Hydrocarbons, C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclic, aromatics (40-60%)

Endpoint summary

Description of key information

Short description of key information on bioaccumulation potential result: 
C14-C20 aliphatic, 2-20% aromatic hydrocarbon fluids are typically metabolized by side chain oxidation to alcohol and carboxylic acid derivatives. These metabolites can be glucuronidated and excreted in the urine or further metabolized before being excreted. The majority of the metabolites are excreted in the urine and to a lower extent, in the feces. Excretion is rapid with the majority of the elimination occurring within the first 24 hours of exposure. As a result of the lack of systemic toxicity and the ability of the parent material to undergo metabolism and rapid excretion, bioaccumulation of the test substance in the tissues is not likely to occur.
Short description of key information on absorption rate: 
C14-C20 aliphatic, 2-20% aromatic hydrocarbon fluids are poorly dermally absorbed and they tend to partition into the stratum corneum. When dermally absorbed, C14-C20 aliphatic, 2-20% aromatic hydrocarbon fluids are rapidly metabolized and eliminated.

Additional information

There are no toxicokinetic data available for hydrocarbons, C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclics, 40-60% aromatics. However, based on available data on similar substances, e. g. C14–C20 aliphatic, 2-30% aromatic and C16-C20 aliphatic, 2-30% aromatic hydrocarbon fluids, hydrocarbons, C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclics, 40-60% aromatics are readily absorbed when inhaled or ingested (Tulliez and Peleran, 1977 and Le Bon et al., 1988) and at the same time are poorly dermally absorbed (Riviere et al., 1999). Regardless of exposure route, hydrocarbons, C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclics, 40-60% aromatic are rapidly metabolized and excreted (Tulliez and Peleran, 1977, Le Bon et al., 1988 and Riviere et al., 1999). Therefore, bioaccumulation of hydrocarbons, C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclics, 40-60% aromatics is not expected.

READ ACROSS STRATEGY

Hydrocarbons, C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclics, 40-60% aromatics are mixed solvents of variable composition, containing primarily aliphatic constituents with up to 60% aromatic constituents. The hydrocarbon solvents which are compositionally most closely related are hydrocarbons, C14-C20 aliphatic, 2 -30% aromatics and C16-C20 aliphatic, 2-30% aromatics as well as C9-C14 aliphatic with 2-25% aromatics. These substances consist of molecules which are of similar types and proportions to hydrocarbons, C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclics, 40-60% aromatics but are of lower molecular weight. The toxicological principle which supports read-across is that substances of similar composition are likely to have similar toxicological properties.

In addition, other types of substances may also be useful for read across, e. g. are petroleum substances of similar carbon number and aromatic content, principally kerosene and jet fuel which, as noted above, are typically in the range of C9-C16. These substances also contain similar types of molecules in similar proportions. In general hydrocarbon solvents are more highly refined than the petroleum substances. Accordingly, the petroleum substances typically represent a “worse case” with respect to hydrocarbon solvents and can be used for read-across on that basis as well.

Discussion on bioaccumulation potential result:

There are no dermal absorption studies available for hydrocarbons, C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclics, 40-60% aromatics. However, there are data available on similar substances, e. g. various Jet-fuels. Thus read-across was performed. Due to the structural similarity of these substances to constituents of hydrocarbons C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclics, 40-60% aromatics, it seems reasonable to assume that the solvents would have toxicokinetic properties similar to those of these substances.

IN VIVO

The percutaneous absorption and cutaneous disposition of topically applied neat Jet-A, JP-8, and JP-8(100) jet fuels (25 µL/5 cm2) was examined by monitoring the absorptive flux of the marker components 14C naphthalene and 4H dodecane simultaneously applied non-occluded to isolated perfused porcine skin flaps (a = 4) (Riviere et al., 1999, Singh et al. 2002). Absorption of 14C hexadecane was estimated from JP-8 fuel. Absorption and disposition of naphthalene and dodecane were also monitored using a nonvolatile JP-8 fraction reflecting exposure to residual fuel that might occur 24 h after a jet fuel spill. In all studies, perfusate, stratum corneum, and skin concentrations were measured over 5 h. Naphthalene absorption had a clear peak absorptive flux at less than 1 h, while dodecane and hexadecane had prolonged, albeit significantly lower, absorption flux profiles. Within JP-8, absorption was (mean +/- SEM; % dose) hexadecane (0.18 +/- 0.08). The area under the curve (AUC) was determined to be (mean +/- SEM; % dose-h/mL): naphthalene (0.0199 +/- 0.0020)> dodecane (0.0107 +/- 0.0009) > hexadecane (0.0017 +/- 0.0003).

