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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Administrative data

Description of key information

Skin sensitisation

Silicic acid Aluminium Magnesium Sodium Salt was not a skin sensitiser under the test conditions of OECD 429. (Key, Roth, 2015, OECD 429, SMAS, RL1)

Key value for chemical safety assessment

Skin sensitisation

Link to relevant study records
Reference
Endpoint:
skin sensitisation: in vivo (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 429 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
Qualifier:
according to guideline
Guideline:
EU Method B.42 (Skin Sensitisation: Local Lymph Node Assay)
GLP compliance:
yes (incl. QA statement)
Remarks:
Hessisches Ministerium für Umwelt, Energie, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz
Type of study:
mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)
Specific details on test material used for the study:
Identification: Silicic acid Aluminium Magnesium Sodium Salt
Batch: code # 1107274003
Purity: > 99%
Appearance: White powder
Expiry Date: November 01, 2018
Storage Conditions: (provided by the Sponsor) At room temperature, moisture protected
Stability: Stable a room temperature
Stability in Solvent: Stable in DMSO
Species:
mouse
Strain:
other: CBA/CaOlaHsd
Sex:
female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
The animals were kept conventionally. The experiment was conducted under standard laboratory conditions.
Housing: group
Cage Type: Makrolon Type II (pre-test) / III (main study), with wire mesh top
Bedding: granulated soft wood bedding
Feed: 2018C Teklad Global 18% protein rodent diet (certified), ad libitum
Water: tap water, ad libitum
Environment: temperature 22 ± 2°C relative humidity approx. 45-65% artificial light 6.00 a.m. - 6.00 p.m.
Vehicle:
dimethyl sulphoxide
Concentration:
0.5, 1, and 2.5% (w/w)
No. of animals per dose:
4
Details on study design:
In order to study a possible skin sensitising potential of Silicic acid Aluminium Magnesium Sodium Salt, three groups each of four female mice were treated once daily with the test item at concentrations of 0.5, 1, and 2.5% (w/w) in DMSO by topical application to the dorsum of each ear for three consecutive days. The highest concentration tested was the highest concentration that could be achieved whilst avoiding systemic toxicity and excessive local skin irritation as confirmed by two pre-experiments. A control group of four mice was treated with the vehicle (DMSO) only. Five days after the first topical application the mice were injected intravenously into a tail vein with radio-labelled thymidine (3H-methyl thymidine). Approximately five hours after intravenous injection, the mice were sacrificed, the draining auricular lymph nodes excised and pooled per group. Single cell suspensions of lymph node cells were prepared from pooled lymph nodes, which were subsequently washed and incubated with trichloroacetic acid overnight. The proliferative capacity of pooled lymph node cells was determined by the incorporation of 3H-methyl thymidine measured in a β-scintillation counter.
Positive control substance(s):
hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
Statistics:
A test item is regarded as a sensitiser in the LLNA if the exposure to one or more test concentration resulted in a 3-fold or greater increase in incorporation of 3HTdR compared with concurrent controls, as indicated by the Stimulation Index (S.I.). The estimated concentration of test item required to produce a S.I. of 3 is referred to as the EC3 value.
In this study Stimulation Indices of 1.13, 1.16, and 0.96 were determined with the test item at concentrations of 0.5, 1, and 2.5% (w/w) in DMSO.
The EC3 value could not be calculated, since none of the tested concentrations induced a S.I. greater than the threshold value of 3.
Parameter:
SI
Value:
1
Test group / Remarks:
0.0 % (w/w) (control group)
Key result
Parameter:
SI
Value:
1.13
Test group / Remarks:
0.5 % (w/w)
Key result
Parameter:
SI
Value:
1.16
Test group / Remarks:
1.0 % (w/w)
Key result
Parameter:
SI
Value:
0.96
Test group / Remarks:
2.5 % (w/w)
Parameter:
other: disintegrations per minute (DPM)
Remarks on result:
other: see Remark
Remarks:
Test item concentration % Measurement DPM DPM per lymph node 0 9914 1236.9 0.5 11222 1400.4 1 11523 1438.1 2.5 9512 1186.1
Interpretation of results:
not sensitising
Remarks:
Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
Conclusions:
The test item Silicic acid Aluminium Magnesium Sodium Salt was not a skin sensitiser under the test conditions of this study.
Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
Additional information:

The study performed with SMAS (Roth, 2015, OECD 429, SMAS) did not sensitize any animals, therefore the substance was considered not skin sensitizing.

Respiratory sensitisation

Link to relevant study records
Reference
Endpoint:
respiratory sensitisation
Data waiving:
study scientifically not necessary / other information available
Justification for data waiving:
other:
Endpoint conclusion
Endpoint conclusion:
no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
Additional information:

Although no study specifically on respiratory sensitisation is available, one on acute inhalation did not found any item-related effects during the inhalation exposure and observation period in the male and female test animals. (Stahl, 2012, sim. OECD 403, SMAS)

Furthermore, due to the mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) of the test item Silic acid Aluminium Magnesium Sodium Salt of more than 10µm no respiration is expected.

Experimental studies/investigations about the exposure during the application/production give no hint that dust of the test item is respired by the applicants/workers

Justification for classification or non-classification

As no hazard was identified, there is no need for classification or labelling as skin or respiaratory sensitising agent.