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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: - | 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
Based on the in vitro study results, the test substance is considered to be non-irritating to both skin and eyes.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin irritation / corrosion
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- From December 05, 2018 to April xx, 2019
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 439 (In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Test Method)
- Deviations:
- yes
- Remarks:
- see "Principles of method if other than guideline"
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Optical Density (OD) values obtained with blanks were higher than 0.1 (0.191) causing a deviation from Acceptance Criteria 4. However, this SOP and guideline deviation was not considered to have affected the integrity or interpretation of the results as no equivocal results were obtained.
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Test system:
- human skin model
- Remarks:
- MatTek EpiDermTM tissue model EPI-200
- Justification for test system used:
- Initially the predictive capacity of the modified EpiDerm™ Skin Irritation Test (SIT) test method, using MatTek EpiDermTM tissue model EPI-200, underwent full prospective validation from 2003-2007. The test method components of this method were used to define the essential test methods components of the original and updated ECVAM Performance Standards (PS). A modification of the original EpiDerm™ SIT was validated using the original ECVAM PS in 2008. In 2008, ESAC concluded that the Modified EpiDerm™ SIT has sufficient accuracy and reliability for prediction of R38 skin irritating and no-label (non-skin irritating) test substances.
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Details on test system:
- Test system:
The reconstructed human epidermal model EpiDermTM (EPI-200-MatTek Corporation) consists of normal human-derived epidermal keratinocytes which have been cultured to form a multi-layered highly differentiated model of the human epidermis. It consists of organised basal, spinous and granular layers and a multi-layered stratum corneum containing intercellular lamellar lipid layers arranged in patterns analogous to those found in vivo.
Characterisation of the test system:
MatTek’s EpiDermTM model has been extensively characterised for multiple parameters including morphology, tissue viability, skin barrier function and sterility. QC results for the specific lot of models received (Lot# 25819) were checked in-house for MatTek acceptance ranges with the following outcome:
- Morphology - PASS
- Tissue viability - PASS
- Skin barrier function (ET50 value for 1 % Triton X-100) where ET50 is the time taken for 1 % Triton X-100 to reduce the viability of the skin model to 50 % relative to the negative control) - PASS
- Sterility testing showed no contamination during long term antibiotic and antimycotic free culture - PASS - Control samples:
- yes, concurrent negative control
- yes, concurrent positive control
- Amount/concentration applied:
- 25 mg (nominal) of the neat test substance
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 60 minutes (25 minutes at room temperature and 35 minutes at 37°C, 5 % CO2, >=95% relative humidity).
- Duration of post-treatment incubation (if applicable):
- 42 h post-treatment incubation.
- Number of replicates:
- 3 replicates for test substance, negative and positive control.
- Irritation / corrosion parameter:
- % tissue viability
- Value:
- 103.13
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Other effects / acceptance of results:
- - Prior to the study, the required compatibility checks (as per SOP L0029) confirmed that the test substance did not interfere with MTT and no water colouration was observed.
- The test substance did not reduce the viability below 50% and therefore should be considered as non-irritant to the skin.
All acceptance criteria were met with the exception of 1 criterion:
- The mean OD570 of the negative control (treated with DPBS) tissues is ≥0.8 and ≤2.8.
Result: 1.777
- The mean of the positive control relative percentage viability must be ≤20 % of the mean of the negative controls.
Result: 3.8 %
- The standard deviation of OD values for triplicate skin models in each experimental condition must be <18 %.
Results: NC: 5 %, PC: 0.72 %, Test substance: 16.17 %
- The mean OD of the 6 wells containing extraction solvent alone (blanks) should be ≤0.1.
Result: 0.191
Optical Density (OD) values obtained with blanks were higher than 0.1 (0.191) causing a deviation from Acceptance Criteria 4. However, the spectrophotometer was fully validated and had passed all required tests. The OD values for blanks observed in this study are consistent with historical data using this spectrophotometer in the laboratory and meet our current internal acceptance criteria of blank OD values <0.194 (mean of historical data, based on blanks obtained during the last 66 studies), therefore this is not considered to be an issue in the interpretation of this study data. This SOP and guideline deviation was not considered to have affected the integrity or interpretation of the results as no equivocal results were obtained. - Interpretation of results:
- other: CLP criteria not met
- Remarks:
- non-irritant to skin
- Conclusions:
- Under the study conditions, the test substance was determined to be non-irritant to the skin.
