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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 940-448-2 | 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
The results obtained from the in vitro skin irritation test indicated that the test item reveals no skin irritation potential under the utilised testing conditions. Based on the results of the isolated chicken eye test a severe eye damaging potential of the test substance can be excluded.
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:
- 2013-10-09 to 2013-10-11
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: The study was conducted in accordance with GLP regulations and OECD/EU guideline.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 439 (In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Test Method)
- Version / remarks:
- 26 July 2013
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.46 (In Vitro Skin Irritation: Reconstructed Human Epidermis Model Test)
- Version / remarks:
- 06 July 2012
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Species:
- other: EpiSkinSM
- Strain:
- other: not applicable
- Details on test animals or test system and environmental conditions:
- TEST SYSTEM
EpiSkinSM, EPISKIN SNC Lyon, France, is a three-dimensional human epidermis model. Adult human-derived epidermal keratinocytes are seeded on a dermal substitute consisting of a collagen type I matrix coated with type IV collagen. A highly differentiated and stratified epidermis model is obtained after a 13-day culture period comprising the main basal, supra basal, spinous and granular layers and a functional stratum corneum. Its use for skin irritation testing involves topical application of test materials to the surface of the epidermis, and the subsequent assessment of their effects on cell viability.
- Supplier: SKINETHIC Laboratories; 4, rue Alexandre Fleming, 69007 – LYON, France.
- Batch No.: 13-EKIN-035
- Expiry date: 14 October 2013 - Type of coverage:
- other: EpiSkin model
- Preparation of test site:
- other: EpiSkin model
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Controls:
- other: not applicable
- Amount / concentration applied:
- TEST MATERIAL
- Amount applied: 10 mg of the test item - Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 15 min
- Observation period:
- 42 hours
- Number of animals:
- 3 replicates per test item
3 replicates negative controls
3 replicates positive controls
3 replicates of additional control for coloured test item (i.e. for non-specific OD evaluation) - Details on study design:
- TEST SITE
- Area of exposure: the whole surface of the EpiSkin model
REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
- Washing: PBS 1x solution
- Time after start of exposure: 15 minutes
SCORING SYSTEM: Viability of the test item treated EpiSkin model in comparison to negative control.
The test substance is considered to be a skin irritant (R38), if the mean relative viability after 15 minutes exposure and 42 hours post incubation is less or equal (≤) to 50 % of the negative control. - Irritation / corrosion parameter:
- other: other: Viability [% control]
- Value:
- 87
- Remarks on result:
- other:
- Remarks:
- Basis: mean. Time point: 42 h. Max. score: 100.0. Remarks: Test item. (migrated information)
- Irritation / corrosion parameter:
- other: other: Viability [% control]
- Value:
- 26
- Remarks on result:
- other:
- Remarks:
- Basis: mean. Time point: 42 h. Max. score: 100.0. Remarks: Positive control (SDS 5% aq.). (migrated information)
- Irritant / corrosive response data:
- - Cell viability
All obtained test item viability results were above 50 % when compared to the viability values obtained from the negative control, therefore the test item was considered to be non-irritant to skin. - Other effects:
- - Validity of the test
The mean OD value of the three negative control tissues was 0.862. The mean OD value obtained for the positive control was 0.224 and this result corresponds to 26 % viability when compared to the results obtained from the negative controls. Each calculated standard deviation value (SD) for the % viability was below 18. All validity criteria were within acceptable limits and therefore the study can be considered as valid.
- Indicator for potential false viability
Possible direct MTT reduction with test substance:
No colour change was observed after three hours of incubation. The test material did not interact with the MTT, therefore additional controls and data calculations were not necessary. A false estimation of viability can be precluded.
Colouring potential of test substances:
As the test item has an intrinsic colour (red), three additional chemical-treated tissues were used for the non-specific OD evaluation. Mean OD (measured at 570 nm) of these tissues were determined as 0.025. The Non Specific Colour% (NSC %) was calculated as 2.9 %. Therefore additional data calculation was not necessary. A false estimation of viability can be precluded. - Interpretation of results:
- not irritating
- Remarks:
- Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- The results obtained from this in vitro skin irritation test, using the EPISKIN model, indicated that the test item reveals no skin irritation potential under the utilised testing conditions. According to the current OECD Guideline No. 439, DOCU Red 116 is considered as non-irritant to skin and is therefore not classified.
