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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 701-079-0 | 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
Skin sensitisation
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- From: 7 September 1992 To: 9 October 1992
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: GLP Guideline study.
Cross-referenceopen allclose all
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- reference to same study
- Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
- reference to other study
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 1 992
- Report date:
- 1992
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- no
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Not applicable.
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- Guinea pig maximisation test was performed in 1993 before the REACH Regulation (EC.1907/2006)
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- A mixture of: tetrasodium-phosphonoethane-1,2-dicarboxylate; hexasodium-phosphonobutane-1,2,3,4-tetracarboxylate
- EC Number:
- 410-800-5
- EC Name:
- A mixture of: tetrasodium-phosphonoethane-1,2-dicarboxylate; hexasodium-phosphonobutane-1,2,3,4-tetracarboxylate
- Cas Number:
- 143239-08-1
- Molecular formula:
- Constituent 1 (tetrasodium phosphonoethane-1,2-dicarboxylate): Hill formula: C4H3Na4O7P CAS formula: C4 H7 O7 P .4Na Constituent 2 (hexasodium-phosphonobutane-1,2,3,4-tetracarboxylate): Hill formula: C8H5Na6O11P CAS formula: C8 H11 O7 P .6Na
- IUPAC Name:
- Reaction mass of tetrasodium phosphonoethane-1,2-dicarboxylate and hexasodium-phosphonobutane-1,2,3,4-tetracarboxylate
- Details on test material:
- - Name of test material (as cited in study report): ITC 288 (reaction mixture consisting mainly of the following components: n=1= phosphonoethane-1,2-dicarboxylic acid tetrasodium salt and n = 2= 1-phosphonobutane-1, 2, 3, 4-tetracarboxylic acid hexasodium salt)
- Physical state: white powder
- Storage condition of test material: room temperature under silica gel
Constituent 1
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- Purity of the test material is based on the phosphonate composition, with no direct measure of % sodium. ITC 288 is not the "Reaction mass of tetrasodium-phosphonoethane-1,2-dicarboxylate and hexasodium-phosphonobutane-1,2,3,4--tetracarboxylate" (EC 410-800-5) rather the substance "Reaction mass of trisodium-phosphonoethane-1,2-dicarboxylate and pentasodium-phosphonobutane-1,2,3,4--tetracarboxylate" (EC 701-079-0) as demonstrated by the manufacturing specs reported in Section 1.2, legal entity composition.
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: David Hall Limited, Burton-on-Trent, Staffordshire, U.K.
- Age at study initiation: 8-12 weeks old
- Weight at study initiation: 300-366 g
- Housing: up to 3 per cage
- Diet : ad libitum
- Water : ad libitum
- Acclimation period: at least 5 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 20-22
- Humidity (%): 51-75
- Air changes (per hr): 15
- Photoperiod : 12 hrs dark / 12 hrs light
IN-LIFE DATES: From: 7 September 1992 To: 9 October 1992
Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Induction
- Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- Intradermal induction: 1 % (w/v) in distilled water
Topical induction: 75 % (w/v) in distilled water
Challenge
- Route:
- epicutaneous, semiocclusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- Topical challenge: 50 % and 25 % (w/w) in distilled water
- No. of animals per dose:
- 20 (test)
10 (control) - Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
- For intradermal induction: 1% was selected for the main study considering as the highest concentration that did not cause local necrosis, ulceration or systemic toxicity
- For Topical application: 75% was selected for the main study considering as the highest concentration producing only mild to moderate dermal irritation after a 48-hour occlusive exposure
- For Topical Challenge: 25% and 75% were selected for the main study considering as the highest non-irritant concentration.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 2
- Exposure period: Day 0 and Day 7
- Site: shoulder region
- Concentrations: 1 % (intradermal), 75 % (epidermal)
Intradermal injection/ day 0
3 pairs of intradermal injections (0.1 ml on each side of the mid-line) were made in an area approximately 40 mm x 60 mm on the shoulder region.
Test animals:
1) Freund's Complete Adjuvant plus distilled water in the ratio 1:1
2) a 1 % (w/v) dilution of test material in distilled water
3) a 1 % (w/v) dilution of test material in a 1:1 preparation of Freund's Complete Adjuvant plus distilled water
Control animals:
1) Freund's Complete Adjuvant plus distilled water in the ratio 1:1
2) distilled water
3) Freund's Complete Adjuvant plus distilled water in the ratio 1:1
Epidermal applications/day 7
One week later (Day 7), the same area on the shoulder region used previously for intradermal injections was clipped again and treated with a topical application of the test material formulation (75 % w/w in distilled water). The test material formulation (0.2-0.3 ml) was applied on filter paper (WHATMAN No.4: approximate size 40 mm x 20 mm) which was held in place by a strip of surgical adhesive tape (BLENDERM: approximate size 60 mm x 25 mm) and covered with an overlapping lenght of aluminium foil. The patch and foil were further secured by a strip of elastic adhesive bandage (ELASTOPLAST: approximate size 250 mm x 35 mm) wound in a double layer around the torso of each animal. This occlusive dressing was kept in place for 48 hours.
Erythematous reactions were quantified one and twenty-four hours following removal of the patches.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1
- Day(s) of challenge: day 21
- Exposure period: 24 hours
- Test groups and Control group: a quantity of 0.1-0.2 ml of the test material formulation (50 % w/w in distilled water) was a^pplied to the shorn right flank of each animal on a square of filter paper which was held in place by a strip of surgical adhesive tape. To ensure that the maximum non-irritant concentration was used at challenge, the test material at a concentration of 25% (w/w) in distilled water was also similarly applied to a separate skin site on the right shorn flank. The vehicle alone was similarly applied to the left shorn flank.
