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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 203-273-6 | CAS number: 105-13-5
- 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
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
Challenge patch with the highest non irritant solution in animals pre-treated with the preparation 60% and 30% are positive in half of the animals.The test chemical can be considered to cause sensitzing reactions to guinea pigs in the OET. The test chemical was considered to be one of the weak contact sensitiser for this species.
The relative potency index of the test chemical was calculated to be 5.9.
Based on the relative potency index, the test chemical was considered to be a moderate sensitizer.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- comparable to guideline study with acceptable restrictions
- Justification for type of information:
- data is from experimental reports
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: Open Epicutaneous test
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Open Epicutaneous test was carried out to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- open epicutaneous test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- not specified
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- not specified
- Sex:
- not specified
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- other: acetone
- Concentration / amount:
- 60, 30, 10 and 3% solutions
- Adequacy of induction:
- not specified
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- other: acetone
- Concentration / amount:
- 60, 30, 10 and 3% solutions
- Adequacy of challenge:
- not specified
- No. of animals per dose:
- 6-8
- Details on study design:
- Induction:
Days 0-20: On day 0, 0.1ml of the test material, undiluted and, if possible or necessary of its progressively diluted solutions or emulsions or suspensions is applied to an area measuring 8cm2 on the clipped flank skin of 6-8 guinea pigs per concentration group, using 1-6 such groups for each test material.
The applications are repeated daily for 3 weeks or done 5 times weekly during 4 weeks, always using the same skin site. The application site is left uncovered and the reactions, if continuous daily applications are performed, can be read 24 hours after each application or at the end of each week. When very strong skin reactions are provoked, the application site is changed.
Challenge:
Day 21 &35: to determine whether or not contact sensitization was induced, all groups of guinea pigs previously treated for 21 days as described above, as well as 6-8 untreated or only with the vehicle pretreated controls are tested on days 21 and 35 on the contralateral flank with the test material at the minimal irritating and some lower concentrations. The minimal irritating concentration of each material is used in order to confirm the biological activity determined before starting the induction (day-1) and to exclude false results based on instability of test materials. These tests are performed by applying with a pipette 0.025ml of each concentration to skin areas measuring 2 cm2, the reactions being read after 24,48 and /or 72 hours. This procedure enables to determine the minimal sensitising concentration necessary for inducing allergic contact hypersensitivity and the minimal eliciting concentration necessary to cause a positive reaction. The test material is considered allergenic at a concentration when at least one out of the 8 animals of the concentration group concerned shows positive reactions with non-irritant concentrations used for challenge, i.e its threshold concentration causing skin reactions is shifted into the lower part of the concentration range used for challenge. - Challenge controls:
- 6-8 untreated or only with the vehicle pretreated controls are tested on days 21 and 35 on the contralateral flank with the test material at the minimal irritating and some lower concentrations
- Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 60 % solution
- No. with + reactions:
- 4
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Clinical observations:
- Challenge on day 21 and 35 of the test
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 30 % solution
- No. with + reactions:
- 4
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Clinical observations:
- Challenge on day 21 and 35 of the test
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- other: 3rd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 10 % solution
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Clinical observations:
- Challenge on day 21 and 35 of the test
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- other: 4th reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 3 % solution
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 8
- Clinical observations:
- Challenge on day 21 and 35 of the test
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- other: weak contact sensitiser
- Conclusions:
- Challenge patch with the highest non irritant solution in animals pre-treated with the preparation 60% and 30% are positive in half of the animals.The test chemical can be considered to cause sensitzing reactions to guinea pigs in the OET. The test chemical was considered to be one of the weak contact sensitiser for this species.
- Executive summary:
Open Epicutaneous test was carried out to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical
On day 0 of the induction exposure, 0.1ml of the test material, undiluted and, if possible or necessary of its progressively diluted solutions or emulsions or suspensions is applied to an area measuring 8cm2 on the clipped flank skin of 6-8 guinea pigs per concentration group, using 1-6 such groups for each test material.