OVERVIEW OF PERCUTANEOUS ABSORPTION OF HYDROCARBON SOLVENTS

Since there are not always studies of repeated dose toxicity of hydrocarbon solvents using the dermal route of administration available, when necessary to calculate dermal DNELs, systemic data from studies utilizing other routes of administration, normally inhalation but also oral data, can be used (route-to-route extrapolation). In accordance with ECHA guidance, read across from oral or inhalation data to dermal should account for differences in absorption where these exist (R8, example B.6). In fact, hydrocarbon solvents are poorly absorbed in most situations, in part because some are volatile and do not remain in contact with the skin for long periods of time and also because, due to their hydrophobic natures, do not partition well into aqueous environments and are poorly absorbed into the blood.

If these differences in relative absorption are introduced into the DNEL calculations to calculate external doses, the DNELs based on systemic effects are highly inflated. This seems potentially misleading as it implies that substances have different intrinsic hazards when encountered by different routes whereas in fact the differences are due ultimately to differences in absorbed dose. Accordingly, it is our opinion that it would be more transparent if the differences in absorption were taken into account in the exposure equations rather than in DNEL derivation. 

Shown below is a compilation of percutaneous absorption information for a number of hydrocarbon solvent constituents covering carbon numbers ranging from C5 to C14 as well as examples of both aliphatic and aromatic constituents. The low molecular weight aliphatic hydrocarbons (n-pentane, 2-methylpentane, n-hexane, n-heptane, and n-octane) were tested by Tsuruta (1982) using rat skin in an in vitro model system. As shown (Table 1), the highest percutaneous absorption value was 2 ug/cm2/hr for pentane. Lower values (< ~ 1 ug/cm2/hr) were reported for aliphatic hydrocarbons ranging from hexane to octane. Several authors have assessed the percutaneous absorption of higher molecular weight aliphatic constituents including Baynes et al. (2000), Singh and Singh (2003), Muhammad et al. (2005), and Kim et al., (2006). The first three of these authors used porcine skin models and reported that, except for one anomalous result with tridecane, the percutaneous absorption values for aliphatic constituents ranging from nonane to tetradecane were well below 1 ug/cm2/hr. Rat and human skin are considered to be more permeable than human skin (Kim et al., 2006), so these numbers can be considered conservative.

Kim et al. (2006) reported results of percutaneous absorption studies with human skin under in vivo conditions. In this case, the assessment method was based on tape stripping. The authors reported percutaneous absorption values ranging from 1 – 2 µg/kg/day for decane, undecane and dodecane. These values are higher than those reported by other authors, most likely because this technique measures absorption into the skin but not through the skin as was done in the studies listed above. Accordingly, it seems likely that these numbers are conservative as well.

With respect to aromatic hydrocarbons, most of the reported percutaneous absorption values [Baynes et al. (2000); Singh and Singh (2003); Mohammad et al. (2005); and Kim et al. (2006)] are less than 2 ug/cm2/day. The only exceptions are the values for naphthalene from Mohammad et al. (2005) which range from 4.2-6.6 µg/cm2/hr. 

After considering all of the above, it seems reasonable to assume apparent that across the entire range of hydrocarbon solvent constituents, percutaneous absorption values are less than 2 ug/cm2/day. Accordingly, when systemic dermal DNELs are calculated using route to route extrapolations, the values will not be corrected for differences in absorption. Rather, 2 µg/cm2/hr will be used as a common percutaneous absorption rate for all hydrocarbon solvents for which dermal exposure estimates are provided. 

Table 1: Summarized information on percutaneous absorption of hydrocarbon solvent constituents (C5-C16). 

 

