Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
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: 500-092-7 | CAS number: 36890-68-3
- 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

Skin sensitisation
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vitro
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- Experimental starting date: 23 Jan 2018. Experimental completion date: 20 Feb 2018
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 2 018
- Report date:
- 2018
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 442D (In Vitro Skin Sensitisation: ARE-Nrf2 Luciferase Test Method)
- Version / remarks:
- Draft version July 2017 including LuSens test
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- activation of keratinocytes
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- 2,2'-oxydiethanol
- EC Number:
- 203-872-2
- EC Name:
- 2,2'-oxydiethanol
- Cas Number:
- 111-46-6
- Molecular formula:
- C4H10O3
- IUPAC Name:
- (2-hydroxyethoxy) ethan-2-ol
- Reference substance name:
- Diethylene glycol 6-hydroxyhexanoate
- Molecular formula:
- C10H20O5
- IUPAC Name:
- Diethylene glycol 6-hydroxyhexanoate
- Reference substance name:
- Diethylene glycol di-6-hydroxyhexanoate
- Molecular formula:
- C16H30O7
- IUPAC Name:
- Diethylene glycol di-6-hydroxyhexanoate
- Reference substance name:
- Diethylene glycol tri-6-hydroxyhexanoate
- Molecular formula:
- C22H40O9
- IUPAC Name:
- Diethylene glycol tri-6-hydroxyhexanoate
- Reference substance name:
- Diethylene glycol tetra-6-hydroxyhexanoate
- Molecular formula:
- C28H50O11
- IUPAC Name:
- Diethylene glycol tetra-6-hydroxyhexanoate
- Reference substance name:
- Diethylene glycol penta-6-hydroxyhexanoat
- Molecular formula:
- C34H60O13
- IUPAC Name:
- Diethylene glycol penta-6-hydroxyhexanoat
- Reference substance name:
- Diethylene glycol hexa-6-hydroxyhexanoate
- Molecular formula:
- C40H70O15
- IUPAC Name:
- Diethylene glycol hexa-6-hydroxyhexanoate
- Test material form:
- liquid: viscous
- Details on test material:
- Appearance viscous, colorless liquid
CAS No. 36890-68-3
EINECS-No. 500-092-7
Constituent 1
Constituent 2
Constituent 3
Constituent 4
Constituent 5
Constituent 6
Constituent 7
In vitro test system
- Details on the study design:
- A human keratinocyte cell line (provided by RWTH, Aachen, Germany) was transfected with the pGL4.20 [luc2/Puro] vector (Promega, Germany) carrying the regulatory antioxidant response element (ARE) up-stream of the luciferase gene (Luc2, Promega, Germany) at the Institute of Anatomy and Cell Biology of the RWTH, Aachen (laboratory of PD Dr. Wruck). The test system employs the use of a reporter gene for luciferase placed under the control of the antioxidant response element (ARE) and hence monitors Nrf-2 transcription factor activity.
The assay included a cytotoxicity range finder test (CRFT) and three independent experiments (experiment I, II and III) with a treatment period of 48 h. The CRFT was performed to detect a potential cytotoxic effect of the test item. Based on the results of this test the concentrations for the three experiments were deter-mined.
In the experiments, the highest nominal applied concentration (2000 µg/mL) was chosen based on the results obtained in the CRFT. A geometric series (factor 1.2) of eleven dilutions thereof was prepared. Precipitation of the test item was not visible in any of the experiments. DMSO (final concentration: 1 %) was used as solvent control and medium no. 3 as growth control. Lactic acid (5000 µM) was used as negative control and EGDMA (120 µM) as positive control.
Three experiments (experiment I, II and III) were performed in the same way. Experiment III serves only to confirm the results of experiment I and II.
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- All control substances indicated the expected effect. No considerable reduction of the viability was de-tected (all values > 92 %). The positive control induced a clear effect with an induction value of 4.9 fold in comparison to the solvent control.
