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: 202-613-0 | CAS number: 97-86-9
- 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

Toxicological Summary
- Administrative data
- Workers - Hazard via inhalation route
- Workers - Hazard via dermal route
- Workers - Hazard for the eyes
- Additional information - workers
- General Population - Hazard via inhalation route
- General Population - Hazard via dermal route
- General Population - Hazard via oral route
- General Population - Hazard for the eyes
- Additional information - General Population
Administrative data
Workers - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 415.9 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: ECHA REACH Guidance and ECETOC 2010
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 27
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC
- Value:
- 11 175 mg/m³
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 6
- Justification:
- Sub-acute to chronic(ECHA 2008)
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- No allometric scaling rat to humans as inhalation (ECHA 2008).
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- The substances are metabolised via general metabolic pathways that are common and very similar to rodents and humans and the absence of any specific target organs indicating a specific MOA at high concentrations there is no reason to believe that an additional AF of 2.5 for remaining differences is justified.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 3
- Justification:
- Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for workers.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The key study was conducted according to modern regulatory standards and was adequately reported. On this basis the quality of the database is not considered to contribute uncertainty and it is therefore not necessary to apply an additional factor.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1.5
- Justification:
- Modification of starting point, value of AF is rounded. Exact overall AF is 26.87. For details see "Discussion".
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 409 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- irritation (respiratory tract)
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: ECHA REACH Guidance and ECETOC 2010
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 4.5
- Dose descriptor:
- NOAEC
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 1
- Justification:
- As demonstrated with MMA once the olfactory lesion is formed there is little or no increase in sensitivity with sub-acute to chronic exposure. No adjustment for studies of longer duration is required.
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- No allometric scaling rat to humans as inhalation (ECHA 2008).
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- The substances are metabolised via general metabolic pathways that are common and very similar to rodents and humans and the absence of any specific target organs indicating a specific MOA at high concentrations there is no reason to believe that an additional AF of 2.5 for remaining differences is justified.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 3
- Justification:
- Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for workers.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The key study was conducted according to modern regulatory standards and was adequately reported. On this basis the quality of the database is not considered to contribute uncertainty and it is therefore not necessary to apply an additional factor.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1.5
- Justification:
- Modification of starting point, value of AF is rounded. Exact overall AF is 4.48. For details see "Discussion".
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Workers - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 5 mg/kg bw/day
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: ECHA REACH Guidance and ECETOC 2010
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 24
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL
- Value:
- 120 mg/kg bw/day
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- The NOAEC is based on a 13-week study. AF for extrapolation from Sub-chronic to chronic (ECHA 2008).
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 4
- Justification:
- Allometric scaling rat to humans AF 4 (ECHA 2008).
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- The substances are metabolised via general metabolic pathways that are common and very similar to rodents and humans and the absence of any specific target organs indicating a specific MOA at high concentrations there is no reason to believe that an additional AF of 2.5 for remaining differences is justified.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 3
- Justification:
- Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for workers.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The key study was conducted according to modern regulatory standards and was adequately reported. On this basis the quality of the database is not considered to contribute uncertainty and it is therefore not necessary to apply an additional factor.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- No remaining uncertainties.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 1 % in mixture (weight basis)
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- sensitisation (skin)
DNEL related information
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 1
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 1 % in mixture (weight basis)
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- sensitisation (skin)
DNEL related information
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 1
Workers - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- low hazard (no threshold derived)
Additional information - workers
Since i-BMA is of low acute toxicity with the median lethal dose values (LD50) being significantly greater than 2000 mg/kg by oral and dermal routes and an LT50 of 290 min at 5026 ppm (29740 mg/m³) by inhalation, the dermal and inhalation DNELs derived for long-term exposure are considered sufficiently protective of acute exposure.
Acute, short-term exposure - local effects:
LLNA data are not available for i-BMA, so, an induction-specific DNEL was not derived for skin sensitization. Because i-BMA was regarded as a sensitiser of low potency by analogy with n-BMA and was not even positive when tested in the GPMT, the default threshold for contact allergy is assumed appropriate.
