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: 268-938-5 | CAS number: 68155-09-9
- 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
A guinea pig maximization test (OECD 406, GLP) was conducted (TH Goldschmidt AG, 1996). 20 Pirbright-Hartley guinea pigs (m/f) were exposed epicutaneous (occlusive) and intradermal during induction phase. An epicutaneous (occlusive) challenge was performed using a solution with 5% active matter. Results revealed a sensitization rate of 20% and 15% at 24 and 48 h post-challenge, respectively.
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
- Study period:
- Sep 1996 - Oct 1996
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
- Version / remarks:
- Jul 1992
- Deviations:
- no
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- No justification given.
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- SOURCE OF TEST MATERIAL
- Source: TH Goldschmidt AG, Essen, Germany
- Batch No.of test material: 571003
- Active component: 35%
- Physical state: clear, viscous liquid
- Density: approx. 1.00 g/ml
STABILITY AND STORAGE CONDITIONS OF TEST MATERIAL
- Storage condition of test material: ambient
- Stability under test conditions: March 1997
OTHER SPECIFICS:
- Solvent/vehicle: intradermal injection and dermal application: aqua ad iniect. - Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Pirbright-Hartley
- Remarks:
- white. Substrain: Hsd/Poc: DH
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Harlan-Winkelmann GmbH, 33178 Borchen, Germany
- Date of receipt: August 7, 1996 (range finding); September 18, 1996 (main test)
- Weight at study initiation: male 308 - 349 g, female 295 - 339 g (main test)
- Housing: collective housing up to a maximum of 10 animals per cage
- Diet: ad libitum, Ssniff-G (Ssniff Spezialdiäten GmBh, Soest, Germany)
- Water: ad libitum
- Acclimation period: 35 days (range finding), 8 days (main test)
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (°C): 22 +/- 3
- Humidity (%): 30 - 70
- Photoperiod (hrs dark / hrs light): 12/12 (illumination from 7 am to 7 pm)
- Measurement: twice daily - Route:
- intradermal
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 2.5%
- Day(s)/duration:
- 7 days
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 50%
- Day(s)/duration:
- 48 h
- Adequacy of induction:
- highest concentration used causing mild-to-moderate skin irritation and well-tolerated systemically
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 5%
- Day(s)/duration:
- 24 h
- Adequacy of challenge:
- highest non-irritant concentration
- No. of animals per dose:
- 20 animals used for the test substance and 10 control animals
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS:
A. INTRADERMAL INJECTION
- Concentration: 5%, dilution with aqua ad iniect. and Freund's complete adjuvant (FCA). Since this concentration produced immoderate irritation such as grey-black discoloration, lower concenrations were tested.
- 4 animals were employed and skin reactions were recorded 48 h post application
B. DERMAL APPLICATION
- the test article was used undiluted. Since the maximum concentration was irritating, lower concentrations were tested.
- occlusive bandage was used
- 10 animals were employed and skin reactions were recorded 48 h post application
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1 intradermal, 1 epicutaneous
- Exposure period: - (id), 48 hours (epic)
- Test groups: Test subsstance, Test substance + FCA, FCA (id); Test substance (epic.)
- Control group: FCA, water+FCA, water (id); water (epic.)
- Site: shoulder
- Frequency of applications: 0 (id), 7d (epic.)
- Duration: 0-7d
- Concentrations: 2.5% (id), 50% (epic.)
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1
- Day(s) of challenge: 14d
- Exposure period: 24 h
- Test groups: test substance
- Control group: test substance
- Site: left flank test substance, right flank water
- Concentrations: 5%
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): 24, 48 h
- Challenge controls:
- Control animals were treated with the test substance concurrently with the test groups in the challenge phase.
- Positive control substance(s):
- no
- Remarks:
- The reaction to the positive control substance (benzocaine) is tested periodically. The last test was performed in June 1996.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 12
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Skin reactions were observed
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 13
- Total no. in group:
- 20
- Clinical observations:
- Skin reactions were observed
- Remarks on result:
- positive indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Skin reactions were observed
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Clinical observations:
- Skin reactions were observed
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- According to the maximization scheme of Magnusson and Kligman (1996), the test substance is classified as a mild sensitzier (The sensitization rate at 24 h was 20 % and at 48 h 15 %).