- Executive summary:
An in vitro study was conducted to determine the skin irritation potential of the test substance, ' Reaction products of hexadecyl dihydrogen phosphate, dihexadecyl hydrogen phosphate, hexadecan-1-ol, stearic acid, esters of C18 (branched and linear) fatty acids with C18 (branched and linear) alcohols, and potassium hydroxide' (UVCB), in Reconstructed Human Epidermis (RHE) cells, according to OECD Guideline 439, in compliance with GLP. Three tissues of the human skin model EpiDermTM were treated with the test substance, positive or negative control for 60 minutes (25 minutes at room temperature and 35 minutes at 37°C, 5 % CO2, 95% RH) and 42 h post incubation period. Test was performed with 3 replicates for each type of treatment. Tissues were first pre-wetted with 25 μL DPBS (Sterile Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline), subsequently 25 mg (nominal) of the neat test substance was applied. 30 μL of DPBS was used as negative control and 5% of sodium dodecyl sulphate as positive control. Viability of the tissues was assessed in MTT test and compared to the negative control. The percentage of viability obtained with the test substance was 103.13%, which is well above the irritant limit of 50%. The study met all the validity criteria. Under the study conditions, the test substance was determined to be non-irritant to the skin (XCellR8, 2017).
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Eye irritation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- eye irritation: in vitro / ex vivo
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- From December 05, 2017 to April xx, 2019
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Justification for type of information:
- This in vitro risk assessment assay predicts the acute eye irritation potential of a chemical by measurement of its cytotoxic effect on the EpiOcular™ corneal epithelial model.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 492 (Reconstructed Human Cornea-like Epithelium (RhCE) Test Method for Identifying Chemicals Not Requiring Classification and Labelling for Eye Irritation or Serious Eye Damage)
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Species:
- other: EpiOcularTM tissue model (OCL-200-MatTek Corporation)
- Strain:
- other: Keratinocyte 4F1188
- Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
- Test system
The EpiOcularTM tissue model (OCL-200-MatTek Corporation) is composed of stratified human keratinocytes in a three-dimensional structure, reflecting the morphology and function of the human corneal epithelium found in vivo.
The EpiOcular TM eye irritation test (EIT) using the MatTek EpiOcularTM tissue model OCL-200, was validated by the European Union Reference Laboratory for Alternative to Animal Testing (EURL ECVAM) and Cosmetics Europe between 2008 and 2013. From this validation study and its independent peer review it was concluded that the EpiOcular TM EIT is able to correctly identify chemicals (both substances and mixtures) not requiring classification and labelling for eye irritation or serious eye damage according to UN GHS, and the test method was recommended as scientifically valid for that purpose, as an alternative to Draize Rabbit Eye Test with excellent correlation of in vivo to in vitro test results.
QC results for the specific lot of models received (Lot# 27002) were checked in-house for MatTek acceptance ranges with the following outcome:
- Morphology - PASS
- Tissue viability - PASS
- Skin barrier function (ET50 value for 0.3 % Triton X-100) where ET50 is the time taken for 0.3 % Triton X-100 to reduce the viability of the skin model to 50 % relative to the negative control) - PASS
- Sterility testing showed no contamination during long term antibiotic and antimycotic free culture - PASS - Vehicle:
- other: PBS (Sterile Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline)
- Controls:
- yes, concurrent positive control
- yes, concurrent negative control
- Amount / concentration applied:
- 20 µL of PBS (Sterile Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline) plus 50 mg of test substance.
- Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 6 h ± 15 minutes, followed by a 25 ± 2 minutes post-treatment immersion
- Duration of post- treatment incubation (in vitro):
- 18 h ± 15 minutes post-treatment incubation
- Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
- Three tissues per condition (n=3)
- Irritation parameter:
- other: Percentage of viability (relative to negative control)
- Value:
- 84.2
- Vehicle controls validity:
- not specified
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of irritation
- Other effects / acceptance of results:
- Prior to the study, the required compatibility checks (as per SOP L0069) confirmed that the test substance did not interfere with MTT or solvent.
- Interpretation of results:
- other: CLP criteria not met
- Remarks:
- non-irritant to eye
- Conclusions:
- Under the study conditions, the test substance was determined to be non-irritant to the eye.