Long-term exposure (inhalation) - local effects
There are no study data for i-BMA itself. For the close structural analogue, the isomer n-BMA, in a 28-day inhalation study the only treatment-related histopathological finding was localised bilateral degeneration of olfactory epithelium lining the dorsal meatus of the nasal cavity at 952 and 1891 ppm (5626 and 11175 mg/m³) in both sexes. Based on histopathological changes seen in the nasal cavities, the no-observable adverse effect concentration (NOAEC) for local effects was 310 ppm (1832 mg/m³). By analogy to the close structural analogue, MMA, the pattern of the critical effects of inhalation of n-BMA in animal studies (i.e. the olfactory epithelium being affected at lowest concentration) is consistent with toxicity resulting from metabolism of the inhaled material in the olfactory tissue by carboxylic esterases to methacrylic acid. Based on limited data from human tissue samples (that may not have been morphologically normal taken at polyp biopsy) with MMA, the activity of alpha-naphthylbutyrate carboxylesterase in human nasal respiratory tissue is less than that in the rat (Mattes & Mattes, 1992). In addition, rodents are obligate nose breathers, whereas humans can also breathe through their mouth, which is expected to reduce exposure of the nasal epithelium. There are also differing nasal flow patterns, with the greater airflow across the human olfactory epithelium during the expiratory phase when the vapour concentration would be considerably reduced as a result of absorption in the lower respiratory tract. Furthermore, there are significant morphological differences between species in the structure of the nasal cavity, which result in differences in concentrations of inhaled materials at the nasal tissue. These are reflected in differences in surface area normalised to minute ventilation, being fivefold greater in rodents than in humans (DeSesso, 1993). A much greater percentage of the nasal cavity is lined by olfactory epithelium in rats than in humans.
Methacrylate esters are rapidly absorbed, metabolised and excreted from the body (see toxicokinetics).In the inhalation studies with MMA local degeneration of the olfactory epithelia was observed in a very similar way in acute (6hrs) at 100ppm, through to chronic (2-yr) studies at 100ppm. There was no progression with regard to concentration threshold, severity or extent of tissues involved in the lesion.Because i-BMA is unlikely to accumulate significantly further following chronic exposure, comparable to the other esters, the target organs identified in the subchronic study with n-BMA are likely to be indicative of local effects after chronic exposure.
There are no useful human data available for n-BMA.
Description |
Value |
Remark |
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
NOAEC6h/rat:>1832 mg/m3(310 ppm) |
NOAEC for rats, 6 hr/day, 5 days/week for 4 weeks |
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
1
10 m3/6.7 m3 |
- As demonstrated with MMA the olfactory lesion is present within 6 hrs of exposure and no increase in sensitivity exists with longer exposure. Hence no correction of exposure duration in study (6 hrs/day) to default worker exposure (8 hrs/day) is required. -Correction for activity driven differences of respiratory volumes in workers compared to workers in rest (10 m3/6.7 m3) is required (ECHA 2008). |
Step 3) Assessment factors |
|
|
Interspecies |
1 |
The olfactory lesion is produced by local enzymatic cleavage of the ester to the acid (MAA). Furthermore, as recognised by SCOEL for the close structural analogue, MMA, “extensive” PBPK modelling work predicted that on kinetic grounds, for a given level of exposure to MMA, human nasal olfactory epithelium will be at least 3 times less sensitive than that of rats to the toxicity of MMA. The same assumptions apply to other short chain alky methacrylate esters. No adjustment is required. |
Intraspecies |
3 |
Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for workers. |
Exposure duration |
1 |
As demonstrated with MMA once the olfactory lesion is formed there is little or no increase in sensitivity with sub-acute to chronic exposure. No adjustment for studies of longer duration is required. |
Dose response |
1 |
The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required. |
Quality of database |
1 |
The key studies were of high quality, being rated K1. No adjustment is required. |
DNEL |
Value |
|
based on NOAEC6h/rats>1832 mg/m3(310 ppm) |
Using a total factor (POD modifier and AF) of 4.48 (1 x 10/6.7 x 1 x 1 x 3 x1 x 1 x 1 )a DNELlong-term,workerof 409 mg/m3(69.23 ppm) is derived. |
Long-term exposure (inhalation) - systemic effects
In a sub-acute 28-day inhalation study in rats with n-BMA, the NOAEC for systemic effects was 11175 mg/m3 (1891 ppm).
