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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 202-940-9 | CAS number: 101-41-7
- 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
It was observed that none of the guinea pigs induced contact sensitization at challenge concentration of 2%.Thus the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing on skin of guinea pigs at concentration of 2% in an Open Epicutaneous Test (OET).
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:
- data from handbook or collection of data
- Justification for type of information:
- data is from peer reviwed journals
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: Open Epicutaneous Test (OET)
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- An Open Epicutaneous Test (OET) was performed on guinea pigs to assess the skin sensitization potential of test chemical
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- open epicutaneous test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- Currently no LLNA study is available for assessment. The Guinea Pig Maximization Test (GPMT) has been carried out as an animal test to predict human sensitization for over a decade and is recommended by international test guidelines such as OECD.
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- not specified
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- - Weight at study initiation: 300-450g
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- other: ethanol, acetone, H20, petroleum, PEG and/or other suitable vehicles
- Concentration / amount:
- 100%, 30%, 10%, 3%, 1%, or 0.3%
- Day(s)/duration:
- 3 weeks
- Adequacy of induction:
- other: The maximal non-irritating and the minimal irritating concentrations after repeated applications are determined by the same all-or-none criterion
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, open
- Vehicle:
- other: ethanol, acetone, H20, petroleum, PEG and/or other suitable vehicles
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.025 ml of 2%
- Day(s)/duration:
- days 21 and 35
- Adequacy of challenge:
- not specified
- No. of animals per dose:
- experimental groups of at least 6 guinea pigs for every concentration group
controls 10 guinea pigs were used. - Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
1 day before starting the induction procedure, the threshold irritating concentration of the test material is estimated on the guinea pigs subsequently used for the experimental group, A single application of 0.025 ml of each test concentration (e.g, 100, 30, 10 and 3%) is 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. The minimal irritating and the maximal nonirritating concentrations are determined by an all-or-none criterion. The minimal irritating concentration is defined as the lowest one causing skin irritation. The maximal nonirritating concentration is defined as the highest one not causing macroscopic skin reactions in any of the animals. The estimation of the threshold concentration (minimal irritating and maximal nonirritating concentration) is essential for the evaluation of the allergenic capacity of the test material.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 21
- Exposure period:24 hours
- Test groups:6-8 guinea pigs
- Control group:3 guinea pigs
- Site: an area measuring 8 cm2 on the clipped flank skin of the guinea pigs
- Frequency of applications: The applications are repeated daily for 3 weeks or done 5 times weekly during 4 weeks
- Duration: 21 days (3 weeks)
- Concentrations: 100%, 30%, 10%, 3%, 1%, or 0.3% in vehicle.
Amount: 0.1ml
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 2
- Day(s) of challenge: on days 21 and 35
- Exposure period:24 hours
- Test groups: 6-8 guinea pigs
- Control group: 3 guinea pigs
- Site: contralateral flank measuring 2 cm2
- Concentrations: Concentration:2%
Amount: 0.025ml
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24,48 and/or 72h. - Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.025 ml
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 6
- Clinical observations:
- no dermal reactions observed
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- other: not sensitizing
- Conclusions:
- It was observed that none of the guinea pigs induced contact sensitization at challenge concentration of 2%. Thus the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing on skin of guinea pigs at concentration of 2% in an Open Epicutaneous Test (OET).
- Executive summary:
An Open Epicutaneous Test (OET) was performed on guinea pigs to assess the skin sensitization potential of test chemical.
On day 1 during induction, 0.1 ml of the test chemical was applied at concentrations of 100%, 30%, 10%, 3%, 1%, or 0.3% in vehicle 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 each concentration to skin areas measuring 2 cm2. The reactions were read after 24,48 and/or 72h.
It was observed that none of the guinea pigs induced contact sensitization at challenge concentration of 2%.Thus the test chemicalwas considered to be not sensitizing on skin of guinea pigs at concentration of 2% in an Open Epicutaneous Test (OET).
Reference
CAS RN |
Maximum user concentration % |
Sensitization procedure |
||
Human |
Guinea pigs |
|||
Concentration % |
HMT or RIPT |
OET |
||
101-41-7 |
0.8 |
8 |
- |
- |
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
In various studies, the test chemical has been investigated for potential to cause dermal sensitization in living organisms to a greater or lesser extent. The studies are based on in vivo experiments in guinea pigs, humans. The results are summarized as follows:
An Open Epicutaneous Test (OET) was performed on guinea pigs to assess the skin sensitization potential of test chemical.
On day 1 during induction, 0.1 ml of the test chemical was applied at concentrations of 100%, 30%, 10%, 3%, 1%, or 0.3% in vehicle 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 each concentration to skin areas measuring 2 cm2. The reactions were read after 24,48 and/or 72h.
It was observed that none of the guinea pigs induced contact sensitization at challenge concentration of 2%.Thus the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing on skin of guinea pigs at concentration of 2% in an Open Epicutaneous Test (OET).
This is supported by the results of a human maximization test carried out to assess the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical. The test chemical 8% in petrolatum was applied to the skin of 25 human volunteers and observed for signs of dermal sensitization (duration of exposure, observation period not specified).
The test chemical 8% in petrolatum did not induce any sensitization reactions on the skin of 25 human volunteers.
Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing to skin.
Skin sensitization effects were also estimated by four different models i.e, Battery, Leadscope, SciQSAR and CASE Ultra used within Danish QSAR database for the test chemical. Based on estimation, no skin sensitization reactions were observed in guinea pigs and humans. Therefore, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing.
These results are supported by results of a maximization test carried out with 4% (2760 microgram/cm2) test chemical in petrolatum on 25 healthy male patients. Application was under occlusion to the same site on the forearms of all subjects for five alternate day, 48 h periods. The patch sites were pretreated for 24 hours with 5% aqueous sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) under occlusion. Following a 10 day rest period, challenge patches were applied to fresh sites on the back for 48 h under occlusion. The challenge site was pre-treated for 1 hour with 10% SLS. The challenge site was evaluated at 48 and 72 hours. No sensitization reactions were observed after the challenge exposure. Hence, the test chemical was considered to be not sensitizing to skin.
The above results are further supported by the results of a human maximization test carried out to assess the dermal sensitization potential of the test chemical in humans. The test chemical was applied in concentration 2% in petrolatum to the skin of 25 human volunteers and observed for signs of dermal irritation or sensitization.
No sensitization reactions were observed in any of the volunteers. Hence, the test chemical can be considered to be not sensitizing to human skin.
Based on the results obtained, the test chemical can be considered to be not sensitizing to skin.Comparing the above annotations with the criteria of CLP regulation, the test chemical can be classified under the category “Not Classified”.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Available data for the test chemical indicates that it is not likely to induce any dermal reactions.
Hence, the test chemical can be considered to be not sensitizing to skin.
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.