Constituent		Molecular Weight		nmol/min/cm2		nmol/hr/cm2		µg/cm2/hr		Reference
Aliphatic Constituents
Pentane	72	0.52	31.2	2.2	Tsuruta et al. 1982
2-methyl pentane	86	0.02	1.2	0.1	Tsuruta et al., 1982
n-hexane	86	0.02	0.6	0.5	Tsuruta et al., 1982
n-heptane	100	0.02	1.2	0.1	Tsuruta et al., 1982
n-octane	114	0.08 x 10-3	0.005	0.0005	Tsuruta et al., 1982
Nonane	128			0.03	Muhammad et al., 2005
Nonane				0.38	McDougal et al., 1999
Decane	142			2	Kim et al., 2006
Decane				1.65	McDougal et al., 1999
Undecane	156			0.06-0.07	Muhammad et al., 2005
Undecane				1.0	Kim et al., 2006
Undecane				1.22	McDougal et al., 1999
Dodecane	170			0.02-0.04	Muhammad et al., 2005
Dodecane				2	Kim et al., 2006
Dodecane				0.3	Singh and Singh, 2003
Dodecane				0.51	McDougal et al., 1999
Dodecane				0.1	Baynes et al. 2000
Tridecane	184			0.00-0.02	Muhammad et al., 2005
Tridecane				2.5	Singh and Singh, 2003
Tridecane				0.33	McDougal et al., 1999
Tetradecane	198			0.3	Singh and Singh, 2003
Hexadecane			7.02 x 10E-3	0.00004	Singh and Singh, 2002
Aromatic Constituents
Trimethyl benzene	120			0.49 - 1.01	Muhammad et al., 2005
Trimethyl benzene				1.25	McDougal et al., 1999
Naphthalene	128			6.6 - 4.2	Muhammad et al., 2005
Naphthalene				0.5	Kim et al., 2006
Naphthalene				1.4	Singh and Singh 2002
Naphthalene				1.8	Baynes et al. (2000)
Naphthalene				1.0	McDougal et al., 1999
1 methyl naphthalene	142			0.5	Kim et al., 2006
Methyl naphthalene				1.55	McDougal et al., 1999
2-methyl naphthalene				0.5	Kim et al., 2006
2-methyl naphthalene				1.1	Singh and Singh, 2002
Dimethyl naphthalene	156			0.62 – 0.67	Muhammad et al., 2005
Dimethyl naphthalene				0.59	McDougal et al. 1999

 

 

References

Tsuruta, H. et al. (1982). Percutaneous absorption of organic solvents III. On the penetration rates of hydrophobic solvents through the excised rat skin. Industrial Health 20:335-345.

Kim, D., Andersen, M., and Nylander-French (2006). Dermal absorption and penetration of jet fuel components in humans. Toxicology Letters 165:11-21.

Muhammad, F., N. Monteiro-Riviere, R. Baynes, and J. Riviere (2005). Effect of in vivo jet fuel exposure on subsequent in vitro dermal absorption of individual aromatic and aliphatic hydrocarbon fuel constituents. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A. 68:719-737.

Singh Somnath, Zhao Kaidi, Singh Jagdish. (2002). In vitro permeability and binding of hydrocarbons in pig ear and human abdominal skin. Drug and chemical toxicology, (2002 Feb) Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 83-92.

Singh, S. and Singh, J. (2003). Percutaneous absorption, biophysical and macroscopic barrier properties of porcine skin exposed to major components of JP-8 jet fuel. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology 14:77-85.

McDougal, J., Pollard, D., Weisman, W., Garrett, C., and Miller, T. (2000). Assessment of skin absorption and penetration of JP-8 jet fuel and its components. Toxicological Sciences 25:247-255.

The following information is taken into account for any hazard / risk assessment:

Hydrocarbons, C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclics, 40-60% aromatics are poorly dermally absorbed and they tend to partition into the stratum corneum. When dermally absorbed, hydrocarbons C13-C20, n-alkanes, isoalkanes, cyclics, 40-60% aromatics are rapidly metabolized and eliminated.

 

Discussion on absorption rate:

There have not been any in vivo dermal absorption studies of C14-C20 aliphatic, 2-20% aromatic hydrocarbon fluids, but there have been in vitro and in vivo studies for constituents of the C14-C20 aliphatic, 2-20% aromatic hydrocarbon fluids.  Due to the structural similarity of these molecules to other constituents of the C14 – C20 aliphatic, 2-20% aromatic hydrocarbon fluids, it seems reasonable to assume that the solvents would have toxicokinetic properties similar to those of these constituents.  

 

IN VIVO

 

The percutaneous absorption and cutaneous disposition of topically applied neat Jet-A, JP-8, and JP-8(100) jet fuels (25 uL/5 cm2) was examined by monitoring the absorptive flux of the marker components 14C naphthalene and 4H dodecane simultaneously applied non-occluded to isolated perfused porcine skin flaps (a = 4). Absorption of 14C hexadecane was estimated from JP-8 fuel. Absorption and disposition of naphthalene and dodecane were also monitored using a nonvolatile JP-8 fraction reflecting exposure to residual fuel that might occur 24 h after a jet fuel spill. In all studies, perfusate, stratum corneum, and skin concentrations were measured over 5 h. Naphthalene absorption had a clear peak absorptive flux at less than 1 h, while dodecane and hexadecane had prolonged, albeit significantly lower, absorption flux profiles. Within JP-8, absorption was (mean +/- SEM; % dose) hexadecane (0.18 +/- 0.08).  The area under the curve (AUC) was determined to be (mean +/- SEM; % dose-h/mL): hexadecane (0.0017 +/- 0.0003).