- Executive summary:
An in vitro study was conducted to determine the eye irritation potential of the test substance, 'Reaction products of hexadecyl dihydrogen phosphate, dihexadecyl hydrogen phosphate, hexadecan-1-ol, stearic acid, esters of C18 (branched and linear) fatty acids with C18 (branched and linear) alcohols, and potassium hydroxide', using Reconstructed human cornea-like Epithelium (RhCE), according to OECD Guideline 492, in compliance with GLP. EpiOcularTM tissues were pre-incubated overnight at 37°C, 5% CO2, ≥95% RH. On Day 1, after pre-wetting tissues with 20 µL PBS (Sterile Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline) for 30 ± 2 min, the tissues in triplicate were exposed to single topical application of 50 mg neat test substance or 50 µL of reference substances (negative control: sterile water; positive control: methyl acetate) for 6 h ± 15 minutes, followed by a 25 ± 2 minutes post-treatment immersion, and 18 h ± 15 minutes post-treatment incubation, prior to the MTT endpoint. On Day 2, MTT tests and measurement were performed 570 nm without reference filter. The viability of the tissues were assessed and compared to a negative control. The percentage viability obtained with the test substance was determined to be 84.2%,which is well above the threshold (i.e., >60%) indicating no irritation potential. Under the study conditions, the test substance was determined to be non-irritant to the eyes (XCellR8, 2019).
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Respiratory irritation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Additional information
Skin:
An in vitro study was conducted to determine the skin irritation potential of the test substance, ' Reaction products of hexadecyl dihydrogen phosphate, dihexadecyl hydrogen phosphate, hexadecan-1-ol, stearic acid, esters of C18 (branched and linear) fatty acids with C18 (branched and linear) alcohols, and potassium hydroxide' (UVCB), in Reconstructed Human Epidermis (RHE) cells, according to OECD Guideline 439, in compliance with GLP. Three tissues of the human skin model EpiDermTM were treated with the test substance, positive or negative control for 60 minutes (25 minutes at room temperature and 35 minutes at 37°C, 5 % CO2, 95% RH) and 42 h post incubation period. Test was performed with 3 replicates for each type of treatment. Tissues were first pre-wetted with 25 μL DPBS (Sterile Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline), subsequently 25 mg (nominal) of the neat test substance was applied. 30 μL of DPBS was used as negative control and 5% of sodium dodecyl sulphate as positive control. Viability of the tissues was assessed in MTT test and compared to the negative control. The percentage of viability obtained with the test substance was 103.13%,which is well above the irritant limit of 50%. The study met all the validity criteria. Under the study conditions, the test substance was determined to be non-irritant to the skin (XCellR8, 2017).
Eye:
An in vitro study was conducted to determine the eye irritation potential of the test substance, 'Reaction products of hexadecyl dihydrogen phosphate, dihexadecyl hydrogen phosphate, hexadecan-1-ol, stearic acid, esters of C18 (branched and linear) fatty acids with C18 (branched and linear) alcohols, and potassium hydroxide', using Reconstructed human cornea-like Epithelium (RhCE), according to OECD Guideline 492, in compliance with GLP. EpiOcularTM tissues were pre-incubated overnight at 37°C, 5% CO2, ≥95% RH. On Day 1, after pre-wetting tissues with 20 µL PBS (Sterile Dulbecco’s Phosphate Buffered Saline) for 30 ± 2 min, the tissues in triplicate were exposed to single topical application of 50 mg neat test substance or 50 µL of reference substances (negative control: sterile water; positive control: methyl acetate) for 6 h ± 15 minutes, followed by a 25 ± 2 minutes post-treatment immersion, and 18 h ± 15 minutes post-treatment incubation, prior to the MTT endpoint. On Day 2, MTT tests and measurement were performed 570 nm without reference filter. The viability of the tissues was assessed and compared to a negative control. The percentage viability obtained with the test substance was determined to be 84.2%,which is well above the threshold (i.e., >60%) indicating no irritation potential. Under the study conditions, the test substance was determined to be non-irritant to the eyes (XCellR8, 2019).
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the in vitro study results, the test substance does not warrant a classification for skin and eye according to the EU CLP criteria (Regulation 1272/2008/EC).
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.