- Executive summary:
The purpose of the study was to determine the skin irritation potential of the test item DOCU Red 116 on reconstituted human epidermis in the EPISKIN model in vitro.
Disks of epidermal units (three units / chemical) were treated with the test item and incubated for 15 minutes at room temperature. Exposure of the test material was terminated by rinsing the epidermal units with PBS 1x solution. Epidermis units were then incubated at 37 °C for 42 hours in an incubator with 5 % CO2. The viability of each disk was assessed by incubating the tissues for 3 hours with MTT solution at 37 °C in 5 % CO2 and protected from light. The resulting formazan chrystals were extracted with acidified isopropanol and quantified with the optical densities (OD) recorded spectrophotometrically.
SDS 5 % aq. and 1 x PBS treated epidermis units were used as positive and negative controls, respectively. For each treated tissue, viability was expressed as a percentage relative to negative control.
The test item is considered to be a skin irritant, if the mean relative viability after 15 minutes exposure and 42 hours post incubation is less than or equal to (≤) 50% when compared to the viability values obtained from the negative control.
In this in vitro skin irritation test using the EPISKIN model, the test item DOCU Red 116 did not show significantly reduced cell viability in comparison to the negative control. All obtained test item viability results were above 50 % when compared to the viability values obtained from the negative control. Therefore the test item was considered to be non-irritant to skin.
Positive and negative controls showed the expected cell viability values within acceptable limits. The experiment was considered to be valid.
The results obtained from this in vitro skin irritation test, using the EPISKIN model, indicated that the test item reveals no skin irritation potential under the utilised testing conditions. According to the current OECD Guideline No. 439, DOCU Red 116 is considered as non-irritant to skin and is therefore not classified.
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:
- key study
- Study period:
- 2013-10-24 to 2013-12-15
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: GLP study according to OECD/EU guideline.
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 438 (Isolated Chicken Eye Test Method for Identifying Ocular Corrosives and Severe Irritants)
- Version / remarks:
- 26 July 2013
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU method B.48 (Isolated chicken eye test method for identifying occular corrosives and severe irritants)
- Version / remarks:
- 08 December 2010
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Species:
- other: Isolated chicken eye from ROSS 308 and COBB 500
- Strain:
- other: Isolated chicken eye from ROSS 308 and COBB 500
- Details on test animals or tissues and environmental conditions:
- not appliable
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Controls:
- other: The three positive control eyes were treated with Imidazole (30 mg) solution and one negative control eye was treated with NaCl (9 g/L saline) solution.
- Amount / concentration applied:
- TEST MATERIAL
- Amount applied: 30 mg - Duration of treatment / exposure:
- 10 seconds
- Observation period (in vivo):
- The control and test eyes were evaluated pre-treatment and at approximately 30, 75, 120, 180 and 240 minutes after the post-treatment rinse. Minor variations within ± 5 minutes were considered acceptable.
The cornea thickness and cornea opacity were measured at all time points. Fluorescein retention was measured on two occasions, at base line (t=0) and 30 minutes after the post-treatment rinse. - Number of animals or in vitro replicates:
- Three test item treated eyes
- Details on study design:
- REMOVAL OF TEST SUBSTANCE
- Washing: The cornea surface was rinsed thoroughly with 20 mL saline solution at ambient temperature
- Time after start of exposure: 10 seconds
TOOL USED TO ASSESS EYE CORROSION: corneal opacity, swelling, fluorescein retention, morphological effects and histopathology - Irritation parameter:
- other: Maximum corneal swelling
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: at up to 75 min
- Remarks on result:
- other: 4 % relative to control
- Irritation parameter:
- other: Maximum corneal swelling
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: at up to 240 min
- Remarks on result:
- other: 4 % relative to control
- Irritation parameter:
- other: Maximum corneal opacity
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 240 min
- Remarks on result:
- other: Corneal opacity score: 0.0
- Irritation parameter:
- other: fluorescein retention
- Basis:
- mean
- Time point:
- other: 30 min
- Remarks on result:
- other: Fluorescein retention score: 2.7
- Irritant / corrosive response data:
- Based on the mean fluorescein retention value of 2.7 an ICE Class of IV was determined for this endpoint. Since values for corneal swelling and opacity showed no indication for severe eye damage (ICE Class I) fluorescein retention is assumed to be influenced by the test item stuck on the cornea surface after post-treatment rinse. In an additional experiment a possible fluorescence of the test item itself was investigated. Further three eyes were treated with the test item in the same manner as in the main study and fluorescein retention was measured without using fluorescein solution.