Description |
Value |
Remark |
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
NOAEC6h/rat: 11175 mg/m3 (1891 ppm) |
NOAEC for rats,6 hr/day, 5 days/week for 4 weeks |
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
8/6
10 m3/6.7 m3 |
- Correction of exposure duration in study (6 hrs/day) to default worker exposure (8 hrs/day) is required. -Correction for activity driven differences of respiratory volumes in workers compared to workers in rest (10 m3/6.7 m3) is required (ECHA 2008). |
Step 3) Assessment factors |
|
|
Interspecies |
1 |
No allometric scaling rat to humans as inhalation (ECHA 2008). 2.5 for remaining differences not justified (ECETOC, 2010). |
Intraspecies |
3 |
Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for workers. |
Exposure duration |
6 |
Sub-acute to chronic(ECHA 2008) |
Dose response |
1 |
The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required. |
Quality of database |
1 |
The key studies were of high quality, being rated K1. No adjustment is required. |
DNEL |
Value |
|
based on NOAEC6h/rats 11175 mg/m3 (1891 ppm) |
Using a total factor (POD modifier and AF) of 26.87 (1 x 10/6.7 x 1 x 3 x 6 x 1 x 1 )a DNELlong-term,worker of 415.9 mg/m3(66.7 ppm) is derived. |
Long-term exposure (oral/dermal exposure) - systemic effects
There are no study data for i-BMA itself. For the close structural analogue, the isomer n-BMA, in a subchronic 90-day gavage study in rats with n-BMA, the lead effect observed was lesions in the olfactory region of the nose (typically observed as a local lesion following inhalation exposure). It is not clear at this stage whether the lesion is a true systemic effect (exposure to the ester via the circulatory system) or a local (via indirect regurgitation/inhalation/ etc.). Considering the short half life of n-BMA in blood (99.7 % removed in first pass by the liver, Jones 2002) it is unlikely that these effects were of systemic origin, but were rather local effects as a consequence of the dosing technique. Consequently, it is likely that the olfactory lesions are the result of inhalation exposure (i. e. local effect) as an indirect consequence of the dosing procedure rather than by systemic exposure. For assessment purposes, as the relevant exposure is likely to occur by inhalation, the DNEL derived for this route will be protective against this effect.
Other toxicologically relevant signs of general systemic toxicity (limited to including effects on the liver activity (increased liver weight, prolonged prothrombin time, lower serum globulin and triglyceride levels in males and/or females) and kidneys weight (increased absolute weight in females) was observed at higher doses. The NOAEL for toxicologically relevant signs of general systemic toxicity was 120 mg/kg body weight/day in both males and females. The NOAEL observed in the n-BMA study is considered relevant for i-BMA.
Description |
Value |
Remark |
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
NOAEC:120 mg/kg bw/d |
NOAEC for rats, for 13 weeks |
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
1 |
No adjustment is necessary. |
Step 3) Assessment factors |
|
|
Interspecies |
4 |
Allometric scaling rat to humans AF 4 (ECHA 2008). 2.5 for remaining differences not justified (ECETOC, 2010). |
Intraspecies |
3 |
Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for workers. |
Exposure duration |
2 |
The NOAEC is based on a 13-week study. AF for extrapolation from Sub-chronic to chronic (ECHA 2008). |
Dose response |
1 |
The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required. |
Quality of database |
1 |
The key studies were of high quality, being rated K1. No adjustment is required. |
DNEL |
Value |
|
NOAEC:120 mg/kg bw/d |
Using a total factor (POD modifier and AF) of 24 (1 x 1 x 4 x 3 x 2 x 1 x 1)a DNELlong-term,workerof 5.0mg/kg bw/d is derived. |
General Population - Hazard via inhalation route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 66.5 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: ECHA REACH Guidance and ECETOC 2010
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 168
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEC
- Value:
- 11 175 mg/m³
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 6
- Justification:
- Sub-acute to chronic (ECHA 2008)
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- No allometric scaling rat to humans as inhalation (ECHA 2008).
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- The substances are metabolised via general metabolic pathways that are common and very similar to rodents and humans and the absence of any specific target organs indicating a specific MOA at high concentrations there is no reason to believe that an additional AF of 2.5 for remaining differences is justified.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for general population.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The key study was conducted according to modern regulatory standards and was adequately reported. On this basis the quality of the database is not considered to contribute uncertainty and it is therefore not necessary to apply an additional factor.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 5.6
- Justification:
- Modification of starting point. For details see section "Discussion" below.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 366.4 mg/m³
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- irritation (respiratory tract)
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: ECHA REACH Guidance and ECETOC 2010
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 5
- Dose descriptor:
- NOAEC
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 1
- Justification:
- As demonstrated with MMA once the olfactory lesion is formed there is little or no increase in sensitivity with sub-acute to chronic exposure. No adjustment for studies of longer duration is required.
