Registration Dossier
Registration Dossier
Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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.
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: 268-018-3 | CAS number: 67989-88-2
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Additional information
Results of tests with EDTA-CuNa2 were used for read across with EDTA-Cu(NH4)2; see also read across document in section 13.
EDTA-CuNa2 was negative in the Ames test and in the in vitro micronucleus test using a treatment period of 4 h (with and without S9 -mix). In the in vitro micronucleus test using a treatment period of 20 h (continuous treatment without S9 -mix), EDTA-CuNa2 was positive at levels >= 62.5 µg/mL, inducing aneugenic but no clastogenic effects. This long treatment period together with the high concentrations of chelant may have resulted in exchange and substantial binding of essential elements such as zinc. Similar results were obtained with EDTA-FeNa and DTPA-FeNaH (see robust summaries and read across document; section 13). Heimbach et al (2000; see also robust summary) concluded that the lack of effects by the Zn-EDTA salt in contrast to effects induced by Ca-, Na- and Mn-salts of EDTA, provided evidence that zinc is required for the initiation or continuation of DNA synthesis and maintaining cell function. As such, the significance of mutations produced by EDTA-CuNa2 (and also EDTA-FeNa and DTPA-FeNaH) at non-physiological concentrations in an in vitro screening system is difficult to extrapolate for relevance to intact organisms.
Although no in vivo genotoxicity studies have been carried out with EDTA-CuNa2 and EDTA-Cu(NH4)2, several in vivo genotoxicity studies are available for other EDTA-compounds such as EDTA-Na2H2. No genotoxic activity was observed (see also read across document in section 13).
Therefore, the overall findings indicate that EDTA-Cu(NH4)2 lacks significant genotoxic potential under conditions that do not deplete essential trace elements required for normal cell function.
Justification for classification or non-classification
The test substance EDTA-CuNa2 gave negative results in two in vitro mutagenicity studies, viz. the Ames test and the micronuclueus test following exposure for 4 h (with and without S9 mix) but gave positive results (aneugenicity but not clastogenicity ) following exposure for 20 h (without S9 -mix). The latter was most probably explained by induction of Zn deficiency. Overall, it was concluded that classification for genotoxicity, also for EDTA-Cu(NH4)2 is not warranted.
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.