According to GHS, EU criteria the substance has not to be classfied as skin sensitizer. - Executive summary:
The potential skin sensitizing potential of the test substance was assessed in the guinea pig maximization test using 20 test and 10 control animals. Following induction exposure to the test substance or the vehicle, the animals were subjected to two weeks later to a challenge a challenge exposure with the test substance. The treated skin areas were evaluated 24 and 48 hours after the end of the exposure period. According to Magnusson and Kligman (J. Invest. Dermatol. 52, 268 -276, 1969), the test substance is classified as a "mild sensitizer".
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- supporting study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- other: Repeat-insult patch test study
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- No justification given
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- 1% raw material was used which contained 35% to 36.5% of the test substance utilizing a facial wash
- Species:
- other: human
- Sex:
- not specified
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- Age range: from 18 to 65
Number of subjects: 252 empaneled, 199 completed the study - Key result
- Reading:
- other: erythema
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 35 -36.5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 30
- Total no. in group:
- 199
- Clinical observations:
- 24+-reaction; 6 with erythema 1
- Conclusions:
- It was concluded that the test material did not induce contact dermal sensitization in human subjects.
- Executive summary:
A repeat-insult patch test study was performed using a facial wash (1% raw material which contained 35% to 36.5% of the test substance) (Harrison Research Laboratories, Inc., 1993). Out of the 252 subjects empaneled (age range from 18 to 65), 199 subjects completed the study. During the induction phase, three subjects scored ± (faint, minimal erythema). During the challenge phase, 24 subjects scored ± and 6 subjects scored a 1 (erythema). It was concluded that the test material did not induce contact dermal sensitization in human subjects.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- supporting study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Type of study:
- other: Repeat-insult patch test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- No justification given
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- 1% raw material was used which contained 35% to 36.5% of the test substance
- Species:
- other: human
- Sex:
- not specified
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- Number of participants: 215 subjects enrolled, 189 completed the study
Age: from 18 to 70 - Route:
- epicutaneous, semiocclusive
- Vehicle:
- not specified
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.2 ml
- Day(s)/duration:
- 24 h
- Route:
- other: epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- not specified
- Day(s)/duration:
- 24 h
- Details on study design:
- The test material (0.2 ml) was dispensed onto the semiocclusive webril/adhesive patch, and placed on the left side of the back. Each subject removed the patch 24 h later, and the procedure was repeated after a 24-h nonapplication period (48 h on the weekends) for a total of nine induction patches. The test site was observed for any signs of reaction and recorded at the time a new patch was reapplied. The subjects were given a 2-week period of non-treatment, which was followed by the challenge dose. The challenge patch was applied to the right side of the back for 24 h. The site was observed for a reaction immediately after removal and again 48, 72, and 96 h after application.
- Key result
- Reading:
- other: erythema
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 35-36.5%
- No. with + reactions:
- 1
- Total no. in group:
- 189
- Clinical observations:
- +
- Conclusions:
- It was concluded that the test substance did not induce dermal sensitization.
- Executive summary:
A repeat-insult patch test was conducted using a facial wash (1% raw material containing 35% to 36.5% of the test substance) (Harrison Research Laboratories, Inc., 2001a). Of the 215subjects enrolled, 189 completed the study (ages ranged from 18 to 70). The test material (0.2 ml) was dispensed onto the semiocclusive webril/adhesive patch, and placed on the left side of the back. Each subject removed the patch 24 h later, and the procedure was repeated after a 24-h nonapplication period (48 h on the weekends) for a total of nine induction patches. The test site was observed for any signs of reaction and recorded at the time a new patch was reapplied. During these observations, two ± reactions (faint, minimal erythema) were noted at the first reading.
The subjects were given a 2-week period of non-treatment, which was followed by the challenge dose. The challenge patch was applied to the right side of the back for 24 h. The site was observed for a reaction immediately after removal and again 48, 72, and 96 h after application. During this phase, only one + reaction was noted at the 48-h postapplication observation.
It was concluded that the test substance did not induce dermal sensitization (Harrison Research Laboratories, Inc. 2001a).
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- supporting study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
- Qualifier:
- no guideline followed
- GLP compliance:
- not specified
- Type of study:
- other: Modified Draize assay
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- No justification given
- Specific details on test material used for the study:
- A test product was used which contained 7.5% of the test substance
- Species:
- other: human
- Sex:
- not specified
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- Number of participants: 120 empaneled, and 110 completed the study
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- not specified
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.025 g of the test product
- Day(s)/duration:
- 48/72 h (72 h on weekends)
- Route:
- other: epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- not specified
- Concentration / amount:
- 0.025 g of the test product
- Day(s)/duration:
- 48 h
- Details on study design:
- Induction: 0.025 g of the test material was applied to the scapular area of the back under occlusive patches. A total of 10 applications were made. 48 h after patch application (72 h on weekends), the patches were removed and the test sites were rinsed and evaluated. New patches were then applied. Twelve days after removal of the last patch, a challenge patch with the same dose used during induction was applied to a previously untested site. The challenge patch was removed 48 h after application, and the site was evaluated 48 and 96 h after application.
