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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 209-935-0 | CAS number: 598-50-5
- 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
Carcinogenicity
Administrative data
Description of key information
In vivo
(1) Multi-organ Carcinogenesis Bioassay: No carcinogenic activity identified in rat (male/female), (no guideline followed, Kitano 1997)
(2) Carcinogenic effect investigated in mongrel rabbits (male / female): negative (no guideline followed, Schneider 1977)
(3) Investigation of neurogenic and lymphoid neoplasms by methylurea given in drinking water to rats: negative (no guideline followed, Koestner 1978). The incidence of non-neurogenic tumours increased with the survival time and was unrelated to the treatment.
(4) Investigation of colon tumors using intrarectal installations of methylurea in rats (male): negative (no guideline followed, Narisawa 1976)
In vitro
Mammalian cell transformation assay using Chinese hamster lung (CHL) cells: negative up to 40 µg/mL (no guideline followed; Ishidate and Kada 1980)
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Carcinogenicity: via oral route
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Carcinogenicity: via inhalation route
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Carcinogenicity: via dermal route
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the data, classification of 1-methylurea for carcinogenicity according to directive 67/548/EEC and Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008 is not possible. .
Additional information
There are no studies available comparable to guideline. Due to methodological deficiencies, the available studies were not reliable or not assignable.
In vivo
In a ratmulti-organ carcinogenesis modelfollowing no guideline (Kitano 1997) used for carcinogenic risk assessment of combinations of N-nitroso precursors in man, the carcinogenic potential was investigated after feeding methylurea (MU) and / or sodium nitrite (NaN02). In experiment 1, to initiate multiple organs, groups of 10 or 20 male F344 rats were treated with 6 carcinogens targeting different organs. Starting a week after completion of this initiation phase, animals were given 0.1% MU in their food and/or 0.15% NaNO2in their drinking water for 23 weeks. The induction of tumors and/or preneoplastic lesions in the forestomach and esophagus was significantly increased in the group receiving MU plus NaN02. The numbers and areas of liver glutathione S-transferase placental form (GST-P)-positive foci were significantly elevated with MU plus NaNO2. Treatment with initiating carcinogens and MU alone resulted in a not significantly enhanced number of papillary or nodular hyperplasia in the forestomach. There was no treatment group with MU without initiation. Therefore, the treatment related effects of MU without NaNO2were not assessable.
In the second study the carcinogenic activity of ca. 30 mg/kg bw/d methylurea (0.1 % in food) with or without simultaneous application of ca. 59 mg/kg bw/d sodium nitrite (0.1 % in tap water) given continuously for duration of 100 days was studied in 6 to 13 young adult male and female mongrel rabbits (Schneider 1977). After a post-exposure period of > 400 days, the development of neoplasms was investigated.
Only a small number of neoplasms, partly benign, partly malignant, were detected in the digestive tract of the animals at least 500 days after beginning of the study. According to the authors, none of the neoplasms could be clearly attributed to the administered test substances. The authors stated that the negative result of the study might be due to the relatively low substance concentrations that were administered to the animals.
The study was documented rather briefly; results were presented only in tabular form. No information was given on results determined after methylurea administration alone as well as on important parameters, such as tumor type, incidence, and multiplicity or latency time.
In a third study, a two year food and drinking water study, 30 days old in total 20 Sprague-Dawley rats in each experiment group were treated 2 years continuously with ca. 10 and 27 mg/kg bw/day methylurea added to the drinking water at concentrations of 0.01 and 0.03 % (w/w) and ca. 135 mg/kg bw/day sodium nitrite in a concentration of 0.3 % (w/w) in the food (Koestner 1975). The induction of neurogenic and lymphoid neoplasms was examined macroscopically in the brain, spinal, cord and major peripheral nerves.
The percentage of rats with non-neurogenic tumors was 80% in the group with methylurea treatment alone compared to 90 % in the combined treatment group. The incidence of non-neurogenic tumours increased with the survival time and was unrelated to the treatment with the carcinogenic precursors.
In the forth study, 28 male rats were given intrarectal installations of methylurea (ca. 6.0 mg/kg bw/d (1.8 mg/rat) with and without simultaneous administration of sodium nitrite)3 times per week for 20 weeks (Narisawa 1976). Animals were autopsied and pathologically investigated. One group of animals (20 rats) was held for a total of 56 weeks with a post-exposure period of 36 weeks. In a third group, rats received methylurea alone dissolved in 0.5 ml of a solution buffered to pH 4.5 with 0.1 N hydrochloric acid. No colon tumors were found in rats given the mixture of nitrite and methylurea for 20 weeks and held for an additional 36 weeks, none presented with colon tumors. The control group of 20 rats given NaNO2alone had no colon tumors. In contrast, the group of 16 rats given methylurea alone in an acidic solution adjusted to pH 4.5 produced tumors in the colon. Adenomas were found in 3 animals; a polyploid lesion was found in another rat of this group.
According to the authors, these findings of a few tumors in rats given methylurea at a pH at which this substrate is readily nitrosable suggest that the large bowel might contain a source of nitrite. However, i.r. administration of a mixture of methylurea and nitrite for 20 weeks and further observation of the rats for an additional 36 weeks yielded no colon tumors. Thus, there is indirect evidence of lack of the in situ formation of carcinogenic MNU in the large bowel under physiological conditions. The study design and the results were presented in a rather brief manner; only one dose level was tested.
In vitro
In a mammalian cell transformation assay following no guideline (Ishidate and Kada 1980), Chinese hamster lung (CHL) cells were exposed to Methylurea at the test concentration 40 µg/ml. No cell transforming activity was observed in the colony assay.
A pulse-conductivity technique using the electron attachment constant (ke) was performed to screen potential carcinogenic activity by measure of the rate at which excess electrons in liquid cyclohexane attach to carcinogens and non-carcinogens, respectively (Bakale and McCreary 1987, Chapter 7.12).
The keresponse for methylurea resulted in an electron attachment / detachment equilibrium. Since none of the chemicals for which an equilibria had been observed are carcinogens, however, the authors decided to regard an electron attachment / detachment equilibrium as a negative indication of carcinogenicity.
Accordingly, for methylurea, a negative response was obtained with the ketest and the authors assessed methylurea as not carcinogenic.
Conclusion: Methylurea has not been tested for its carcinogenic activity in a guideline conform study. It is noted, however, that nitrosation of methylurea may occur with nitrite, resulting in the formation of nitrosoureas. Nitrosoureas have been shown to be carcinogenic (Hill M 1988. N-Nitroso compounds and human cancer. In Nitrosamines: Toxicology and Microbiology, ed Hill M. Ellis Horwood Ltd., Chichester, pp.142-162.Koehl W Eisenbrand G (1999) N-nitroso compounds. Toxicology; eds: Marquardt H et al., London, Academic Press).
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.