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: 949-859-1 | 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

Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
KeratinoSensTM assay: Negative
Skin sensitisation (OECD TG 406): not sensitising
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- 01 October 2019 - 29 November 2019
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 1992
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EU Method B.6 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- EPA OPPTS 870.2600 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- 2003
- Deviations:
- no
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: JMAFF Guidelines (2000), including the most recent revisions.
- Version / remarks:
- 2000
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The Dunkin Hartley guinea pig was chosen as the animal model for this study as recognized by international guidelines as a recommended test system (e.g. OECD, FDA, MHLW). The test method and number of animals are based on the test guidelines.
The guinea pig Maximization test was selected since the test item is a surfactant and the Local Lymph Node Assay as preferred alternative has shown to provide false positive results for surfactants. - Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Charles River France, L’Arbresle, France
- Females (if applicable) nulliparous and non-pregnant: yes
- Age at study initiation: Young adult animals (approximately 5 weeks old)
- Weight at study initiation: 276 to 334 g
- Housing: Animals were group housed (up to 5 animals of the same sex and same dosing group together) in labelled Noryl cages containing sterilized sawdust as bedding material.
- Diet: Free access to complete maintenance diet for guinea pigs (MS-H, SSNIFF® Spezialdiäten GmbH, Soest, Germany) was provided ad libitum, except during designated procedures. In addition, hay (TecniLab-BMI BV, Someren, The Netherlands) was provided at least twice a week.
- Water: Free access to tap water.
- Acclimation period: At least 5 days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 18 to 24
- Humidity (%): 40 to 70
- Air changes (per hr): Ten or greater
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12
- IN-LIFE DATES: From: 08 October 2019 To: 29 November 2019 - Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- corn oil
- Concentration / amount:
- 1% for the intradermal induction and 5% for the epidermal induction.
- Day(s)/duration:
- Intradermal induction: 7 days. Epidermal induction: 48 hours.
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- corn oil
- Concentration / amount:
- 5% for the challenge phase.
- Day(s)/duration:
- 24 hours
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No. of animals per dose:
- Test animals: 10
Control animals: 5 - Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
Series of test item concentrations were tested. Practical feasibility of administration determined the highest starting-concentration for each route. The starting- and subsequent concentrations were taken from the series: 100% (undiluted), 50%, 20%, 10%, 5%, 2%, 1% and if needed, further lower concentrations using the same steps.
The test system and procedures were identical to those used during the main study, unless otherwise specified. The eight animals selected were 4 weeks old. No body weights were determined.
Intradermal injections:
Initially, a series of four test item concentrations was tested; the highest concentration was the maximum concentration that could technically be injected. Each of two animals received two different concentrations in duplicate (0.1 mL/site) in the clipped scapular region. The resulting dermal reactions were assessed 24 and 48 hours after treatment.
Based on the results in the initially treated animals, two additional animals were treated in a similar manner with four lower concentrations at a later stage.
Epidermal application:
A series of four test item concentrations was tested; the highest concentration being the maximum concentration that could technically be applied. Two different concentrations were applied (0.5 mL each) per animal to the clipped flank, using Metalline patches# (2x3 cm) mounted on Medical tape, which were held in place with Micropore tape and subsequently Coban elastic bandage. The initially used animals receiving intradermal injections were treated with the lowest concentrations and two other animals with the highest concentrations. After 24 hours, the dressing was removed and the skin cleaned of residual test item using water.
The resulting dermal reactions were assessed for irritation 24 and 48 hours after removal of the dressings.
Based on the results in the initially treated animals, two additional animals were treated in a similar manner with four lower concentrations at a later stage.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1
1) Intradermal injections on day 1:
- Site: scapular region. One of each pair was on each side of the midline and from cranial to caudal:
Three pairs of intradermal injections:
1) 0.1 mL: FCA (50% in water for injection)
2) 0.1 mL: test substance at a 1% concentration (control animals: 0.1 mL corn oil)
3) 0.1 mL: 1:1 mixture of the test substance at a 2% concentration + FCA (undiluted)
- Readings: on day 3 (48 hrs after the injections)
2) Topical application on day 8:
- Amount: 0.5 mL (control animals: 0.5 mL corn oil) 5% test substance
- Area: approximately 6 cm^2
- Exposure period: 48 hours (occlusive)
- Readings: scores were rated directly after patch removal
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE (all animals, with the 5% test substance and the vehicle)
- Day of challenge: day 21
- Exposure period: 24 hours (occlusive)
- Site: flank
- Amount: 0.1 mL
- Readings: scores were rated 24 and 48 hours after patch removal
OBSERVATIONS
Mortality/Moribundity Checks: Throughout the study, animals were observed for general health/mortality and moribundity twice daily, in the morning and at the end of the working day.