 

IN VITRO

The flux, permeability coefficient (Kp), and binding of hexadecane for porcine skin was determined to be 8.80 +/- 0.00 (nmol/cm2/h) x 10E-3. The permeability coefficient (Kp), and binding of hexadecane for human skin were determined to be 7.02 +/- 0.00 (nmol/cm2/h) x 10E-3. Factor of difference (FOD) in the permeability of pig and human skin was 1.28 for hexadecane. The FOD in binding of hexadecane to pig and human skin was found to be 0.76.

 

The percutaneous absorption was determined in vivo (weanling pigs) for the constituent hexadecane, which is also a component of JP-8. In vivo percutaneous absorption results suggest a greater absorption of hexadecane (0.43%) than xylene (0.17%) or heptane (0.14%) of the applied dose after 30 min exposure. Transepidermal water loss (TEWL) provides a robust method for assessing damage to the stratum corneum. Heptane showed greater increase in TEWL than the other two chemicals. No significant (p < 0.05) increase in temperature was observed at the chemically treated site than the control site. Heptane showed greater TEWL values and erythema scores than other two chemicals (xylene and hexadecane). Erythema was completely resolved after 24 h of the patch removal in case of xylene and hexadecane.

OVERVIEW OF PERCUTANEOUS ABSORPTION OF HYDROCARBON SOLVENTS

There are no studies of repeated dose toxicity of hydrocarbon solvents using the dermal route of administration. Accordingly, where it is necessary to calculate dermal DNELs, systemic data from studies utilizing other routes of administration, normally inhalation but also oral data, can be used in some situations.  In accordance with ECHA guidance, read across from oral or inhalation data to dermal should account for differences in absorption where these exist (R8, example B.6). In fact, hydrocarbon solvents are poorly absorbed in most situations, in part because some are volatile and do not remain in contact with the skin for long periods of time and also because, due to their hydrophobic natures, do not partition well into aqueous environments and are poorly absorbed into the blood. 

 

           If these differences in relative absorption are introduced into the DNEL calculations to calculate external doses, the DNELs based on systemic effects are highly inflated. This seems potentially misleading as it implies that substances have different intrinsic hazards when encountered by different routes whereas in fact the differences are due ultimately to differences in absorbed dose. Accordingly, it is our opinion that it would be more transparent if the differences in absorption were taken into account in the exposure equations rather than in DNEL derivation. 

 

           Shown below is a compilation of percutaneous absorption information for a number of hydrocarbon solvent constituents covering carbon numbers ranging from C5 to C14 as well as examples of both aliphatic and aromatic constituents. The low molecular weight aliphatic hydrocarbons (n-pentane, 2-methylpentane, n-hexane, n-heptane, and n-octane) were tested by Tsuruta (1982) using rat skin in an in vitro model system. As shown (Table 1), the highest percutaneous absorption value was 2 ug/cm2/hr for pentane. Lower values (< ~ 1 ug/cm2/hr) were reported for aliphatic hydrocarbons ranging from hexane to octane. Several authors have assessed the percutaneous absorption of higher molecular weight aliphatic constituents including Baynes et al. (2000), Singh and Singh (2003), Muhammad et al. (2005), and Kim et al., (2006). The first three of these authors used porcine skin models and reported that, except for one anomalous result with tridecane, the percutaneous absorption values for aliphatic constituents ranging from nonane to tetradecane were well below 1 ug/cm2/hr. Rat and human skin are considered to be more permeable than human skin (Kim et al., 2006), so these numbers can be considered conservative. 

 

           Kim et al. (2006) reported results of percutaneous absorption studies with human skin under in vivo conditions. In this case, the assessment method was based on tape stripping. The authors reported percutaneous absorption values ranging from 1 – 2 ug/kg/day for decane, undecane and dodecane. These values are higher than those reported by other authors, most likely because this technique measures absorption into the skin but not through the skin as was done in the studies listed above. Accordingly, it seems likely that these numbers are conservative as well.