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 1
- Justification:
- No allometric scaling rat to humans as inhalation (ECHA 2008).
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- The substances are metabolised via general metabolic pathways that are common and very similar to rodents and humans and the absence of any specific target organs indicating a specific MOA at high concentrations there is no reason to believe that an additional AF of 2.5 for remaining differences is justified.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for general population.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The key study was conducted according to modern regulatory standards and was adequately reported. On this basis the quality of the database is not considered to contribute uncertainty and it is therefore not necessary to apply an additional factor.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- No remaining uncertainties.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard via dermal route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 3 mg/kg bw/day
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- repeated dose toxicity
DNEL related information
- DNEL derivation method:
- other: ECHA REACH Guidance and ECETOC 2010
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 40
- Modified dose descriptor starting point:
- NOAEL
- Value:
- 120 mg/kg bw/day
- AF for dose response relationship:
- 1
- Justification:
- The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required.
- AF for differences in duration of exposure:
- 2
- Justification:
- The NOAEC is based on a 13 -week study. AF for extrapolation from Sub-chronic to chronic(ECHA 2008).
- AF for interspecies differences (allometric scaling):
- 4
- Justification:
- Allometric scaling rat to humans AF 4 (ECHA 2008).
- AF for other interspecies differences:
- 1
- Justification:
- The substances are metabolised via general metabolic pathways that are common and very similar to rodents and humans and the absence of any specific target organs indicating a specific MOA at high concentrations there is no reason to believe that an additional AF of 2.5 for remaining differences is justified.
- AF for intraspecies differences:
- 5
- Justification:
- Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for general population.
- AF for the quality of the whole database:
- 1
- Justification:
- The key study was conducted according to modern regulatory standards and was adequately reported. On this basis the quality of the database is not considered to contribute uncertainty and it is therefore not necessary to apply an additional factor.
- AF for remaining uncertainties:
- 1
- Justification:
- No remaining uncertainties.
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
Local effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 1 % in mixture (weight basis)
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- sensitisation (skin)
DNEL related information
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 1
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- DNEL (Derived No Effect Level)
- Value:
- 1 % in mixture (weight basis)
- Most sensitive endpoint:
- sensitisation (skin)
DNEL related information
- Overall assessment factor (AF):
- 1
General Population - Hazard via oral route
Systemic effects
Long term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
Acute/short term exposure
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- no hazard identified
DNEL related information
General Population - Hazard for the eyes
Local effects
- Hazard assessment conclusion:
- low hazard (no threshold derived)
Additional information - General Population
Since i-BMA is of low acute toxicity with the median lethal dose values (LD50) being significantly greater than 2000 mg/kg by oral and dermal routes and an LT50 of 290 min at 5026 ppm (29740 mg/m³) by inhalation, the dermal and inhalation DNELs derived for long-term exposure are considered sufficiently protective of acute exposure.
Acute, short-term exposure - local effects:
LLNA data are not available for i-BMA, so, an induction-specific DNEL was not derived for skin sensitization. Because i-BMA was regarded as a sensitiser of low potency by analogy with n-BMA and was not even positive when tested in the GPMT, the default threshold for contact allergy is assumed appropriate.
Long-term exposure (inhalation) - local effectsThere are no study data for i-BMA itself. The point of departure is the NOAEC for olfactory lesions in the nasal cavity of 1832 mg/m3(310 ppm) observed in a sub-acute 28-day inhalation study in rats with n-BMA. For further details see local effects, workers.