Toxicity: At least once daily.
Body weights: Animals were weighed individually on Day 1 (pre-dose) and after each challenge on Day 24.
Necropsy: No necropsy was performed.
Irritation: Skin reactions were graded according to OECD 406. The intradermal reactions were assessed for erythema only or, if necrosis is present, the diameter of necrosis. A description of all other local effects was recorded. - Challenge controls:
- Not applicable.
- Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- the results of the latest reliability check, performed in June 2019 with Alpha-Hexylcinnamaldehyde, are reported.
- Positive control results:
- The latest reliability check shows a sensitisation rate of 100%.
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- vehicle
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- vehicle
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 5
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 50% Alpha- Hexylcinnamaldehyde, technical grade
- No. with + reactions:
- 10
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 50% Alpha- Hexylcinnamaldehyde, technical grade
- No. with + reactions:
- 10
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- other: Not classified.
- Remarks:
- According to Regulation (EC) 1272/2008.
- Conclusions:
- In a guinea pig maximisation test method the potential of the substance for skin sensitisation was tested according to OECD 406 guideline and GLP principles, showing a sensitization rate of 0 per cent.
- Executive summary:
In a guinea pig maximisation test method the potential of the substance for skin sensitisation was tested according to OECD 406 guideline and GLP principles.
Slight to moderate erythema was observed during the intradermal induction (conc. 1%) at the injection sites in control and test animals. Slight erythema was observed following the epidermal induction (conc. 5%) in 8 test animals. No mortality occurred and no symptoms of systemic toxicity were observed in the animals of the main study.
No skin reactions were evident after the challenge exposure in the experimental and control animals.
There was no evidence that the substance had caused skin hypersensitivity in the guinea pig, since no responses were observed in the experimental animals in response to a 5% test item concentration in the challenge phase. This result indicates a sensitization rate of 0 per cent.
Based on these results the substance does not have to be classified and has no obligatory labelling requirement for sensitization by skin contact according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of items and mixtures (including all amendments).
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
A KeratinoSensTM assay was performed in accordance with Section 8.3 of Annex VII of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 as amended in Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/1688 of 20 September 2016 and the strategy presented in ECHA Guidance on information requirements and chemical safety assessment Chapter R.7a.
A DEREK and DPRA could not be performed as the substance is a UVCB. The outcome of the KeratinoSensTM assay was negative. Performance of a U-SENSTM assay is considered to give no additional information as the cytotoxic properties of the substance are expected to preclude the outcome as positive. The KeratinoSensTM data alone is insufficient to conclude on the skin sensitization endpoint and as further in vitro testing will not lead to a conclusion, as a last resort, it is justified to continue with in vivo testing (LLNA or GPMT).
A KeratinoSensTM assay was performed with the substance according to OECD 442D and in accordance with GLP principles. Three independent experiments were performed. The stock and spike solutions were diluted 400-fold in the assay resulting in test concentrations of 0.20 – 400 μg/mL in the first experiment (2-fold dilution series), in test concentrations of 5.41 – 63 μg/mL in the second experiment (1.25-fold dilution series) and in test concentrations of 0.73 – 63 μg/mL in the third experiment (1.5-fold dilution series).
Positive controls and vehicle controls were included. All acceptability criteria were met and therefore the study was considered to be valid. No precipitate was observed at any dose level tested.
Toxicity was observed, no biologically relevant induction of the luciferase activity (no EC1.5 value) was measured, at any of the test concentrations in all three experiments.
The maximum luciferase activity induction (Imax) was 1.46 -fold, 0.37 -fold and 1.43-fold in experiment 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Based on these results, the substance is classified as negative in the KeratinoSensTM assay since negative results (<1.5-fold induction) were observed at test concentrations up to and including 400 μg/mL.
In a guinea pig maximisation test method the potential of the substance for skin sensitisation was tested according to OECD 406 guideline and GLP principles.
Slight to moderate erythema was observed during the intradermal induction (conc. 1%) at the injection sites in control and test animals. Slight erythema was observed following the epidermal induction (conc. 5%) in 8 test animals. No mortality occurred and no symptoms of systemic toxicity were observed in the animals of the main study.
No skin reactions were evident after the challenge exposure in the experimental and control animals.
There was no evidence that the substance had caused skin hypersensitivity in the guinea pig, since no responses were observed in the experimental animals in response to a 5% test item concentration in the challenge phase. This result indicates a sensitization rate of 0 per cent.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Based on the results the substance does not have to be classified and has no obligatory labelling requirement for sensitization by skin contact according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on classification, labelling and packaging of items and mixtures (including all amendments).
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.

EU Privacy Disclaimer
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our websites.