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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 233-360-4 | CAS number: 10128-55-9
- 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
Endpoint summary
Administrative data
Description of key information
Skin sensitisation: not sensitising (modified OECD 429; GLP)
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- 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)
- Version / remarks:
- 2010-07-22
- Deviations:
- yes
- Remarks:
- test modified according to Ehling.
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- The test was performed in accordance with the method according to Ehling et al (2005): An european inter-laboratory validation of alternative endpoints of the murine local lymph node assay: first round, Toxicology 212 (2005) 60-68 and Ehling et al (2005): An european inter-laboratory validation of alternative endpoints of the murine local lymph node assay: 2nd round, Toxicology 212 (2005) 69-79.
Threshold values of the stimulation indices of lymph node cell count (i.e. sensitising properties) and ear weight (i.e. irritating properties) were calculated by dividing the average values per group of the test item treated animals by the vehicle treated ones. Values above 1.4 (lymph node cell count) or 1.1 (ear weight) are considered positive (these values were fixed empirically during the inter-laboratory validation of this method). In addition, the lymph node weights were determined for concentration related properties. - GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA)
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- STABILITY AND STORAGE CONDITIONS OF TEST MATERIAL
- Storage condition of test material: at room temperature, store in a tightly closed original container and in a cool, dry and well-ventilated place. Protected from light. - Species:
- mouse
- Strain:
- NMRI
- Sex:
- female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Charles River Laboratories Germany GmbH, Sandhofer Weg 7, 97633 Sulzfeld, Germany
- Females nulliparous and non-pregnant: yes
- Age at study initiation: approx. 8 - 12 weeks
- Weight at study initiation: weight variation < 20 % of mean
- Housing: kept singly in MAKROLON cages (type II) with a basal surface of approx. 360 cm² and a height of approx. 14 cm; bedding material: granulated textured wood (Granulat A2, J. Brandenburg, 49424 Goldenstedt, Germany); animals are not group-housed to prevent contact of the application sites.
- Diet (ad libitum): ssniff® R/M-H V1534 (ssniff Spezialdiäten GmbH, 59494 Soest, Germany)
- Water (ad libitum): drinking water
- Acclimation period: at least 5 adaptation days
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature: 22 °C ± 3 °C (maximum range)
- Relative humidity: 55 % ± 10 % (maximum range)
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12 - Vehicle:
- dimethylformamide
- Concentration:
- 10 %, 25 % and 50 % (w/w) of the test item
- No. of animals per dose:
- 6 females
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TEST
A preliminary experiment was carried out in 3 animals to examine the irritating potential and handling/application of the test item in order to select the appropriate concentrations. Doses were selected from the concentration series 100%, 50%, 25%, 10%, 5%, 2.5%, 1%, 0.5% etc.
A 50% suspension was the highest feasible concentration of N-[2-(4-oxo-4H-3,1-benzoxazin-2-yl)phenyl]naphthalene-2-sulphonamide in N,N-dimethylformamide.
MAIN STUDY
The experimental schedule of the assay was as follows:
Day 1:
The weight of each animal was individually identified. The weights and any clinical observation were recorded. In addition, ear swelling measurements were carried out
at the helical edge of both ears using an Oditest micrometer. Open application of 25 μL of the appropriate dilution of the test substances, the vehicle alone, or the positive control (as appropriate), to the dorsum of each ear.
Days 2 and 3:
The application procedure carried out on day 1 was repeated.
Day 4 (24 h after the last application):
Ear swelling measurements (immediately before sacrificing the mice) were carried out at the helical edge of both ears using an Oditest micrometer.
Punch biopsies of 8 mm in diameter of the apical area of both ears were prepared and immediately weighed on an analytical balance.
Lateral pairs of auricular lymph nodes draining the ear tissue were excised, carefully separated from remaining fatty tissue and weighed on an analytical balance immediately following preparation. Lymph nodes were then stored on ice in PBS/0.5% BSA and subjected to the preparation of single cell suspensions by mechanical tissue disaggregation. The cells were counted automatically in a cell counter.
OBSERVATIONS:
- Clinical signs: animals were observed once daily for any clinical signs of local systemic irritation at the application site or of systemic toxicity. In addition, animals were checked regularly throughout the working day and on the weekend.
- Body weight: the weight of each mouse was recorded at the time of allocation of animals to groups (test day 1) and at the time of necropsy (test day 4).
ANALYSIS OF RESULTS
The so-called stimulation (or LLN-) indices to determine the sensitising potential were calculated by dividing the average absolute lymph node weight or lymph node cell counts per group of the test item treated animals by the vehicle treated ones.
Thus, in case of no stimulating effect the index for the lymph node cell count is always below 1.4 (cut-off value). An index above 1.4 is considered positive.
For lymph node weight significance at p ≤ 0.01 is considered positive, however, an increase in lymph node weight is an indication for possible irritating properties not sensitising properties.
