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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 247-988-1 | CAS number: 26762-93-6
- 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
![](https://chesar.echa.europa.eu/o/diss-blank-theme/images/factsheets/A-REACH/factsheet/print_toxicological-information.png)
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
The potential of diisopropylbenzene hydroperoxide to induce delayed contact hypersensitivity was evaluated in guinea pigs according to the maximization method of Magnusson and Kligman and to OECD 406 guideline (Ollivier, 2006). Thirty guinea pigs were allocated to two groups: a control group of five males and five females and a treated group of ten males and ten females. On day 1, three pairs of intradermal injections were performed in the interscapular region of all animals: Freund's complete adjuvant (FCA) diluted to 50% (v/v) with 0.9% NaCl (both groups), test item at the concentration of 1% in corn oil (treated group) or vehicle alone (control group), test item at the concentration of 1% in a mixture FCA/0.9% NaCl (50/50, w/w) (treated group) or vehicle at the concentration of 50% (w/v) in a mixture FCA/0.9% NaCl (50/50, v/v) (control group).
On day 8, the animals of the treated group received a topical application of the test item at the concentration of 10% (w/w) in ethanol/water (80/20) to the same test site, which was then covered by an occlusive dressing for 48 hours. The animals of the control group received an application of the vehicle under the same experimental conditions. On day 22, all animals of both groups were challenged by a cutaneous application of the test item at the concentration of 2.5% (w/w) in acetone to the right flank. The test item was maintained under an occlusive dressing for 24 hours. The vehicle was applied to the left flank under the same experimental conditions. Skin reactions were evaluated approximately 24 and 48 hours after removal of the dressing.
As equivocal cutaneous reactions were noted after the first challenge, a second challenge application was performed on day 36. The test item was applied at the concentration of 1% (w/w) in acetone to the left flank and at the concentration of 0.5% (w/w) in acetone to the right flank of the animals of both groups, under the same experimental conditions as for the first challenge application.
At the end of the study, the animals were killed without examination of internal organs. No skin samples were taken from the challenge application sites. No systemic clinical signs and no deaths were noted during the study.
After the first challenge application, a discrete erythema was observed in 4/10 animals of the control group at the 24-hour reading. At the 48-hour reading, a moderate or intense erythema was noted in 2/10 and 1/10 animals, respectively. Dryness of the skin, together with crusts in one animal, was also recorded at the 48-hour reading in 5/10 animals. In the treated group, at the 24-hour reading, a discrete or moderate erythema, together with dryness of the skin in one animal, was noted in 13/20 and 2/20 animals, respectively. At the 48-hour reading, a discrete or moderate erythema was recorded in 3/20 and 9/20 animals, respectively. Dryness of the skin was also observed in 13/20 animals at the 48-hour reading.
After the second challenge application with 1%, no cutaneous reactions were noted in the animals of the control group. In the treated group, a discrete or moderate erythema was noted in 3/20 and 1/20 animals, respectively. At the 48-hour reading, a discrete or moderate erythema was observed in 9/20 and 1/20 animals, respectively. Dryness of the skin was also recorded in 10/20 animals at the 48-hour reading. At the concentration of 0.5%, a discrete erythema was noted in 1/10 animals of the control group at the 24-hour reading only. In the treated group, a discrete erythema was observed in 1/20 animals at the 24-hour reading; at the 48-hour reading, the evaluation of erythema was masked by dryness of the skin in this animal. Dryness of the skin was also recorded in another animal at the 48-hour reading.
The cutaneous reactions observed at the 48-hour reading of the second challenge application on the left flank of 10/20 animals, which were of higher incidence and severity than those recorded in the control group, were attributed to delayed contact hypersensitivity.
Diisopropylbenzene monohydroperoxide in diisopropylbenzene (purity 55.9 %) induces delayed contact hypersensitivity in 10/20 (50%) guinea pigs and should therefore be considered as a mild sensitizer.
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
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- The study was performed before the implementation of the REACH regulation.
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Hartley
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- Species and sex: male and nulliparous and non-pregnant female guinea pigs.
