epidermally tested. Therefore, the test site of all animals of the main study were treated with 10% SDS approximately 24 h before the epidermal induction, to provoke a mild inflammatory reaction.
A 100% test substance concentration was selected for the challenge phase.
MAIN STUDY
INDUCTION PHASE: The reactions noted in the experimental and control animals after the epidermal induction exposure were considered to be enhanced by the SDS treatment.
CHALLENGE PHASE: No skin reactions were evident after the challenge exposure in the experimental and control animals.
TOXICITY / MORTALITY: No mortality occurred and no symptoms of systemic toxicity were observed in the animals of the main study.
BODY WEIGHTS: Body weights and body weight gain of experimental animals remained in the same range as controls over the study period.
There was no evidence that test substance caused skin hypersensitivity in the guinea pig, since no responses were observed in the experimental animals in response to a 100% test substance concentration in the challenge phase.
Data source
Materials and methods
Results and discussion
Applicant's summary and conclusion
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.