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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 256-005-5 | CAS number: 42928-85-8
- 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 substance was found to be skin sensitising when tested in the murine Local Lymph Node Assay according to OECD 429 guideline.
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 25 november 2015 - 14 december 2015
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
- Version / remarks:
- july 2010
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)
- Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- CBA:J
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: breeder: Janvier, Le Genest-Saint-Isle, France.
- Age at study initiation: the animals of the preliminary test were approximately 10-12 weeks and the animals of the main test were approximately 10 weeks old
- Mean body weight at study initiation: the animals of the preliminary test and the main test had a bodyweight within +/- 20% of the sex mean.
- Fasting period before study: no
- Housing: polycarbonate cages
- Diet: SSNIFF R/M-Z pelleted diet (free access)
- Water: yes (free access)
- Acclimation period: at least 5 days before the beginning of the study
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 18 to 24°C
- Humidity (%): 40 to 70%
- Air changes (per hr):at least 10 cycles/hour
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12 h/12 h - Vehicle:
- acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v)
- Remarks:
- Acetone p.a.: Merck, Darmstadt, Germany / olive oil: Fagron, Nieuwerkerka/d Ijssel, The Netherlands
- Concentration:
- For the preliminary test the concentrations were 50 and 100%, of the test item.
For the main test the concentrations were 0,10, 50 and 100% of the test item. - No. of animals per dose:
- For the preliminary test: 2 females/dose (no controls)
For the main test: 5 females/dose, 5 females for the negative control and 5 females for the positive control - Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
- Compound solubility: The vehicle was selected on the basis of maximizing the solubility using test item data and trial preparation results: the first recommended vehicle (acetone/olive oil) was chosen as a homogenous dosage form preparation was obtained at the concentration of 100% inacetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v).
- Irritation: In the preliminary test, measurement of the ear thickness (using a digital thickness gauge) was performed prior to dosing on Days 1 and 3, and on Day 6. Increase in ear thickness was below 25% in all animals, the maximum value being +7%. In the preliminary test, skin irritation grade 1 or 2 was noted in all females treated at 50% and 100%. The highest concentration retained for the main test was therefore 100%.
- Lymph node proliferation response:not assessed
MAIN STUDY
ANIMAL ASSIGNMENT AND TREATMENT
- Name of test method: murine Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA)
- Criteria used to consider a positive response: Disintegration per minute (DPM) values are presented for each animal and for each dose group. A Stimulation Index (SI) is calculated for each group using the individual SI values. The individual SI is the ratio of the DPM/animal compared to the DPM/vehicle control group mean. If the results indicate a SI = 3, the test item may be regarded as a skin sensitizer. The EC3 values (the estimated test item concentration that will give a SI =3) were determined, using
linear interpolation.
TREATMENT PREPARATION AND ADMINISTRATION:
The test item was prepared in the vehicule at the chosen concentrations. All dosage form preparations were prepared within 4 hours prior to each dosing. On days 1, 2 and 3, a dose-volume of 25 µL of the control or dosage form preparations was applied to the dorsal surface of both ears. - Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
- Statistics:
- None
- Positive control results:
- SI =4.6 was obtained for the positive control (i.e. HCA 25% in AOO). The experiment was therefore considered valid.
- Key result
- Parameter:
- EC3
- Value:
- 58.1
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Remarks on result:
- other: The SI values calculated for the test item concentrations 10, 50 and 100% were 1.5; 2.4 and 6.1 respectively
- Interpretation of results:
- Category 1B (indication of skin sensitising potential) based on GHS criteria
- Conclusions:
- The test item induces delayed contact hypersensitivity in the murine Local Lymph Node Assay ( EC3 = 58,1%)
- Executive summary:
The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential of the test substance to induce contact hypersensitivity in CBA female mice using the murine Local Lymph Node Assay (LLNA).
This study was conducted in compliance with OECD Guideline No. 429 and the principles of Good Laboratory Practices.