In the additional experiment fluorescein retention measurement revealed that the test item stuck on the cornea surface is non-fluorescent and does not directly influence fluorescein retention measurement. However retention of fluorescein solution at the test item stuck on the cornea surface was taken into consideration and might explain the high fluorescein retention in the absence of elevated values for corneal swelling and opacity. Therefore fluorescein retention parameter was assessed as not appropriate in this ICET study and is not considered in the evaluation of ocular corrosion and severe irritation potential of the test item.
Based on the data for corneal swelling and opacity the test item has no ocular corrosion and severe eye irritation potential. - Other effects:
- Histopathology
The results of measurement by ocular micrometer method revealed slight thickening of substantia propria in two test item treated eyes and slight thickening of anterior epithelium in three test item treated eyes as compared with the negative control and regarding the positive controls.
The thickness of other DOCU RED 116 treated samples regarding the substantia propria and regarding the anterior epithelium was the same as the negative control.
No thickness of other layers (subepithelial basement membrane, posterior limiting membrane, posterior epithelium) was observed in the treated or control samples.
Desquamation (focal complete loss) of anterior epithelium was observed in serious form (6-8 focal area/ specimen) in the positive control samples indicating for eye corrosion and severe irritation however no significant desquamation occurred in the DOCU RED 116 treated samples.
No other pathological lesion were detectable in the all investigated (treated and control) specimens.
In conclusion it can be stated that the test item DOCU RED 116 did not cause histologically detectable ocular corrosion and severe irritation. Corneas of positive and negative control showed the expected histological response. - Interpretation of results:
- other: not severely eye damaging
- Remarks:
- Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- In this In vitro eye corrosives and severe irritants study using the Isolated Chicken Eye model with DOCU Red 116 according to OECD guideline No. 438 ocular corrosion and severe irritation potential was not observed.
- Executive summary:
The purpose of the Isolated Chicken Eye Test (ICET) was to evaluate the potential ocular corrosivity or severe irritancy of the test item DOCU Red 116 by its ability to induce toxicity in enucleated chicken eyes. The study was conducted in accordance with OECD guideline No. 438 (26 July 2013) and EU guideline B.48 (08 December 2010). The test compound was applied in a single dose onto the cornea of isolated chicken eyes in order to potentially classify the test compound as ocular corrosive and/or severe irritant. The ICET does not fully replace the in vivo rabbit eye test (OECD 405); however, the ICET is used as part of a tiered testing strategy for regulatory purposes.
The purpose of the additional experiment was to examine, whether DOCU Red 116 can cause false positive fluorescein retention.
Based on the data for corneal swelling and opacity DOCU Red 116 did not cause ocular corrosion and severe eye irritation in the enucleated chicken eyes.
However, a mean fluorescein retention value of 2.7 was observed indicating severe eye damage (ICE Class IV). Since values for corneal swelling and opacity showed no indication for severe eye damage (ICE Class I) fluorescein retention is assumed to be influenced by the test item stuck on the cornea surface after post-treatment rinse. Although DOCU Red 116 is not fluorescent itself as shown in the additional experiment retention of fluorescein solution at the test item stuck on the cornea surface was taken into consideration and might explain the high fluorescein retention in the absence of elevated values for corneal swelling and opacity.