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 110
- Clinical observations:
- 1+ reactions
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 96
- Group:
- test chemical
- No. with + reactions:
- 2
- Total no. in group:
- 110
- Clinical observations:
- 1+ reactions
- Conclusions:
- The researchers concluded that no evidence of sensitization to 7.5% of the test substance was observed.
- Executive summary:
A modified Draize assay was performed using a test product containing 7.5% of the test substance (International Research Services, Inc., 1997). Of the original 120 subjects, 110 completed the study. During induction, 0.025 g of the test material was applied to the scapular area of the back under occlusive patches. A total of 10 applications were made. Forty-eight hours after patch application (72 h on weekends), the patches were removed and the test sites were rinsed and evaluated. New patches were then applied. Twelve days after removal of the last patch, a challenge patch with the same dose used during induction was
applied to a previously untested site. The challenge patch was removed 48 h after application, and the site was evaluated 48 and 96 hours after application.
During the induction phase of the study, 1 + reactions (erythema throughout the entire patch area) were observed in 53 subjects and 2+ reactions (erythema and edema) were observed in three subjects. These reactions were considered typical of mild irritation. Two of the subjects had 1+ reactions at the 48—and 96-h challenge readings. The researchers concluded that “no evidence of sensitization” to 7.5% of the test substance was observed (International Research Services, Inc. 1997).
Referenceopen allclose all
Table 1: Challenge exposure in the test group - results
|
24h |
|
|||||
Animal |
|
Initial |
Test |
|
Test |
|
Final |
no. |
Sex |
BW(g) |
article E Oe |
Vehicle E Oe |
article E Oe |
Vehicle E Oe |
BW(g) |
1 |
m |
321 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
489 |
2 |
m |
343 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
580 |
3 |
m |
349 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
543 |
4 |
m |
316 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
490 |
5 |
m |
317 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
517 |
6 |
m |
320 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
532 |
7 |
m |
326 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
476 |
8 |
m |
329 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
516 |
9 |
m |
308 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
484 |
10 |
m |
322 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
489 |
11 |
f |
303 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
441 |
12 |
f |
337 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
518 |
13 |
f |
295 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
411 |
14 |
f |
323 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
459 |
15 |
f |
314 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
468 |
16 |
f |
326 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
485 |
17 |
f |
322 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
480 |
18 |
f |
313 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
446 |
19 |
f |
318 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
436 |
20 |
f |
305 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
430 |
Reaction rate at 24 h: 60%
Sensitization rate at 24 h: 20%
Reaction rate at 48 h: 65%
Sensitization rate at 48 h: 15%
Severity index:
test article (leftflank):
mean value (E) 24 h: 0.80
mean value (Oe) 24 h: 0.05
mean value (E) 48 h: 0.80
mean value (Oe) 48 h: 0.05
Severity index: vehicle (rightflank):
mean value(E)24 h: 0.00
mean value (Oe) 24 h: 0.00
mean value(E)48 h: 0.00
mean value (Oe) 48 h: 0.00
m=male; f=female; BW=body weight; E=erythema; Oe=oedema
Table 2: Challenge exposure in the control group - results
Animal no. |
Initial SexBW(g) |
24hTest article E Oe |
Vehicle E Oe |
48hTest article E Oe |
Vehicle E Oe |
Final BW(g) |
|||||
1 |
m |
324 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
522 |
2 |
m |
320 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
518 |
3 |
m |
317 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
471 |
4 |
m |
314 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
484 |
5 |
m |
310 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
468 |
6 |
f |
303 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
509 |
7 |
f |
339 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
511 |
8 |
f |
317 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
508 |
9 |
f |
327 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
500 |
l0 |
f |
315 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
525 |
Table 2.2.: Results belonging to results presented in table 2
Reaction rate at 24 h:
Severity index: test article (leftflank): |
20% |
Reaction rate at 48 h:
Severity index: vehicle (rightflank): |
20% |
mean value (E) 24 h: |
0.20 |
mean value(E)24 h: |
0.00 |
mean value (Oe) 24 h: |
0.00 |
mean value (Oe) 24 h: |
0.00 |
mean value(E)48 h: |
0.20 |
mean value(E)48 h: |
0.00 |
mean value (Oe) 48 h: |
0.00 |
mean value (Oe) 48 h: |
0.00 |
m=male; f=female; BW=bodyweight; E=erythema; Oe=oedema
During the induction phase, three subjects scored +/- (faint, minimal erythema). During the challenge phase, 24 subjects scored +/- and 6 subjects scored a 1 (erythema).
