Registration Dossier

Administrative data

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Genetic toxicity in vitro

Description of key information

Based on 4 different Ames tests on its analogue acrylic acid up to concentrations ranging between 1000 and 5000 µg/plate with or without exogenous metabolic activation, the registered substance is considered to be devoid of mutagenic potential in bacterial systems.

Acrylic acid did not induce gene mutations in CHO cells (HGPRT locus) in one study but was positive in four distinct mouse lymphoma assays and in two in vitro chromosomal aberration tests. In the mouse lymphoma assays small colonies were induced preferentially, thus the mutagenic potential of acrylic acid seems to be limited to clastogenicity.

Link to relevant study records

Referenceopen allclose all

Endpoint:
in vitro gene mutation study in bacteria
Type of information:
read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
Adequacy of study:
weight of evidence
Justification for type of information:
1. HYPOTHESIS FOR THE ANALOGUE APPROACH
- Read-across hypothesis: "Different compounds have the same type of effect(s)"

2. SOURCE AND TARGET CHEMICAL(S) (INCLUDING INFORMATION ON PURITY AND IMPURITIES)
- Target chemical: 2-Propenoic acid, homopolymer (purity ≥ 99.0%) = UVCB substance composed of acrylic acid monomers (Mw = 72 g/mol) and 2-carboxyethyl acrylate oligomers (average Mw = 208.8 g/mol)
- Source chemical: Acrylic acid = monoconstituent substance composed of acrylic acid monomers (Mw = 72 g/mol)

3. ANALOGUE APPROACH JUSTIFICATION
- Common structure: the constituents of the target and source chemicals share identical functional groups (i.e. one terminal carboxylic acid group and one terminal vinyl group) and only differ in the presence/absence of one or several -CH2-CH2-COO- pattern(s) in their structural backbones. This pattern being introduced as a result of (poly)addition reactions, it is only present in the polymerized units of acrylic acid (average number of -CH2-CH2-COO- patterns per vinyl group: < 3) and is absent from the monomer units.
- Common physico-chemical/fate properties: the target and source chemicals are both hydrophylic substances (log Pow < 1) with a high solubility in water and a low volatility (VP < 5 hPa). Both substances have a low potential for bioaccumulation in living organisms (log Pow < 4) and a low potential for persistence in environmental compartments (rapidly degradable).
- Common mode of action: the toxic effects of the target and source chemicals are expected to result from their acidic character (carboxylic acid group) and from the reactivity of their double bond (vinyl group). As the polyaddition reactions lead only to an increase in the chain length/molecular weight without an increase in the number of reactive functional groups, the low molecular-weight polymerized units of acrylic acid (from the test item) are not expected to exert higher toxicity than the monomer units. As a result, the target chemical, although only partially composed of acrylic acid monomers, is considered at the very worst to be as toxic as the source substance.

Further information (including data matrix) is available in the attached read-across justification document.
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Key result
Species / strain:
other: S. Typhimurium TA 1535, TA 1537, TA 98 and TA 100
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
negative
Remarks:
Up to concentrations ranging between 1000 and 5000 µg/plate
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
cytotoxicity
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
valid
Positive controls validity:
valid
Conclusions:
Based on 4 different Ames test in compliance with the standards in force at the time, the acrylic acid analogue did not show evidence of mutagenic activity up to concentrations ranging between 1000 and 5000 µg/plate with or without exogenous metabolic activation. Therefore the registered substance is considered to be devoid of mutagenic potential in bacterial systems.
Endpoint:
in vitro cytogenicity / chromosome aberration study in mammalian cells
Type of information:
read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
Adequacy of study:
weight of evidence
Justification for type of information:
1. HYPOTHESIS FOR THE ANALOGUE APPROACH
- Read-across hypothesis: "Different compounds have the same type of effect(s)"

2. SOURCE AND TARGET CHEMICAL(S) (INCLUDING INFORMATION ON PURITY AND IMPURITIES)
- Target chemical: 2-Propenoic acid, homopolymer (purity ≥ 99.0%) = UVCB substance composed of acrylic acid monomers (Mw = 72 g/mol) and 2-carboxyethyl acrylate oligomers (average Mw = 208.8 g/mol)
- Source chemical: Acrylic acid = monoconstituent substance composed of acrylic acid monomers (Mw = 72 g/mol)