Therefore fluorescein retention parameter was assessed as not appropriate in this ICET study and is not considered in the evaluation of ocular corrosion and severe irritation potential of the test item.
Histopathology evaluation of retained corneas was performed as an additional endpoint to further characterize the scope of the corneal damage suggested by the fluorescein retention parameter. DOCU RED 116 did not cause histologically detectable ocular corrosion and severe irritation.
Positive and negative controls showed the expected results. The experiments were considered to be valid.
Conclusion
In this in vitro eye corrosives and severe irritants study using the Isolated Chicken Eyes model with DOCU Red 116 according to OECD guideline No. 438 ocular corrosion and severe irritation potential was not observed.
Reference
Result tables
Test Item: DOCU Red 116
Observation |
Value |
ICE Class |
Mean maximum corneal swelling at up to 75 min |
4 % |
I |
Mean maximum corneal swelling at up to 240 min |
4 % |
I |
Mean maximum corneal opacity |
0.0 |
I |
Mean fluorescein retention |
2.7 |
IV * |
Other Observations |
The test item was stuck on the cornea surface all test item treated eyes at 30 minutes after the post-treatment rinse. It cannot be removed from cornea surface by extra rinse (20 mL/eye saline solution). |
|
Overall ICE Class |
2xI, 1xIV |
Results of the additional experiment are shown in the table below.
Test Item: DOCU Red 116 (Additional Experiment)
Observation |
Value |
Mean fluorescein retention at 30 min |
0.3 |
Mean fluorescein retention at 75 min |
0.3 |
Mean fluorescein retention at 120 min |
0.3 |
Mean fluorescein retention at 180 min |
0.2 |
Mean fluorescein retention at 240 min |
0.2 |
Other Observations |
The test item was stuck on the cornea surface and cornea surface was painted by test item all eyes at 30 minutes after the post-treatment rinse. The cornea surfaces were not totally cleared, little volume of test item was stuck on the cornea surfaces at 240 min after the post-treatment rinse. |
Positive Control: Imidazole
Observation |
Value |
ICE Class |
Mean maximum corneal swelling at up to 75 min |
15 % |
III |
Mean maximum corneal swelling at up to 240 min |
31 % |
III |
Mean maximum corneal opacity |
4.0 |
IV |
Mean fluorescein retention |
3.0 |
IV |
Other Observations |
Cornea opacity score 4 was observed in three eyes at 30 minutes after the post-treatment rinse |
|
Overall ICE Class |
1xIII, 2xIV |
Positive Control: Imidazole (Additional Experiment)
Observation |
Value |
ICE Class |
Mean maximum corneal swelling at up to 75 min |
9 % |
II |
Mean maximum corneal swelling at up to 240 min |
21 % |
III |
Mean maximum corneal opacity |
4.0 |
IV |
Mean fluorescein retention |
3.0 |
IV |
Other Observations |
Cornea opacity score 4 was observed in three eyes at 30 minutes after the post-treatment rinse |
|
Overall ICE Class |
1xIII, 2xIV |
Negative Control: NaCl (9 g/L saline)
Observation |
Value |
ICE Class |
Mean maximum corneal swelling at up to 75 min |
0 % |
I |
Mean maximum corneal swelling at up to 240 min |
0 % |
I |
Mean maximum corneal opacity |
0.0 |
I |
Mean fluorescein retention |
0.0 |
I |
Other Observations |
None |
|
Overall ICE Class |
3xI |
Negative Control: NaCl (9 g/L saline) (Additional Experiment)
Observation |
Value |
ICE Class |
Mean maximum corneal swelling at up to 75 min |
0 % |
I |
Mean maximum corneal swelling at up to 240 min |
0 % |
I |
Mean maximum corneal opacity |
0.0 |
I |
Mean fluorescein retention |
0.0 |
I |
Other Observations |
None |
|
Overall ICE Class |
3xI |
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not irritating)
Respiratory irritation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Additional information
Skin irritation
The purpose of the study was to determine the skin irritation potential of the test item DOCU Red 116 on reconstituted human epidermis in the EPISKIN model in vitro.