Breeder: Charles River Laboratories France, L’Arbresle, France.
Allocation to the groups: on day -1, the animals were weighed and allocated to two groups: a
control group of ten animals (five males and five females) and a treated group of 20 animals
(ten males and ten females).
Age/weight: on day 1, the animals of the main test were 1-2 months old and had a mean
body weight ± standard deviation of 369 ± 16 g for the males and 360 ± 13 g for the females.
Acclimation: at least 5 days before the beginning of the study.
Identification: by individual ear-tattoo
The conditions in the animal room were set as follows:
• temperature: 22 ± 2°C
• relative humidity: 30 to 70%
• light/dark cycle: 12 h/12 h
• ventilation: approximately 12 cycles/hour of filtered, non-recycled air.
• The temperature and relative humidity were under continuous control and recording.
• Food and water ad libitum - Route:
- intradermal
- Vehicle:
- corn oil
- Concentration / amount:
- 1%
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 1
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- other: ethanol/water (80/20)
- Concentration / amount:
- 10%
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 8
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- other: acetone
- Concentration / amount:
- 2.5%
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 22
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No.:
- #2
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- other: acetone
- Concentration / amount:
- 1% (left flank) and 0.5% (right flank)
- Day(s)/duration:
- Day 36
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No. of animals per dose:
- 5 males and 5 females for the preliminary test,
30 animals (15 males and 15 females) for the main test. - Details on study design:
- Three injections of 0.1 mL were made into each side of this interscapular region (i.e. three pairs
of sites), as follows:
1 Anterior FCA at 50% (v/v) in 0.9% NaCl
2 Middle test item at 1% (w/w) in corn oil
3 Posterior test item at 1% (w/w) in the mixture FCA/0.9% NaCl (50/50)
FCA: Freund's complete adjuvant
* : The test item was suspended in FCA prior to be combined with the aqueous phase. The final concentration of the test item was equal to that used in injection 2.
As the test item was shown to be irritant during the preliminary test, a topical application of sodium lauryl sulfate was not necessary on day 7.
On day 8, a pad of filter paper (approximately 8 cm2) was fully-loaded with the test item at the concentration of 10% (w/w) and was then applied to the interscapular region of the animals of the treated group. The animals of the control group received an application of the vehicle alone under the same
experimental conditions. The pad was held in place for 48 hours by means of an adhesive hypoallergenic dressing and an
adhesive anallergenic waterproof plaster. On removal of the dressing (day 10), no residual test item was observed.
A local irritation was recorded in the animals of both groups. - Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- Mercaptobenzothiazole
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 2.5 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 4
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- score:1
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 2.5 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 3
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Score: 2 or 3
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 2.5 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 15
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Score: 1 or 2
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 2.5 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 11
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Score: 1 or 2
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 0.5 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 0.5 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.5 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Score 1
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 0.5 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 1 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Score 1
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 1 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 1 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 4
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Score 1 or 2
- Reading:
- rechallenge
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 1 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 10
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Score 1 or 2
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- 1%
- No. with + reactions:
- 8
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- Category 1B (indication of skin sensitising potential) based on GHS criteria
- Conclusions:
- According to the maximization method of Magnusson and Kligman, DIISOPROPYLBENZENE HYDROPEROXIDE in diisopropylbenzen (purity :55.9%) induces delayed contact hypersensitivity in 10/20 (50%) guinea pigs and should therefore be considered as a mild sensitizer.
- Executive summary:
The potential of diisopropylbenzene hydroperoxide to induce delayed contact hypersensitivity was evaluated in guinea pigs according to the maximization method of Magnusson and Kligman and to OECD406 guideline. Thirty guinea pigs were allocated to two groups: a control group of five males and five females and a treated group of ten males and ten females. On day 1, three pairs of intradermal injections were performed in the interscapular region of all animals: Freund's complete adjuvant (FCA) diluted to 50% (v/v) with 0.9% NaCl (both groups), test item at the concentration of 1% in corn oil (treated group) or vehicle alone (control group), test item at the concentration of 1% in a mixture FCA/0.9% NaCl (50/50, w/w) (treated group) or vehicle at the concentration of 50% (w/v) in a mixture FCA/0.9% NaCl (50/50, v/v) (control group).