In vitro / in chemico
Results
- Key result
- Parameter:
- other: Fold induction
- Value:
- 1.5
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Other effects / acceptance of results:
- Prior to routine use, the validity of the LuSens test at LAUS GmbH was demonstrated in a proficiency study. In this study, 22 proficiency chemicals (indicated by the OECD 442D guideline as well as the OECD PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED SIMILAR OR MODIFIED IN VITRO SKIN SEN-SITISATION ARE-NRF2 LUCIFERASE TEST METHODS) were tested. As prescribed by the guidelines, more than 80 % (96 %) of the results were correctly categorized. Therefore, the proficiency of the LuSens test was demonstrated.
The following criteria for acceptability were met:
- The average induction for the positive control should be ≥ 2.5 fold and it should have a relative viability of at least 70 %.
- The induction triggered by the negative control and growth control should be < 1.5 fold as compared to the induction of the solvent control and the viability should be above 70%.
- The average percentage standard deviation (luciferase induction) of the variability in at least 21 solvent control wells should be below 20 %.
- At least 3 test concentrations must be within viability limits, i.e. have relative viability of at least 70 %.
Any other information on results incl. tables
The following test item concentrations showed a viability ≥ 70 %, were declared as valid and could therefore be evaluated for luciferase induction:
Experiment I: 269µg/mL, 323 µg/mL, 338 µg/mL, 465 µg/mL, 558 µg/mL.
Experiment II: 269µg/mL, 323 µg/mL, 338 µg/mL, 465 µg/mL.
Experiment III: 269µg/mL, 323 µg/mL, 338 µg/mL.
A substantial and reproducible dose-dependent and a statistically significant increase in luciferase induction was measured in the test item concentrations 323 µg/mL to 558 µg/mL in experiment I, 269 µg/mL to 465 µg/mL in experiment II and 269 to 388 µg/mL in experiment III. Here, the induction was equal or above threshold of 1.5 fold in comparison to the solvent control.
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- study cannot be used for classification
- Conclusions:
- The test item ε-Caprolactone, oligomeric reaction products with 2,2'-oxydiethanol is considered to have the potential to activate the Nrf2 transcription factor (sensitizing potential) under the conditions of the LuSens test.
- Executive summary:
An in vitro study (conducted according to OECD Test Guideline 422D) has been carried out to evaluate the potential of the test item ε-Caprolactone, oligomeric reaction products with 2,2'-oxydiethanol to activate the Nrf2 transcription factor (sensitizing potential) by using the LuSens cell line. This test is part of a tiered strategy for the evaluation of skin sensitization potential. Thus, data generated with the present Test Guideline should be used to support the discrimination between skin sensitizers and non-sensitizers in the context of an integrated approach to testing and assessment.
The LuSens test is an ARE Reporter Gene Assay that was developed by the BASF SE (Ludwigshafen, Germany) and is based on the OECD 442D Guideline (KeratinoSens Assay). Since July 2017 a reviewed version of the OECD 442D is available, which includes the LuSens test. Therefore this study is performed in accordance to this draft OECD 442D with the title “In Vitro Skin Sensitisation assays addressing the AOP Key Event on: Keratinocyte activation”.
The assay included a cytotoxicity range finder test (CRFT) and two independent experiments (experiment I and II) with a treatment period of 48 h. The CRFT was performed to detect a potential cytotoxic effect of the test item. Based on the results of this test the concentrations for the two experiments were determined.
In the experiments, the highest nominal applied concentration (2000 µg/mL) was chosen based on the results obtained in the CRFT.A geometric series (factor 1.2) of eleven dilutions thereof was prepared. Precipitation of the test item was not visible in any of the experiments.
DMSO (final concentration: 1 %) was used as solvent control and medium no. 3 as growth control. Lactic acid (5000 µM) was used as negative control and EGDMA (120 µM) as positive control.
A substantial and reproducible dose-dependent increase in luciferase induction above 1.5 fold in more than two non-cytotoxic consecutive test item concentrations was observed in both experiments.
Under the experimental conditions of this study, the test item,ε-Caprolactone, oligomeric reaction products with 2,2'-oxydiethanol, was positive in the LuSens assay and is therefore considered to have the potential to activate the Nrf2 transcription factor (sensitizing potential).
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.