 

           With respect to aromatic hydrocarbons, most of the reported percutaneous absorption values [Baynes et al. (2000); Singh and Singh (2003); Mohammad et al. (2005); and Kim et al. (2006)] are less than 2 ug/cm2/day. The only exceptions are the values for naphthalene from Mohammad et al. (2005) which range from 4.2-6.6 ug/cm2/hr. 

 

           After considering all of the above, it seems reasonable to assume apparent that across the entire range of hydrocarbon solvent constituents, percutaneous absorption values are less than 2 ug/cm2/day. Accordingly, when systemic dermal DNELs are calculated using route to route extrapolations, the values will not be corrected for differences in absorption. Rather, 2 ug/cm2/hr will be used as a common percutaneous absorption rate for all hydrocarbon solvents for which dermal exposure estimates are provided. 

           

Table 1: Summarized information on percutaneous absorption of hydrocarbon solvent constituents (C5-C16). 

 

Constituent	Molecular Weight	nmol/min/cm2	nmol/hr/cm2	ug/cm2/hr	Reference
Aliphatic Constituents
Pentane	72	0.52	31.2	2.2	Tsuruta et al. 1982
2-methyl pentane	86	0.02	1.2	0.1	Tsuruta et al., 1982
n-hexane	86	0.02	0.6	0.5	Tsuruta et al., 1982
n-heptane	100	0.02	1.2	0.1	Tsuruta et al., 1982
n-octane	114	0.08 x 10-3	0.005	0.0005	Tsuruta et al., 1982
Nonane	128			0.03	Muhammad et al., 2005
Nonane				0.38	McDougal et al., 1999
Decane	142			2	Kim et al., 2006
Decane				1.65	McDougal et al., 1999
Undecane	156			0.06-0.07	Muhammad et al., 2005
Undecane				1.0	Kim et al., 2006
Undecane				1.22	McDougal et al., 1999
Dodecane	170			0.02-0.04	Muhammad et al., 2005
Dodecane				2	Kim et al., 2006
Dodecane				0.3	Singh and Singh, 2003
Dodecane				0.51	McDougal et al., 1999
Dodecane				0.1	Baynes et al. 2000
Tridecane	184			0.00-0.02	Muhammad et al., 2005
Tridecane				2.5	Singh and Singh, 2003
Tridecane				0.33	McDougal et al., 1999
Tetradecane	198			0.3	Singh and Singh, 2003
Hexadecane			7.02 x 10E-3	0.00004	Singh and Singh, 2002
Aromatic Constituents
Trimethyl benzene	120			0.49 - 1.01	Muhammad et al., 2005
Trimethyl benzene				1.25	McDougal et al., 1999
Naphthalene	128			6.6 - 4.2	Muhammad et al., 2005
Naphthalene				0.5	Kim et al., 2006
Naphthalene				1.4	Singh and Singh 2002
Naphthalene				1.8	Baynes et al. (2000)
Naphthalene				1.0	McDougal et al., 1999
1 methyl naphthalene	142			0.5	Kim et al., 2006
Methyl naphthalene				1.55	McDougal et al., 1999
2-methyl naphthalene				0.5	Kim et al., 2006
2-methyl naphthalene				1.1	Singh and Singh, 2002
Dimethyl naphthalene	156			0.62 – 0.67	Muhammad et al., 2005
Dimethyl naphthalene				0.59	McDougal et al. 1999

 

 

References

Tsuruta, H. et al. (1982). Percutaneous absorption of organic solvents III. On the penetration rates of hydrophobic solvents through the excised rat skin. Industrial Health 20:335-345.

 

Kim, D., Andersen, M., and Nylander-French (2006). Dermal absorption and penetration of jet fuel components in humans. Toxicology Letters 165:11-21.

 

Muhammad, F., N. Monteiro-Riviere, R. Baynes, and J. Riviere (2005). Effect of in vivo jet fuel exposure on subsequent in vitro dermal absorption of individual aromatic and aliphatic hydrocarbon fuel constituents. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A. 68:719-737.

 

Singh Somnath, Zhao Kaidi, Singh Jagdish. (2002). In vitro permeability and binding of hydrocarbons in pig ear and human abdominal skin. Drug and chemical toxicology, (2002 Feb) Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 83-92.

 

Singh, S. and Singh, J. (2003). Percutaneous absorption, biophysical and macroscopic barrier properties of porcine skin exposed to major components of JP-8 jet fuel. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology 14:77-85.

 

McDougal, J., Pollard, D., Weisman, W., Garrett, C., and Miller, T. (2000). Assessment of skin absorption and penetration of JP-8 jet fuel and its components. Toxicological Sciences 25:247-255.