On day 8, the animals of the treated group received a topical application of the test item at the concentration of 10% (w/w) in ethanol/water (80/20) to the same test site, which was then covered by an occlusive dressing for 48 hours. The animals of the control group received an application of the vehicle under the same experimental conditions. On day 22, all animals of both groups were challenged by a cutaneous application of the test item at the concentration of 2.5% (w/w) in acetone to the right flank. The test item was maintained under an occlusive dressing for 24 hours. The vehicle was applied to the left flank under the same experimental conditions. Skin reactions were evaluated approximately 24 and 48 hours after removal of the dressing.
As equivocal cutaneous reactions were noted after the first challenge, a second challenge application was performed on day 36. The test item was applied at the concentration of 1% (w/w) in acetone to the left flank and at the concentration of 0.5% (w/w) in acetone to the right flank of the animals of both groups, under the same experimental conditions as for the first challenge application.
At the end of the study, the animals were killed without examination of internal organs. No skin samples were taken from the challenge application sites. No systemic clinical signs and no deaths were noted during the study.
After the first challenge application, a discrete erythema was observed in 4/10 animals of the control group at the 24-hour reading. At the 48-hour reading, a moderate or intense erythema was noted in 2/10 and 1/10 animals, respectively. Dryness of the skin, together with crusts in one animal, was also recorded at the 48-hour reading in 5/10 animals. In the treated group, at the 24-hour reading, a discrete or moderate erythema, together with dryness of the skin in one animal, was noted in 13/20 and 2/20 animals, respectively. At the 48-hour reading, a discrete or moderate erythema was recorded in 3/20 and 9/20 animals, respectively. Dryness of the skin was also observed in 13/20 animals at the 48-hour reading.
After the second challenge application with 1%, no cutaneous reactions were noted in the animals of the control group. In the treated group, a discrete or moderate erythema was noted in 3/20 and 1/20 animals, respectively. At the 48-hour reading, a discrete or moderate erythema was observed in 9/20 and 1/20 animals, respectively. Dryness of the skin was also recorded in 10/20 animals at the 48-hour reading. At the concentration of 0.5%, a discrete erythema was noted in 1/10 animals of the control group at the 24-hour reading only. In the treated group, a discrete erythema was observed in 1/20 animals at the 24-hour reading; at the 48-hour reading, the evaluation of erythema was masked by dryness of the skin in this animal. Dryness of the skin was also recorded in another animal at the 48-hour reading.
The cutaneous reactions observed at the 48-hour reading of the second challenge application on the left flank of 10/20 animals, which were of higher incidence and severity than those recorded in the control group, were attributed to delayed contact hypersensitivity.
Diisopropylbenzene monohydroperoxide in diisopropylbenzene (purity 55.9 %) induces delayed contact hypersensitivity in 10/20 (50%) guinea pigs and should therefore be considered as a mild sensitizer.
Reference
A discrete erythema (grade 1) was observed in 4/10 animals of the control group at the 24-hour reading. At the 48-hour reading, a moderate or intense erythema (grade 2 or 3) was noted in 2/10 and 1/10 animals, respectively. Dryness of the skin, together with crusts in one animal, was also recorded at the 48-hour reading in 5/10 animals.
In the treated group, at the 24-hour reading, a discrete or moderate erythema (grade 1 or 2), together with dryness of the skin in one animal, was noted in 13/20 and 2/20 animals, respectively. At the 48-hour reading, a discrete or moderate erythema (grade 1 or 2) was recorded in 3/20 and 9/20 animals, respectively. Dryness of the skin was also observed in 13/20 animals at the 48-hour reading.