To assess the irritant potential of the test substance, a preliminary test was first performed in order to define the test item concentrations to be used in the main test. Two groups of two female mice received the test substance diluted in in acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v) by topical route to the dorsal surface of both ears (one concentration per ear) on days 1, 2 and 3 at concentrations of 50 or 100% under a dose-volume of 25 µL. From day 1 to day 3 then on day 6, the thickness of both ears of each animal was measured and the local reactions were recorded. Each animal was observed once a day for mortality and clinical signs. Increase in ear thickness was below 25% in all animals, the maximum value being +7%. Skin irritation grade 1 or 2 was noted in all females treated at 50% and 100%. The highest concentration retained for the main test was therefore 100%.
In the main test, three groups of five female mice received the test item by topical route to the dorsal surface of both ears on days 1, 2 and 3 at concentrations of 10, 50 or 100% under a dose-volume of 25 µL. One negative control group of five females received the vehicle (acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v)) under the same experimental conditions. Additionally, one positive control group of five females received the positive control, a-hexylcinnamaldehyde (HCA), at 25% in a mixture acetone/olive oil (4/1; v/v) under the same experimental conditions. Once daily on days 1 to 6 and within 1 hour after dosing on days 1 to 3, the local reactions were recorded.
After 2 days of resting, on day 6, the animals received a single intravenous injection of tritiated methyl thymidine (3H-TdR). Approximately 5 hours later, the animals were sacrificed and the auricular lymph nodes were excised. The proliferation of lymphocytes in the lymph nodes draining the application site was measured by incorporation of3H-TdR.The results are expressed as disintegrations per minute (dpm) per animal and for each dose group. The obtained values were used to calculate Stimulation Indices (SI). The EC3 value was determined using linear interpolation.
No unscheduled deaths and no clinical signs indicative of systemic toxicity were observed during the study. Body weight of animals was unaffected by the test substance treatment. The very slight irritation (grade 1) noted on days 2 and /or 3, on days 1 to 3 and on days 1 to 5 for animals treated at 10, 50 and 100% respectively and scaliness of the ears for all females treated at 100% on days 5 and / or 6 were considered not to have a toxicologically significant effect on the activity of the nodes. The auricular lymph nodes of the animals treated at 10 and 50% were considered normal in size while the nodes of animals treated at 100% were considered enlarged. Mean DPM / animal values were 1457, 2365 and 6047 DPM for the 10, 50 and 100% treated groups respectively.The corresponding SI values were 1.5, 2.4 and 6.1. The test item showed a clear dose-response with an EC3 value of 58.1%. The SI value of the positive control was 4.6; this experiment was therefore considered valid.
It was concluded that the test item induced delayed contact hypersensitivity in the murine Local Lymph Node.
Reference
Table 7.4.1/1: Relative size lymph nodes, Radioactivity counts (DPM) and Stimulation Index (SI)
Group |
Test Item (%) |
Animal |
Size nodes
Left Right |
DPM/animal |
Mean DPM±SEM |
Mean SI±SEM |
|
1 |
Vehicle control |
1 |
n |
n |
515 |
996± 214 |
1.0± 0.3 |
2 |
n |
n |
671 |
||||
3 |
n |
n |
779 |
||||
4 |
n |
n |
1437 |
||||
5 |
n |
n |
1576 |
||||
2 |
10% |
6 |
n |
n |
1385 |
1457± 158 |
1.5± 0.4 |
7 |
n |
n |
1100 |
||||
8 |
n |
n |
2039 |
||||
9 |
n |
n |
1478 |
||||
3 |
50% |
10 |
n |
n |
1284 |
2365± 391 |
2.4± 0.6 |
11 |
n |
n |
2118 |
||||
12 |
n |
n |
1535 |
||||
13 |
n |
n |
2280 |
||||
14 |
n |
n |
2044 |
||||
4 |
100% |
15 |
+ |
+ |
3846 |
6047± 577 |
6.1± 1.4 |
16 |
+ |
+ |
7052 |
||||
17 |
+ |
+ |
5737 |
||||
18 |
+ |
+ |
6735 |
||||
19 |
+ |
+ |
6790 |
||||
20 |
+ |
n |
3920 |
||||
11 |
Positive control |
51 |
n |
n |
4599 |
4600± 399 |
4.6± 1.1 |
52 |
n |
n |
4000 |
||||
53 |
+ |
+ |
6136 |
||||
54 |
+ |
+ |
4250 |
||||
55 |
+ |
+ |
4015 |
Test Item (% w/w)
Relative size auricular lymph nodes: -, --, ---: degree of reduction, +,++,+++: degree of enlargment, n: considered to be normal
DPM= Disintegrations per minute
SEM= Standard Error of the Mean
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (sensitising)
- Additional information:
The study was conducted in compliance with OECD Guideline No. 429 and the principles of Good Laboratory Practices.