3. ANALOGUE APPROACH JUSTIFICATION
- Common structure: the constituents of the target and source chemicals share identical functional groups (i.e. one terminal carboxylic acid group and one terminal vinyl group) and only differ in the presence/absence of one or several -CH2-CH2-COO- pattern(s) in their structural backbones. This pattern being introduced as a result of (poly)addition reactions, it is only present in the polymerized units of acrylic acid (average number of -CH2-CH2-COO- patterns per vinyl group: < 3) and is absent from the monomer units.
- Common physico-chemical/fate properties: the target and source chemicals are both hydrophylic substances (log Pow < 1) with a high solubility in water and a low volatility (VP < 5 hPa). Both substances have a low potential for bioaccumulation in living organisms (log Pow < 4) and a low potential for persistence in environmental compartments (rapidly degradable).
- Common mode of action: the toxic effects of the target and source chemicals are expected to result from their acidic character (carboxylic acid group) and from the reactivity of their double bond (vinyl group). As the polyaddition reactions lead only to an increase in the chain length/molecular weight without an increase in the number of reactive functional groups, the low molecular-weight polymerized units of acrylic acid (from the test item) are not expected to exert higher toxicity than the monomer units. As a result, the target chemical, although only partially composed of acrylic acid monomers, is considered at the very worst to be as toxic as the source substance.

Further information (including data matrix) is available in the attached read-across justification document.
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Species / strain:
Chinese hamster Ovary (CHO)
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
positive
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
cytotoxicity
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
valid
Positive controls validity:
valid
Species / strain:
mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells
Metabolic activation:
without
Genotoxicity:
positive
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
cytotoxicity
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
valid
Positive controls validity:
valid
Conclusions:
The analogue of the registered substance, acrylic acid, induced chromosomal aberrations in CHO cells or mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells in vitro.
Endpoint:
in vitro gene mutation study in mammalian cells
Type of information:
read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
Adequacy of study:
weight of evidence
Justification for type of information:
1. HYPOTHESIS FOR THE ANALOGUE APPROACH
- Read-across hypothesis: "Different compounds have the same type of effect(s)"

2. SOURCE AND TARGET CHEMICAL(S) (INCLUDING INFORMATION ON PURITY AND IMPURITIES)
- Target chemical: 2-Propenoic acid, homopolymer (purity ≥ 99.0%) = UVCB substance composed of acrylic acid monomers (Mw = 72 g/mol) and 2-carboxyethyl acrylate oligomers (average Mw = 208.8 g/mol)
- Source chemical: Acrylic acid = monoconstituent substance composed of acrylic acid monomers (Mw = 72 g/mol)

3. ANALOGUE APPROACH JUSTIFICATION
- Common structure: the constituents of the target and source chemicals share identical functional groups (i.e. one terminal carboxylic acid group and one terminal vinyl group) and only differ in the presence/absence of one or several -CH2-CH2-COO- pattern(s) in their structural backbones. This pattern being introduced as a result of (poly)addition reactions, it is only present in the polymerized units of acrylic acid (average number of -CH2-CH2-COO- patterns per vinyl group: < 3) and is absent from the monomer units.
- Common physico-chemical/fate properties: the target and source chemicals are both hydrophylic substances (log Pow < 1) with a high solubility in water and a low volatility (VP < 5 hPa). Both substances have a low potential for bioaccumulation in living organisms (log Pow < 4) and a low potential for persistence in environmental compartments (rapidly degradable).
- Common mode of action: the toxic effects of the target and source chemicals are expected to result from their acidic character (carboxylic acid group) and from the reactivity of their double bond (vinyl group). As the polyaddition reactions lead only to an increase in the chain length/molecular weight without an increase in the number of reactive functional groups, the low molecular-weight polymerized units of acrylic acid (from the test item) are not expected to exert higher toxicity than the monomer units. As a result, the target chemical, although only partially composed of acrylic acid monomers, is considered at the very worst to be as toxic as the source substance.