First challenge application
Scoring of skin reactions was as follows:
|
Control group |
|
||||||
Sex |
Animal number |
LF |
24 hours |
RF |
|
LF |
48 hours |
RF |
Male |
286 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
0/S |
|
287 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
288 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
2/S |
|
289 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
290 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
Female |
301 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
302 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
303 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
3/S/A |
|
304 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
2/S |
|
305 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
0/S |
LF: left flank (vehicle)
RF: right flank (test item at the concentration of 2.5% (w/w))
A : crusts
S : dryness of the skin
|
Treated group |
|
||||||
Sex |
Animal number |
LF |
24 hours |
RF |
|
LF |
48 hours |
RF |
Male |
291 |
0 |
|
1/S |
|
0 |
|
2/S |
|
292 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
1/S |
|
293 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
294 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
2/S |
|
295 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
296 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
1/S |
|
297 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
0/S |
|
298 |
0 |
|
2 |
|
0 |
|
2/S |
|
299 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
2 |
|
300 |
0 |
|
2 |
|
0 |
|
2/S |
Female |
306 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
307 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
2/S |
|
308 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
2/S |
|
309 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
2/S |
|
310 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
1/S |
|
311 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
312 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
0/S |
|
313 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
2/S |
|
314 |
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
|
315 |
0 |
|
1 |
|
0 |
|
0 |
LF: left flank (vehicle)
RF: right flank (test item at the concentration of 2.5% (w/w))
S : dryness of the skin
In order to determine whether the observed cutaneous reactions are attributable to delayed contact hypersensitivity or to an irritant effect of the test item, a second challenge application was performed.
For this second challenge application, the lower concentrations of 1% and 0.5% (w/w) were chosen.
The observed cutaneous reactions were as follows:
Left flank: test item at the concentration of 1%
No cutaneous reactions were noted in the animals of the control group.
In the treated group, a discrete or moderate erythema (grade 1 or 2) was noted in 3/20 and 1/20 animals, respectively. At the 48-hour reading, a discrete or moderate erythema (grade 1 or 2) was observed in 9/20 and 1/20 animals, respectively. Dryness of the skin was also recorded in 10/20 animals at the 48-hour reading.
Right flank: test item at the concentration of 0.5%
A discrete erythema (grade 1) was noted in 1/10 animals of the control group at the 24-hour reading only.
In the treated group, a discrete erythema (grade 1) was observed in 1/20 animals at the 24-hour reading; at the 48-hour reading, the evaluation of the erythema was masked by dryness of the skin in this animal. Dryness of the skin was also recorded in another animal at the 48-hour reading.
The cutaneous reactions observed at the 48-hour reading of the second challenge application on the left flank of 10/20 animals, which were of higher incidence and severity than those recorded in the control group, were attributed to delayed contact hypersensitivity.
Second challenge application
Scoring of skin reactions was as follows:
|
|
Control group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sex |
Animal number |
before treatment LF RF |
LF |
24 hours |
RF |
LF |
48 hours RF |
|
Male |
286 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
287 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
288 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
289 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
290 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Female |
301 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
302 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
303 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
304 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
305 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Treated group |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sex |
Animal number |
before treatment LF RF |
LF |
24 hours |
RF |
LF |
48 hours RF |
|
Male |
291 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1/S |
LS |
|
|
292 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
2/S |
0 |
|
|
293 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0/S |
0 |
|
|
294 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
295 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
296 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
297 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1/S |
0 |
|
|
298 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1/S |
0 |
|
|
299 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0/S |
0 |
|
|
300 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
Female |
306 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0/S |
0 |
|
|
307 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
308 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
309 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1/S |
0 |
|
|
310 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
311 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
312 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1/S |
0/S |
|
|
313 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
314 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1/S |
0 |
|
|
315 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
LF : left flank (test item at the concentration of 1% (w/w))
RF: right flank (test item at the concentration of 0.5% (w/w))
LS : reading masked by an important dryness of the skin
S : dryness of the skin
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- adverse effect observed (sensitising)
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
According to EU Regulation (EC) N° 1272/2008 (CLP), the substance should be classified as a skin sensitizer, category 1 B, since in the GPMT, 50 % positive response were obtained with an intradermic induction dose of 1 %.
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.
![ECHA](/o/diss-blank-theme/images/factsheets/A-REACH/factsheet/echa_logo.png)