Description |
Value |
Remark |
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
NOAEC6h/rat:>1832 mg/m3(310 ppm) |
NOAEC for rats,6 hr/day, 5 days/week for 4 weeks |
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
1
|
- As demonstrated with MMA the olfactory lesion is present within 6 hrs of exposure and no increase in sensitivity exists with longer exposure. Hence no correction of exposure duration in study (6 hrs/day) to default worker exposure (8 hrs/day) is required. -Correction for activity driven differences of respiratory volumes in workers compared to workers in rest (10 m3/6.7 m3) is not required (ECHA 2008). |
Step 3) Assessment factors |
|
|
Interspecies |
1 |
The olfactory lesion is produced by local enzymatic cleavage of the ester to the acid (MAA). Furthermore, as recognised by SCOEL for the close structural analogue, MMA, “extensive” PBPK modelling work predicted that on kinetic grounds, for a given level of exposure to MMA, human nasal olfactory epithelium will be at least 3 times less sensitive than that of rats to the toxicity of MMA. The same assumptions apply to other short chain alky methacrylate esters.No adjustment is required. |
Intraspecies |
5 |
Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for general population. |
Exposure duration |
1 |
As demonstrated with MMA once the olfactory lesion is formed there is little or no increase in sensitivity with sub-acute to chronic exposure. No adjustment for study duration is required. |
Dose response |
1 |
The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required. |
Quality of database |
1 |
The key study was conducted according to modern regulatory standards and was adequately reported. On this basis the quality of the database is not considered to contribute uncertainty and it is therefore not necessary to apply an additional factor. |
DNEL |
Value |
|
based on NOAEC6h/rats>1832 mg/m3(310 ppm) |
Using a total factor (POD modifier and AF) of 5 (1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 5 x1 x 1 x 1)a DNELlong-term,general populationof366.4 mg/m3(62 ppm) is derived. |
Long-term exposure (inhalation) - systemic effects
There are no study data for i-BMA itself. In a sub-acute 28-day inhalation study in rats with n-BMA, the NOAEC for systemic effects was 5626 mg/m3(952 ppm).
Description |
Value |
Remark |
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
NOAEC6h/rat:11175 mg/m3(1891 ppm) |
NOAEC for rats,6 hr/day, 5 days/week for 4 weeks |
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
24/6 7/5
|
- Correction for study duration (6hrs) to default general population exposure (24 hrs/day) is required. - Correction for worker week of 5 days to 7 days for general population -Correction for activity driven differences of respiratory volumes in workers compared to workers in rest (10 m3/6.7 m3) is not required (ECETOC 2008). |
Step 3) Assessment factors |
|
|
Interspecies |
1 |
2.5 for remaining differences not justified (ECETOC, 2010). |
Intraspecies |
5 |
Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for general population. |
Exposure duration |
6 |
Sub-acute to chronic(ECHA 2008) |
Dose response |
1 |
The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required. |
Quality of database |
1 |
The key study was conducted according to modern regulatory standards and was adequately reported. On this basis the quality of the database is not considered to contribute uncertainty and it is therefore not necessary to apply an additional factor. |
DNEL |
Value |
|
based on NOAEC6h/rats 11175 mg/m3(1891 ppm) |
Using a total factor (POD modifier and AF) of 168 (8/6 x 24/8 x 7/5 x 5 x 6 x 1 x 1 )a DNELlong-term,general populationof 66.5 mg/m3(11.3 ppm) is derived. |
Long-term exposure (oral/dermal exposure) - systemic effects
There are no study data for i-BMA itself. The POD is the NOAEL for toxicologically relevant signs of general systemic toxicity of 120 mg/kg body weight/day in both males and females in a subchronic 90 -day gavage study in rats with n-BMA. For further details see “Long-term exposure (oral/dermal exposure) - systemic effects, workers”.
Description |
Value |
Remark |
Step 1) Relevant dose-descriptor |
NOAEC:120 mg/kg bw/d |
NOAEC for rats,for 13 weeks |
Step 2) Modification of starting point |
1 |
No adjustment is necessary. |
Step 3) Assessment factors |
|
|
Interspecies |
4 |
Allometric scaling rat to humans AF 4 (ECHA 2008). 2.5 for remaining differences not justified (ECETOC, 2010). |
Intraspecies |
5 |
Known mode of action involving ubiquitous and non-specific enzyme systems (carboxylesterases, tricarboxylic acid cycle) makes a lower variability likely, hence the AF of 5 by ECETOC (2010) is sufficiently conservative for general population. |
Exposure duration |
2 |
The NOAEC is based on a 13 -week study. AF for extrapolation fromSub-chronic to chronic(ECHA 2008). |
Dose response |
1 |
The NOAEC is reliable. No adjustment is required. |
Quality of database |
1 |
The key study was conducted according to modern regulatory standards and was adequately reported. On this basis the quality of the database is not considered to contribute uncertainty and it is therefore not necessary to apply an additional factor. |
DNEL |
Value |
|
NOAEC:120 mg/kg bw/d |
Using a total factor (POD modifier and AF) of 40 (1 x 1 x 4 x 5 x 2 x 1 x 1)a DNELlong-term,general_populationof 3.0mg/kg bw/d is derived. |
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.