The applications are repeated daily for 3 weeks or done 5 times weekly during 4 weeks, always using the same skin site. The application site is left uncovered and the reactions, if continuous daily applications are performed, can be read 24 hours after each application or at the end of each week. When very strong skin reactions are provoked, the application site is changed. To determine whether or not contact sensitization was induced, all groups of guinea pigs previously treated for 21 days as described above, as well as 6-8 untreated or only with the vehicle pretreated controls are tested on days 21 and 35 on the contralateral flank with the test material at the minimal irritating and some lower concentrations. The minimal irritating concentration of each material is used in order to confirm the biological activity determined before starting the induction (day-1) and to exclude false results based on instability of test materials. These tests are performed by applying with a pipette 0.025ml of each concentration to skin areas measuring 2 cm2, the reactions being read after 24,48 and /or 72 hours. This procedure enables to determine the minimal sensitising concentration necessary for inducing allergic contact hypersensitivity and the minimal eliciting concentration necessary to cause a positive reaction. The test material is considered allergenic at a concentration when at least one out of the 8 animals of the concentration group concerned shows positive reactions with non-irritant concentrations used for challenge, i.e its threshold concentration causing skin reactions is shifted into the lower part of the concentration range used for challenge. 6-8 untreated or only with the vehicle pretreated controls are tested on days 21 and 35 on the contralateral flank with the test material at the minimal irritating and some lower concentrations
Challenge patch with the highest non irritant solution in animals pre-treated with the preparation 60% and 30% are positive in half of the animals.The test chemical can be considered to cause sensitzing reactions to guinea pigs in the OET. The test chemical was considered to be one of the weak contact sensitiser for this species.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- data from handbook or collection of data
- Justification for type of information:
- data is from peer reviewed journals
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: USEPA method OPPTS 870.2600
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- To evaluate the potential of the test chemical for inducing allergic contact dermatitis
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- CBA
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- Details on test animal
TEST ANIMALS
- Age at study initiation: 7-12 weeks - Vehicle:
- other: ethanol:diethyl phthalate [1:3]
- Concentration:
- 2,5 10, 25, and 50% w/v in 1:3 ethanol:diethyl phthalate
- No. of animals per dose:
- four female mice/dose
- Details on study design:
- Details on study design
Pre –screen tests : No data
MAIN STUDY
ANIMAL ASSIGNMENT AND TREATMENT
- Name of test method: LLNA
- Criteria used to consider a positive response:
A substance was classified as a skin sensitizer if it induced a threefold or greater increase in local lymph node proliferative activity at one or more test concentrations when compared with concurrent vehicle-treated controls (SI≥3). Dose response data were used to measure the relative skin sensitization potency of all of the chemicals that were positive. When the LLNA dose-response curve included concentrations that induced at least one SI greater than 3 and one SI less than 3, EC3 values were calculated by linear interpolation. For chemicals that induced an SI greater than or equal to 3 at all concentrations tested, an EC3 value was extrapolated from the two lowest doses used. For this extrapolation method to work, a dose response should be evident. The relative sensitizing potencies of the chemical allergens were categorized via a recently proposed arbitrary classification scheme.
TREATMENT PREPARATION AND ADMINISTRATION: groups of CBA female mice (7–12 weeks of age) were exposed topically on the dorsum of both ears to 25 µL of test material or to an equal volume of the relevant vehicle alone. Treatment was performed daily for 3 consecutive days. Five days after the initiation of exposure, all mice were injected via the tail vein with 250 µL of phosphate buffered saline (PBS) containing 20 µCi of tritiated thymidine. Mice were sacrificed 5 hours later, and the draining auricular lymph nodes were excised and pooled for each experimental group or each individual animal. The incorporation of tritiated thymidine measured by beta scintillation counting was reported in disintegrations per minute (dpm). A stimulation index (SI) was calculated for each chemical-treated group as the ratio of the dpm of the treated group (or mean dpm when individual animals were assessed) to the dpm or mean dpm of the concurrent vehicle control group. - Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Key result
- Parameter:
- EC3
- Value:
- 5.9
- Test group / Remarks:
- Moderate Sensitizer
- Remarks on result:
- other: positive sensitizer
- Interpretation of results:
- other: sensitizing
- Conclusions:
- The relative potency index of the test chemical was calculated to be 5.9.