- Site: right flank (test material), left flank (vehicle)
- Concentrations: 50 and 25 %
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24, 48 and 72 hours
- Challenge controls:
- no data
- Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
Study design: in vivo (LLNA)
- Statistics:
- None
Results and discussion
- Positive control results:
- no data
In vivo (non-LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 50 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 10
- Total no. in group:
- 19
- Clinical observations:
- no data
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 50 %. No with. + reactions: 10.0. Total no. in groups: 19.0. Clinical observations: no data.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 50 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 7
- Total no. in group:
- 19
- Clinical observations:
- no data
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 50 %. No with. + reactions: 7.0. Total no. in groups: 19.0. Clinical observations: no data.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 25 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 19
- Clinical observations:
- no data
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 25 %. No with. + reactions: 1.0. Total no. in groups: 19.0. Clinical observations: no data.
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 25 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 19
- Clinical observations:
- no data
- Remarks on result:
- other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 25 %. No with. + reactions: 2.0. Total no. in groups: 19.0. Clinical observations: no data.
Any other information on results incl. tables
Table 7.4.1/1: Reaction at challenge at 24 h and 48 h in negative control group and test group (25%)
Animal number |
Reaction at challenge |
||||
24 h |
48 h |
72 h |
|||
Control group |
|
||||
21 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
22 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
23 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
24 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
25 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
26 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
27 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
28 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
29 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
30 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Test group (25%) |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
6 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
7 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
8 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
9 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
10 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
11 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
12 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
13 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
14 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
15 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
16 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
17 |
1 |
1 |
0D |
|
|
18 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
19 |
- |
- |
- |
|
|
20 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
- = no data; animal found dead day 14
D = Desquamation
R = extended reaction
Table 7.4.1/2: Reaction at challenge at 24 h and 48 h in negative control group and test group (50%)
Animal number |
Reaction at challenge |
||||
24 h |
48 h |
72 h |
|||
Control group |
|
||||
21 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
22 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
23 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
24 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
25 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
26 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
27 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
28 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
29 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
30 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Test group (50%) |
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
3 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
4 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
6 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
7 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
8 |
1R |
1R |
0 D |
|
|
9 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
10 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
11 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
12 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
13 |
0 |
0 |
0 D |
|
|
14 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
15 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
16 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
17 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
18 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
19 |
- |
- |
- |
|
|
20 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
- = no data; animal found dead day 14
D = Desquamation
R = extended reaction
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- other: lassified in category 1B, H317 ( May cause an allergic skin reaction) according to the CLP regulation (1272/2008)
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of this test, ITC 288 produced a 58 % (11/19) sensitisation rate and was classified in category 1B, H317 ( May cause an allergic skin reaction) according to the CLP regulation (1272/2008) and as a sensitiser to guinea pig skin (Xi, R43) according to the Directive 67/548/EEC.
- Executive summary:
In a dermal sensitisation study (Tuffnell PP, 1992), female albino Dunkin-Hartley guinea pigs (20 tested, 10 control) were used to test the skin contact sensitisation potential of ITC 288. The method of Guinea pig maximisation test was used. The concentrations of the test material were 1% for the intradermal induction, 75 % for the topical induction and 50 and 25 % for the topical challenge. One test animal was found dead on day 14. The cause of death was not determined but the absence of this animal was considered not to affect the purpose or integrity of the study. Scattered mild redness and moderate and diffuse redness were elicited by the test material after topical induction. Other adverse reactions noted were bleeding, dried blood and small superficial scattered scabs. After topical challenge (50 % of test material), positive skin responses were noted at the test sites of ten test animals at the 24 -hour observation and persisted in seven test animals at the 48 -hour observation. The reaction extended beyond the treatment site of one test animal at the 24 and 48 -hour observations. Desquamation was noted at the test sites of two test animals at the 72 -hour observation; according to Draize's scale and Magnusson and Kligman's scale this local effect should not be considered as an positive reaction. No adverse reactions were noted at the test sites of control animals at the 24, 48 and 72 -hour observations. After topical challenge (25 % of test material), a positive skin response was noted at the test sites of one test animal at the 24 and 48 -hour observations. A positive response developed at the test site of one more test animal at the 48 -hour observation. Desquamation was noted at the test site of one test animal at the 72 -hour observation. No adverse reactions were noted at the test sites of control animals at the 24, 48 and 72 -hour observations. It should be noted that desquamation observed for two animals at 72 -hour post exposure were discounted for the calculation of the sensitisation index. Initially the study report mentioned 12 animals with positive reactions, and after re-evaluation of the data only 11 showed clear skin sensitisation effect; the latest animal exhibited only desquamation at 72 -hours post exposure without any previous local effects.
Under the conditions of this test, ITC 288 produced a 58 % (11/19) sensitisation rate and was classified in category 1B, H317 ( May cause an allergic skin reaction) according to the CLP regulation (1272/2008) and as a sensitiser to guinea pig skin (Xi, R43) according to the Directive 67/548/EEC.
This skin sensitisation study is classified as acceptable. It satisfies the guideline requirement for a skin sensitisation in the guinea pig.
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.