To assess the irritant potential of the test substance, a preliminary test was first performed in order to define the test item concentrations to be used in the main test. Two groups of two female mice received the test substance diluted in in acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v) by topical route to the dorsal surface of both ears (one concentration per ear) on days 1, 2 and 3 at concentrations of 50 or 100% under a dose-volume of 25 µL. From day 1 to day 3 then on day 6, the thickness of both ears of each animal was measured and the local reactions were recorded. Each animal was observed once a day for mortality and clinical signs. Increase in ear thickness was below 25% in all animals, the maximum value being +7%. Skin irritation grade 1 or 2 was noted in all females treated at 50% and 100%. The highest concentration retained for the main test was therefore 100%.
In the main test, three groups of five female mice received the test item by topical route to the dorsal surface of both ears on days 1, 2 and 3 at concentrations of 10, 50 or 100% under a dose-volume of 25 µL. One negative control group of five females received the vehicle (acetone/olive oil (4:1 v/v)) under the same experimental conditions. Additionally, one positive control group of five females received the positive control, a-hexylcinnamaldehyde (HCA), at 25% in a mixture acetone/olive oil (4/1; v/v) under the same experimental conditions. Once daily on days 1 to 6 and within 1 hour after dosing on days 1 to 3, the local reactions were recorded.
After 2 days of resting, on day 6, the animals received a single intravenous injection of tritiated methyl thymidine (3H-TdR). Approximately 5 hours later, the animals were sacrificed and the auricular lymph nodes were excised. The proliferation of lymphocytes in the lymph nodes draining the application site was measured by incorporation of3H-TdR. The results are expressed as disintegrations per minute (dpm) per animal and for each dose group. The obtained values were used to calculate Stimulation Indices (SI). The EC3 value was determined using linear interpolation.
No unscheduled deaths and no clinical signs indicative of systemic toxicity were observed during the study. Body weight of animals was unaffected by the test substance treatment. The very slight irritation (grade 1) noted on days 2 and /or 3, on days 1 to 3 and on days 1 to 5 for animals treated at 10, 50 and 100% respectively and scaliness of the ears for all females treated at 100% on days 5 and / or 6 were considered not to have a toxicologically significant effect on the activity of the nodes. The auricular lymph nodes of the animals treated at 10 and 50% were considered normal in size while the nodes of animals treated at 100% were considered enlarged. Mean DPM / animal values were 1457, 2365 and 6047 DPM for the 10, 50 and 100% treated groups respectively. The corresponding SI values were 1.5, 2.4 and 6.1. The test item showed a clear dose-response with an EC3 value of 58.1%. The SI value of the positive control was 4.6; this experiment was therefore considered valid.
It was concluded that the test item induced delayed contact hypersensitivity in the murine Local Lymph Node.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Skin sensitisation:
The substance induced delayed contact hypersensitivity in the murine Local Lymph Node. According to Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008 and its subsequent amendments on classification, labeling and packaging (CLP) of substances and mixtures, the substance is classified Skin sensitizer category 1B as the EC3 value is higher than 2%.
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.