In addition, the average ear weights per group and the average ear thickness per group were compared to the vehicle control group as an indication for possible irritaitng properties. The stimulation indices were calculated by dividing the average ear weight and average ear thickness on test day 4 per group of the test item treated animals by the vehicle treated ones. The cut-off threshold value for ear weight was set at 1.1. - Positive control substance(s):
- hexyl cinnamic aldehyde (CAS No 101-86-0)
- Statistics:
- Please refer to "details on study design"
- Positive control results:
- The positive control group caused the expected increases in lymph node cell count and lymph node weight (statistically significant at p ≤ 0.01). Therefore, the study
can be regarded as valid.
positive control: SI: 1.564 (lymph node weight); SI: 1.106 (ear thickness)
positive control (vehicle): SI: 1.000 (lymph node weight); SI: 1.000 (ear thickness) - Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.413
- Test group / Remarks:
- 10 % test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: lymph node cell count
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.021
- Test group / Remarks:
- 10 % test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: ear weight
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 2.098
- Test group / Remarks:
- 25 % test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: lymph node cell count
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.117
- Test group / Remarks:
- 25 % test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: ear weight
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.754
- Test group / Remarks:
- 50 % test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: lymph node cell count
- Key result
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.124
- Test group / Remarks:
- 50 % test item
- Remarks on result:
- other: ear weight
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1
- Test group / Remarks:
- negative control group
- Remarks on result:
- other: lymph node cell count
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1
- Test group / Remarks:
- negative control
- Remarks on result:
- other: eat weight
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.91
- Test group / Remarks:
- positive control group
- Remarks on result:
- other: lymph node cell count
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1.184
- Test group / Remarks:
- positive control group
- Remarks on result:
- other: ear weight
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1
- Test group / Remarks:
- positive control goup vehicle
- Remarks on result:
- other: lymph node cell count
- Parameter:
- SI
- Value:
- 1
- Test group / Remarks:
- positive control group vehicle
- Remarks on result:
- other: ear weight
- Cellular proliferation data / Observations:
- DETAILS ON STIMULATION INDEX CALCULATION
Threshold values of the stimulation indices of lymph node cell count and ear weight were calculated by dividing the average values per group of the test item treated animals by the vehicle treated ones. Values above 1.4 (cell count) or 1.1 (ear weight) are considered positive (these values were fixed empirically during the inter-laboratory validation of this method).
RESULTS ON SKIN SENSITISATION
In the main study treatment with N-[2-(4-oxo-4H-3,1-benzoxazin-2-yl)phenyl]naphthalene-2-sulphonamide at concentrations of 10 %, 25 % or 50 % revealed increased values for the lymph node cell count (statistical significantly at 25% and 50% (p ≤ 0.01)). The stimulation index of the lymph node cell count of 1.4 was exceeded markedly at all tested concentrations.
In addition, increases were noted for lymph node weights for all concentrations. At the 25% and the 50% concentrations the stimulation indices of ear weight exceeded the threshold level of 1.1, the test item was considered to have irritating properties in this concentration range in this test system. However, as the 10% concentration did not exceed the threshold level of 1.1 the test item possesses sensitising potential at this concentration.
STIMULATION INDEX RESULTS OF LYMPH NODE WEIGHT AND EAR THICKNESS
10 % w/w: SI: 1.106 (lymph node weight); SI: 1.000 (ear thickness)
25 % w/w: SI: 1.340 (lymph node weight); SI: 1.050 (ear thickness)
50 % w/w: SI: 1.319 (lymph node weight); SI: 1.054 (ear thickness)
negative control: SI: 1.000 (lymph node weight); SI: 1.000 (ear thickness)
CLINICAL OBSERVATIONS:
No signs of local or systemic intolerance were recorded.
BODY WEIGHTS
The animal body weight was not affected by the treatment. - Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- N-[2-(4-oxo-4H-3,1-benzoxazin-2-yl)phenyl]naphthalene-2-sulphonamide was tested with a modified LLNA test according to Ehling et al. (2005) in concentrations of 10, 25 and 50 % to determine the sensitising potential of the substance. During the assay the proliferation of the lymphocytes are measured using the parameters lymph node cell count and lymph node weight, whereas the former indicates a sensitizing property of the substance, if a stimulation index of 1.4 or greater is calculated. The latter parameter also provides information on sensitising properties, however, a statistical significant increase in lymph node weight is an indication of possible irritating not sensitizing properties.
In addition to the parameters, as stated above, ear weight and ear thickness are also recorded during testing. These parameters measure the irritating potential of a substance. If the ear weight results in a stimulation index of 1.1 or greater the substance is considered to be irritating to the skin.
Considering the results of the current study, all tested concentrations gave a stimulation index of 1.4 or greater for lymph node cell count, which obviously demonstrates skin sensitising potential of the substance. However, the 25 % and 50 % concentrations of the substance afforded a stimulation index of 1.1 for ear weight, which indicates skin irritating property of the substance within this test system. Furthermore, lymph node weight showed a statistical significant increase for all tested concentrations. Hence, the substance is considered to have skin irritating properties within this test system rather than a skin sensitising potential.
In order to gain more information on a possible skin sensitising property of the substance, a Guinea pig maximization test according to the OECD 406 (1992) or an adequate alternate test system could be conducted to provide more conclusive information.
Nevertheless, the REACH regulation requires, according to Annex VII point 8.3 column 2, the performance of an LLNA study as the first choice method for in vivo sensitisation testing, at the same time suggesting that only in exceptional circumstances another test should be used (e.g. Magnusson and Kligman study (OECD 406)), for animal welfare reasons.
One argument for initiating the GMPT: Several investigations have generated evidence that irritancy increases the induction response in the LLNA and may thereby lead to non-specific proliferation responses (Basketter et al. 2007a,b,c; Montelius et al. 1998; Woolhiser et al. 1998). For example, methyl salicylate and nonanoic acid showed a dose-response relationship and clearly positive results in the LLNA studies by Montelius et al. (1998) and would normally be classified as potential sensitisers according to the current criteria for positive assay results. However, both irritants are well known to be non-sensitisers in older studies but induced false positive results in the LLNA. Hence, N-[2-(4-oxo-4H-3,1-benzoxazin-2-yl)phenyl]naphthalene-2-sulphonamide may induce skin irritation in mice the initiation of an GMPT should be considered.
Reference
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
Justification for classification or non-classification
Skin sensitisation
The substance does not possess a skin sensitisation potential and does not require classification as skin sensitiser according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 and subsequent adaptations.
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.