Based on the relative potency index, the test chemical was considered to be a moderate sensitizer. - Executive summary:
The dermal sensitization potential ofthe test chemical was evaluated in a mouse local lymphnode assay(LLNA). The study was performed as per OECD 429 Guidelines. Groups of female CBA mice (7-12 weeks of age) were exposed topically on the dorsum of both ears to 25µl of the test material or to an equal volume of relevant vehicle only. Treatment was performed daily for 3 consecutive days.Five days after the initiation of exposure, all mice were injected via the tail vein with 250 µL of phosphate buffered saline (PBS) containing 20 µCi of tritiated thymidine. Mice were sacrificed 5 hours later, and the draining auricular lymph nodes were excised and pooled for each experimental group or each individual animal. The incorporation of tritiated thymidine measured by beta scintillation counting was reported in disintegrations per minute (dpm). A stimulation index (SI) was calculated for each chemical-treated group as the ratio of the dpm of the treated group (or mean dpm when individual animals were assessed) to the dpm or mean dpm of the concurrent vehicle control group.The approach to estimation of the relative skin sensitization potential was based on the mathematical estimation of the concentration of chemical necessary to obtain a threshold positive response (SI = 3); this is termed as the EC3 value.A substance was classified as a skin sensitizer if it induced a threefold or greater increase in local lymph node proliferative activity at one or more test concentrations when compared with concurrent vehicle-treated controls (SI≥3).
The relative potency index of the test chemical was calculated to be 5.9.
Based on the relative potency index, the test chemical was considered to be a moderate sensitizer.
Referenceopen allclose all
Capacity to induce allergic sensitisation
After daily applications over three weeks |
Sensitisation rate Number of animals (positive/ total) |
|
Concentration % |
Day 21 |
Day 35 |
60 |
4/8 4/8 0/8 0/8 |
|
30 |
||
10 |
||
3 |
Table: Chemical Structures, Molecular Weights, LLNA Data, Potency Categorizations, and Reaction Mechanistic Domains
CAS |
Vehicle |
LLNA% |
LLNA% |
LLNA% |
LLNA% |
LLNA% |
LLNA SI |
LLNA SI |
LLNA SI |
LLNA SI |
LLNA SI |
LLNA EC3 |
Relative Potency |
Reaction mechanism domain |
105-13-5 |
E: DEP [1:3] |
2 |
5 |
10 |
25 |
50 |
1.8 |
2.8 |
3.9 |
5.1 |
5.3 |
5.9 |
Moderate |
Pro/Pre-MA |
E:D = ethanol:diethyl phthalate[1:3]; LLNA – Local lymph node assay (LLNA% = weight per volume :concentration); EC3 – Mathematically estimated concentration of the test chemical necessary to induce a threefold stimulation index; MA –Michaels acceptor
**value is estimated
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (sensitising)
- Additional information:
Various studies have been reviewed to determine the allergenic potential of the test chemical in living organisms. These include in vivo experimental studies performed on mice, guinea pigs, humans for the test chemical.
Open Epicutaneous test was carried out to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical.
On day 0 of the induction exposure, 0.1ml of the test material, undiluted and, if possible or necessary of its progressively diluted solutions or emulsions or suspensions is applied to an area measuring 8cm2 on the clipped flank skin of 6-8 guinea pigs per concentration group, using 1-6 such groups for each test material.