Further information (including data matrix) is available in the attached read-across justification document.
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Species / strain:
Chinese hamster Ovary (CHO)
Remarks:
HGPRT locus
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
negative
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
cytotoxicity
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
valid
Positive controls validity:
valid
Species / strain:
mouse lymphoma L5178Y cells
Metabolic activation:
with and without
Genotoxicity:
positive
Cytotoxicity / choice of top concentrations:
cytotoxicity
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Untreated negative controls validity:
valid
Positive controls validity:
valid
Conclusions:
The analogue of the registered substance, acrylic acid, did not induce gene mutations in CHO cells (HGPRT locus) in one study but was positive in four distinct mouse lymphoma assays. In the mouse lymphoma assays small colonies were induced preferentially, thus the mutagenic potential of acrylic acid seems to be limited to clastogenicity.
Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
adverse effect observed (positive)

Genetic toxicity in vivo

Description of key information

In vivo, the analogue acrylic acid did not induce mutagenic effects in either rat bone marrow cells or mouse germ cells after oral administration.

Link to relevant study records
Reference
Endpoint:
genetic toxicity in vivo, other
Remarks:
Chromosomal aberrations in rats and germ cell mutations in mice
Type of information:
read-across from supporting substance (structural analogue or surrogate)
Adequacy of study:
weight of evidence
Justification for type of information:
1. HYPOTHESIS FOR THE ANALOGUE APPROACH
- Read-across hypothesis: "Different compounds have the same type of effect(s)"

2. SOURCE AND TARGET CHEMICAL(S) (INCLUDING INFORMATION ON PURITY AND IMPURITIES)
- Target chemical: 2-Propenoic acid, homopolymer (purity ≥ 99.0%) = UVCB substance composed of acrylic acid monomers (Mw = 72 g/mol) and 2-carboxyethyl acrylate oligomers (average Mw = 208.8 g/mol)
- Source chemical: Acrylic acid = monoconstituent substance composed of acrylic acid monomers (Mw = 72 g/mol)

3. ANALOGUE APPROACH JUSTIFICATION
- Common structure: the constituents of the target and source chemicals share identical functional groups (i.e. one terminal carboxylic acid group and one terminal vinyl group) and only differ in the presence/absence of one or several -CH2-CH2-COO- pattern(s) in their structural backbones. This pattern being introduced as a result of (poly)addition reactions, it is only present in the polymerized units of acrylic acid (average number of -CH2-CH2-COO- patterns per vinyl group: < 3) and is absent from the monomer units.
- Common physico-chemical/fate properties: the target and source chemicals are both hydrophylic substances (log Pow < 1) with a high solubility in water and a low volatility (VP < 5 hPa). Both substances have a low potential for bioaccumulation in living organisms (log Pow < 4) and a low potential for persistence in environmental compartments (rapidly degradable).
- Common mode of action: the toxic effects of the target and source chemicals are expected to result from their acidic character (carboxylic acid group) and from the reactivity of their double bond (vinyl group). As the polyaddition reactions lead only to an increase in the chain length/molecular weight without an increase in the number of reactive functional groups, the low molecular-weight polymerized units of acrylic acid (from the test item) are not expected to exert higher toxicity than the monomer units. As a result, the target chemical, although only partially composed of acrylic acid monomers, is considered at the very worst to be as toxic as the source substance.

Further information (including data matrix) is available in the attached read-across justification document.
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Reason / purpose for cross-reference:
read-across source
Key result
Sex:
male/female
Genotoxicity:
negative
Toxicity:
no effects
Vehicle controls validity:
valid
Negative controls validity:
valid
Positive controls validity:
valid
Conclusions:
In vivo, the analogue acrylic acid did not induce mutagenic effects in either rat bone marrow cells or mouse germ cells after oral administration. Based on the in vivo results on acrylic acid and the fact that the registered substance has a higher molecular weight (average 208.8 vs. 72 g/mol) and is therefore likely less bioavailable to enter cells and directly interact with genetic material, the registered substance is not considered to be genotoxic and classified accordingly.
Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (negative)

Mode of Action Analysis / Human Relevance Framework

The exact mode of action of the clastogenic effects observed with acrylic acid and their relevance to humans remain unclear.

Additional information

Justification for classification or non-classification

Based on the in vivo results on acrylic acid and the fact that the registered substance has a higher molecular weight (average 208.8 vs. 72 g/mol) and is therefore likely less bioavailable to enter cells and directly interact with genetic material, the registered substance is not considered to be genotoxic and classified accordingly.