During induction, two ± reactions (faint, minimal erythema) were noted at the first reading. During challenge, only one ± reaction was noted at the 48 h postapplication observation.
During the induction phase of the study, 1+ reactions (erythema throughout the entire patch area) were observed in 53 subjects and 2+ reactions (erythema and edema) were observed in three subjects. These reactions were considered typical of mild irritation. Two of the subjects had 1+ reactions at the 48- and 96 -h challenge readings.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
A study was performed in order to assess the skin sensitizing potential of the test substance using the guinea pig maximization test which was according to OECD guideline 406 and in compliance with GLP in 1996 (TH Goldschmidt AG, 1996). Twenty test and 10 control Pirbright-Hartley guinea pigs both male and female were exposed epicutaneous (occlusive) and intradermal to a dilution of 50% and 2.5%, respectively, during induction phase. Following induction exposure to the test substance or the vehicle, the animals were subjected two weeks later to an epicutaneous (occlusive) challenge using a solution with 5% active matter. The treated skin areas were evaluated 24 and 48 hours after the end of the exposure period. Results revealed a sensitization rate of 20% and 15% at 24 and 48 h post-challenge, respectively. According to Magnusson and Kligman (J. Invest. Dermatol. 52, 268 -276, 1969), the test substance is classified as a "mild sensitizer". Applying the GHS (UN) criteria, no classification is triggered.
Harrison Research Laboratories, Inc. performed a non-guidelien repeat-insult patch test study with no information on GLP compliance in 1993. A facial wash (1% raw material which contained 35% to 36.5% of the test substance) was used. Out of the 252 subjects empaneled (age range from 18 to 65), 199 subjects completed the study. During the induction phase, three subjects scored ± (faint, minimal erythema). During the challenge phase, 24 subjects scored ± and 6 subjects scored a 1 (erythema). It was concluded that the test material did not induce contact dermal sensitization in human subjects.
International Research Services, Inc. (1997) performed a modified Draize assay using a test product containing 7.5% of the test substance. Of the original 120 subjects, 110 completed the study. During induction, 0.025 g of the test material was applied to the scapular area of the back under occlusive patches. A total of 10 applications were made. Forty-eight hours after patch application (72 h on weekends), the patches were removed and the test sites were rinsed and evaluated. New patches were then applied. Twelve days after removal of the last patch, a challenge patch with the same dose used during induction was applied to a previously untested site. The challenge patch was removed 48 h after application, and the site was evaluated 48 and 96 hours after application.
During the induction phase of the study, 1 + reactions (erythema throughout the entire patch area) were observed in 53 subjects and 2+ reactions (erythema and edema) were observed in three subjects. These reactions were considered typical of mild irritation. Two of the subjects had 1+ reactions at the 48—and 96-h challenge readings. The researchers concluded that “no evidence of sensitization” to 7.5% of the test substance was observed.
Harrison Research Laboratories, Inc. (2001a) conducted a repeat-insult patch test using a facial wash (1% raw material containing 35% to 36.5% of the test substance). Of the 215
subjects enrolled, 189 completed the study (ages ranged from 18 to 70). The test material (0.2 ml) was dispensed onto the semiocclusive webril/adhesive patch, and placed on the left side of the back. Each subject removed the patch 24 h later, and the procedure was repeated after a 24-h nonapplication period (48 h on the weekends) for a total of nine induction patches. The test site was observed for any signs of reaction and recorded at the time a new patch was reapplied. During these observations, two ± reactions (faint, minimal erythema) were noted at the first reading.
The subjects were given a 2-week period of non-treatment, which was followed by the challenge dose. The challenge patch was applied to the right side of the back for 24 h. The site was observed for a reaction immediately after removal and again 48, 72, and 96 h after application. During this phase, only one + reaction was noted at the 48-h postapplication observation.
It was concluded that the test substance did not induce dermal sensitization.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
Classification, Labeling, and Packaging Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008
The available experimental test data are reliable and suitable for classification purposes under Regulation 1272/2008. As a result the substance is not considered to be classified for skin sensitization under Regulation (EC) No. 1272/2008.
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.

EU Privacy Disclaimer
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our websites.