The applications are repeated daily for 3 weeks or done 5 times weekly during 4 weeks, always using the same skin site. The application site is left uncovered and the reactions, if continuous daily applications are performed, can be read 24 hours after each application or at the end of each week. When very strong skin reactions are provoked, the application site is changed. To determine whether or not contact sensitization was induced, all groups of guinea pigs previously treated for 21 days as described above, as well as 6-8 untreated or only with the vehicle pretreated controls are tested on days 21 and 35 on the contralateral flank with the test material at the minimal irritating and some lower concentrations. The minimal irritating concentration of each material is used in order to confirm the biological activity determined before starting the induction (day-1) and to exclude false results based on instability of test materials. These tests are performed by applying with a pipette 0.025ml of each concentration to skin areas measuring 2 cm2, the reactions being read after 24,48 and /or 72 hours. This procedure enables to determine the minimal sensitising concentration necessary for inducing allergic contact hypersensitivity and the minimal eliciting concentration necessary to cause a positive reaction. The test material is considered allergenic at a concentration when at least one out of the 8 animals of the concentration group concerned shows positive reactions with non-irritant concentrations used for challenge, i.e its threshold concentration causing skin reactions is shifted into the lower part of the concentration range used for challenge. 6-8 untreated or only with the vehicle pretreated controls are tested on days 21 and 35 on the contralateral flank with the test material at the minimal irritating and some lower concentrations
Challenge patch with the highest non irritant solution in animals pre-treated with the preparation 60% and 30% are positive in half of the animals.The test chemical can be considered to cause sensitzing reactions to guinea pigs in the OET. The test chemical was considered to be one of the weak contact sensitiser for this species.
This is supported by the results of a mouse local lymphnode assay(LLNA) to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical. The study was performed as per OECD 429 Guidelines. Groups of female CBA mice (7-12 weeks of age) were exposed topically on the dorsum of both ears to 25µl of the test material or to an equal volume of relevant vehicle only. Treatment was performed daily for 3 consecutive days.Five days after the initiation of exposure, all mice were injected via the tail vein with 250 µL of phosphate buffered saline (PBS) containing 20 µCi of tritiated thymidine. Mice were sacrificed 5 hours later, and the draining auricular lymph nodes were excised and pooled for each experimental group or each individual animal. The incorporation of tritiated thymidine measured by beta scintillation counting was reported in disintegrations per minute (dpm). A stimulation index (SI) was calculated for each chemical-treated group as the ratio of the dpm of the treated group (or mean dpm when individual animals were assessed) to the dpm or mean dpm of the concurrent vehicle control group.The approach to estimation of the relative skin sensitization potential was based on the mathematical estimation of the concentration of chemical necessary to obtain a threshold positive response (SI = 3); this is termed as the EC3 value.A substance was classified as a skin sensitizer if it induced a threefold or greater increase in local lymph node proliferative activity at one or more test concentrations when compared with concurrent vehicle-treated controls (SI≥3).
The relative potency index of the test chemical was calculated to be 5.9.
Based on the relative potency index, the test chemical was considered to be a moderate sensitizer.
These results are also supported by a Freunds Complete Adjuvant test performed to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of test chemical.
0.05 ml of the compound (undiluted, diluted or suspended) mixed with the same volume of FCA were injected intradermally into the neck on days 0,2,4,7 and 9 (total dose approx. 250mg). The experimental animals and controls, treated with 0.05ml of FCA only, were tested epicutaneously on days 21 and 35. These tests were performed by applying 0.025ml of each test-concentration to skin areas measuring 2 sq.cm. The reactions were read after 24, 48 and 72 hours.
The test chemical showed signs of sensitization in all the guinea pigs tested on day 21 and day 35 of the challenge exposure.
Hence, the test chemical can be considered to be sensitizing to guinea pig skin.
Draize test was performed to determine the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical in guinea pigs.
On day 0, groups of 8 animals were injected intradermally with 0.05ml of a 0.1% solution of the preparation in saline and with 0.1 ml on nine further alternate days (total dose: 0.95mg). Experimental and control animals were tested intradermally with 0.05ml of a 0.1% solution on days 35 and 49, the mean diameter of the papular reactions being evaluated
The intradermal and epicutaneous challenge exposure with the test chemical were negative. Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing to the skin of guinea pigs in the Draize test.
The results of the Draize test are supported by a Guinea Pig Maximization Test (GPMT) to assess the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical
On day 0, the animals were injected intradermally with 0.1ml of a 5% solution of the compound, with 0.1ml of a 5% emulsion of the compound in FCA and with 0.1 ml of FCA alone, each injection was given twice. In addition, on day 8 the compound, dissolved in petrolatum upto 25% was applied to a clipped skin area of the neck and kept under occlusive bandage for 2 days (total dose 20mg intradermally plus 250mg epicutaneously). On day 21, an occlusive patch test with the compound in petrolatum was applied to the flank for 24 hours and the reactions were read 24 and 48 hours after removing the patch
The occlusive challenge patch was negative. Epicutaneous tests 2 and 3 weeks later became positive in 1/8 and 3/8 animals respectively. No sensitisation with the test chemical can be detected by the Maximization test.
