Registration Dossier

Diss Factsheets

Administrative data

Description of key information

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
Additional information:

Soluble tri-tetra, and pentavalent vanadium substances failed to elicit any skin sensitising response in sensitisation studies according to Magnusson and Kligman (OECD 406). Positive human experience with any vanadium substance have not been reported. Based on read-across, vanadium dioxide is not assumed to have a potential for skin sensitisation.

Read across

Upon dissolution, vanadium substances transform inartificial body fluids, including PBS, sweat, gastric juice and lung fluid, predominantlyto the pentavalent form,exceptin artificial lysosomal fluid; here, even pentavalent forms are converted almost completely totetravalent species already after a short period of time (for more information on in vitro bioaccessibility testing,please refer IUCLID section 7).Thus, it can be assumed that vanadium speciation in body fluids is controlled by the conditions of the respective medium but not by the vanadium source.

Unrestricted read-across from very soluble pentavalent substances to VO2 is not applicable since the bioaccessibility of VO2 is lower (and similar to V2O3 in comparison): in artificial sweat at a loading of 100 mg/L V2O3, only 6.5% and 24.0% went into solution after 2h and 24h respectively, whereas other pentavalent substances (V2O5or NaVO3) dissolved completely within 2 h. A similarly low dissolution of V2O3was also observed in PBS (4.3% after 2h; 8.6% after 24h). Similar bioaccessibility tests are ongoing with VO2. For the time being, the solubility of V2O3 and VO2 in physiological fluids is expected to be similar based on similar intrinsic water solubility and transformation/dissolution characteristics.

However, in lieu of substance-specific data read-across from very soluble vanadium substances to poorly/less soluble and poorly/less bioavailable V substances, including V2O3 and VO2, is considered in a conservative approach.


Migrated from Short description of key information:
Soluble tri-, tetra- and pentavalent vanadium substances did test negative (i.e. not sensitising) in sensitisation studies according to Magnusson and Kligman (OECD 406). A justification for using the Magnusson and Kligman design instead of the LLNA is provided as attached document below. Vanadium dioxide is not considered to have a sensitisation potential.

Justification for selection of skin sensitisation endpoint:
The studies by Haferkorn (2010a,b,c) are considered key studies on skin sensitisation and are used for classification.

Respiratory sensitisation

Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
Additional information:
Migrated from Short description of key information:
Vanadium exposure has not been reported to induce immune responses in vanadium industry workers, and occupational asthma or reduced lung function have not been diagnosed in vanadium and vanadium dioxide producing facilities.

Justification for classification or non-classification

Based on the outcome of sensitisation studies with soluble vanadium forms according to Magnusson and Kligman, it can be concluded that vanadium dioxide does not have a sensitisation potential and therefore must not be classified and labelled according to Directive 67/548/EEC and Regulation (EC) 1272/2008.

Categories Display