Disks of epidermal units (three units / chemical) were treated with the test item and incubated for 15 minutes at room temperature. Exposure of the test material was terminated by rinsing the epidermal units with PBS 1x solution. Epidermis units were then incubated at 37 °C for 42 hours in an incubator with 5 % CO2. The viability of each disk was assessed by incubating the tissues for 3 hours with MTT solution at 37 °C in 5 % CO2 and protected from light. The resulting formazan chrystals were extracted with acidified isopropanol and quantified with the optical densities (OD) recorded spectrophotometrically.
SDS 5 % aq. and 1 x PBS treated epidermis units were used as positive and negative controls, respectively. For each treated tissue, viability was expressed as a percentage relative to negative control.
The test item is considered to be a skin irritant, if the mean relative viability after 15 minutes exposure and 42 hours post incubation is less than or equal to (≤) 50% when compared to the viability values obtained from the negative control.
In this in vitro skin irritation test using the EPISKIN model, the test item DOCU Red 116 did not show significantly reduced cell viability in comparison to the negative control. All obtained test item viability results were above 50 % when compared to the viability values obtained from the negative control. Therefore the test item was considered to be non-irritant to skin.
Positive and negative controls showed the expected cell viability values within acceptable limits. The experiment was considered to be valid.
The results obtained from this in vitro skin irritation test, using the EPISKIN model, indicated that the test item reveals no skin irritation potential under the utilised testing conditions. According to the current OECD Guideline No. 439, DOCU Red 116 is considered as non-irritant to skin and is therefore not classified.
Eye irritation
The purpose of the Isolated Chicken Eye Test (ICET) was to evaluate the potential ocular corrosivity or severe irritancy of the test item DOCU Red 116 by its ability to induce toxicity in enucleated chicken eyes. The study was conducted in accordance with OECD guideline No. 438 (26 July 2013) and EU guideline B.48 (08 December 2010). The test compound was applied in a single dose onto the cornea of isolated chicken eyes in order to potentially classify the test compound as ocular corrosive and/or severe irritant. The ICET does not fully replace the in vivo rabbit eye test (OECD 405); however, the ICET is used as part of a tiered testing strategy for regulatory purposes.
The purpose of the additional experiment was to examine, whether DOCU Red 116 can cause false positive fluorescein retention.
Based on the data for corneal swelling and opacity DOCU Red 116 did not cause ocular corrosion and severe eye irritation in the enucleated chicken eyes.
However, a mean fluorescein retention value of 2.7 was observed indicating severe eye damage (ICE Class IV). Since values for corneal swelling and opacity showed no indication for severe eye damage (ICE Class I) fluorescein retention is assumed to be influenced by the test item stuck on the cornea surface after post-treatment rinse. Although DOCU Red 116 is not fluorescent itself as shown in the additional experiment retention of fluorescein solution at the test item stuck on the cornea surface was taken into consideration and might explain the high fluorescein retention in the absence of elevated values for corneal swelling and opacity.
Therefore fluorescein retention parameter was assessed as not appropriate in this ICET study and is not considered in the evaluation of ocular corrosion and severe irritation potential of the test item.
Histopathology evaluation of retained corneas was performed as an additional endpoint to further characterize the scope of the corneal damage suggested by the fluorescein retention parameter. DOCU RED 116 did not cause histologically detectable ocular corrosion and severe irritation.
Positive and negative controls showed the expected results. The experiments were considered to be valid.
Conclusion
In this in vitro eye corrosives and severe irritants study using the Isolated Chicken Eyes model with DOCU Red 116 according to OECD guideline No. 438 ocular corrosion and severe irritation potential was not observed.
Justification for selection of skin irritation / corrosion endpoint:
Only one study available.
Justification for selection of eye irritation endpoint:
Only one study available.
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the available experimental data the test item is not classified for skin irritation according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP) and Directive 67/548/EEC (DSD).
Eye irritation study (ICET test) showed that the test item is non-corrosive. Based on these results, DOCU Red116 is not classified and labelled for serious eye damage, category 1 according to Directive 67/548/EEC (DSD) and to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 (CLP).
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.