These results are further supported by an Open Epicutaneous test conducted in guinea pigs (male and female) to determine the skin sensitization potential of the test chemical.
The pretest was performed to determine the primary irritating threshold concentration of test substances at various concentrations (e.g, 100, 30, 10 and 3%). In this test, a single application of 0.025 ml of each test concentration was simultaneously performed on one of the areas measuring 2 cm2 of the flank skin previously clipped and marked with a circular stamp. Reactions are read 24 h after the application of the test material.
On day 1 during induction, 0.1 ml of undiluted test chemical was applied to an area measuring 8 cm2 on the clipped flank skin of the guinea pigs. The applications are repeated daily for 3 weeks or done 5 times weekly during 4 weeks, usually on the same skin sites. The application sites were left uncovered and the reactions, if continuous daily applications were performed, can be read 24 h after each application, or at the end of each week. To determine whether or not contact sensitization was induced, all groups of guinea pigs previously treated for 21 days, as well as 10 untreated, or only pretreated with the vehicle, controls are tested on days 21 and 35 on the contralateral flank with the test material. This test was performed by applying with a pipette 0.025 ml of chemical to skin areas measuring 2 cm2. The reactions were read after 24, 48 and/or 72h.
0.025ml of minimal irritating concentration failed to cause any dermal reactions in the challenge exposure. Hence, the test chemical can be considered to be not sensitizing to skin.
The above studies are further supported by a skin sensitization study of the test chemical was carried out in 10 Inbred Hartley strain albino the guinea pigs of to determine its sensitization potential according modified Draize sensitization test. The preliminary irritation tests were done in guinea pigs to determine concentrations suitable for sensitization testing [injection challenge concentration(ICC) and application challenge concentration(ACC) ]
In the induction phase,the total dose was administered on one occasion as 4 intradermal injections, each 2.5 times the ICC (2.5X 0.25). Fourteen days later each animal was challenged intradermally in one flank and topically in the other with 0.1 ml aliquots of test substance at the respective ICC and ACC (0.25 and 10 respectively). Twenty-four hours later the reactions were observed. In the absence of sensitization reactions at first challenge the induction and challenge procedures were repeated, andapparent sensitization reactions confirmed 7 days later by a second challenge with controls included. Based upon the second challenge, it can be concluded that the test chemical was considered to be non-sensitizing to the skin of albino Hartley guinea pigs at 0.25% ICC and 10% ACC concentrations.
The above guinea pig studies are supported by a Human Maximization test performed to evaluate the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical.
5% test chemical (3450microgram/cm2) in petrolatum was applied under occlusion to the same site on the forearms or backs of 25 subjects for five alternate-day 48-h periods. Patch sites were pre-treated for 24 h with 5% aqueous sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) under occlusion. Following a 10–14 day rest period, challenge patches were applied under occlusion to fresh sites for 48 h. Challenge applications were preceded by a 60 min SLS treatment (10%). Reactions were read at patch removal and again at 48 and 72 h.
In a human Maximization study involving 25 subjects, there were no positive reactions to 5% test chemical (3450microgram/cm2) in petrolatum.
Hence, the test chemical can be considered to be not sensitizing to skin.
Eventhough the results of the various studies on guinea pigs and humans claim that the test chemical was not sensitizing to skin, but the results of the LLNA and other studies on guinea pigs claim otherwise. Taking into consideration, all these parameters, the test chemical can be considered to be sensitizing to skin. Comparing the above annotations with the criteria of CLP Regulation, the test chemical can be classified under the category “Skin Sensitizer 1”.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Eventhough the results of the various studies on guinea pigs and humans claim that the test chemical was not sensitizing to skin, but the results of the LLNA and other studies on guinea pigs claim otherwise. Taking into consideration, all these parameters, the test chemical can be considered to be sensitizing to skin. Comparing the above annotations with the criteria of CLP Regulation, the test chemical can be classified under the category “Skin Sensitizer 1”.
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.