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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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

Toxicological information

Skin sensitisation

Currently viewing:

Administrative data

Endpoint:
skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Type of information:
experimental study
Adequacy of study:
key study
Study period:
March 1990
Reliability:
2 (reliable with restrictions)
Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
comparable to guideline study with acceptable restrictions
Remarks:
Study is similar to OECD guideline regulatory studies, methods are well reported, but study is not GLP

Data source

Reference
Reference Type:
study report
Title:
Unnamed
Year:
1990
Report date:
1990

Materials and methods

Test guideline
Qualifier:
equivalent or similar to guideline
Guideline:
OECD Guideline 406 (Skin Sensitisation)
Deviations:
not specified
GLP compliance:
no
Type of study:
guinea pig maximisation test
Justification for non-LLNA method:
An LLNA study does not need to be conducted because adequate reliable data is available from this alternative existing study providing data on the potential for skin sensitisation

Test material

Constituent 1
Chemical structure
Reference substance name:
2-(2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethoxy)ethanol
EC Number:
203-962-1
EC Name:
2-(2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethoxy)ethanol
Cas Number:
112-35-6
Molecular formula:
C7H16O4
IUPAC Name:
2-[2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethoxy]ethanol
Constituent 2
Reference substance name:
Tris[2-[2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethoxy]ethyl] orthoborate
EC Number:
250-418-4
EC Name:
Tris[2-[2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethoxy]ethyl] orthoborate
Cas Number:
30989-05-0
IUPAC Name:
tris{2-[2-(2-methoxyethoxy)ethoxy]ethyl} borate
Constituent 3
Reference substance name:
triethylene glycol monomethyl ether, borate
IUPAC Name:
triethylene glycol monomethyl ether, borate
Details on test material:
Cited by author of RSS:
triethylene glycol monomethyl ether, borate (30989-05-0): 25-30%
triethylene glycol monomethyl ether (112-35-6): 30-40%
17-44% di-, tri-, tetra-, and pentaethylene glycol butyl ethers, and tetra-, and pentaethylene glycol monomethyl ethers (approximately 50% borated)
<4% unidentified
0.8% boron

Stated in test report:
Feedstock composition: TEGME 37%, TetraEGME 37%, PentaEGME 10%, butyl glycol ethers <12%, unknown 4%
Dot 4 comprises 85-90% methyl glycol streams and 10-15% buty glycol streams. These are esterified with boric acid to a value of 0.8% boron which is equivalent to ~50% esterication. Note that in the presence of water, the ester rapidly hydrolyses so in vivo the test substance can be considered to have a composition equivalent to the parent glycol ether mixture plus a small amount of boric acid.

In vivo test system

Test animals

Species:
guinea pig
Strain:
Dunkin-Hartley
Sex:
male/female
Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
Animals, after acclimatisatino period, were housed 2-3/cage and provided food and water ad libitum. Room was maintained at 19-23C, with 30-70% relative humidity. Light was maintained on a 12-hour cycle.

Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)

Induction
Route:
intradermal and epicutaneous
Vehicle:
water
Concentration / amount:
0.6% in FCA (induction)
100% epicutaneous induction phase
60% in challenge
Challenge
No.:
#1
Route:
epicutaneous, occlusive
Vehicle:
water
Concentration / amount:
0.6% in FCA (induction)
100% epicutaneous induction phase
60% in challenge
No. of animals per dose:
10/sex for treated animals, 5/sex for the negative control
Details on study design:
Range finding test on 2 animals/sex was carried out to determine the maximum concentration for the intradermal induction. Animals were closely shorn in the shoulder region, and two rows of intradermal injections were made on either side of the midline. 0.1 mL of Freund's Complete Adjuvant, 0.1 mL of test material in vehicle, and 0.1 mL of test material in 50:50 FCA/vehicle.
One week after intradermal injections, the same region was again shorn, and 0.3 mL of undiluted test material was applied via moistened filter paper under occlusive bandage and held in place for 48 hours.
Three weeks after the induction phase, the one flank of each animal was shorn, and 0.1 mL of diluted test material applied via filter paper and held in place by occlusive bandage for 24 hours. Reactions were read 24 and 48 hours after patch removal, and graded on a 4 point scale.
Challenge controls:
Water was used as a negative control
Positive control substance(s):
no

Results and discussion

Positive control results:
not applicable

In vivo (non-LLNA)

Resultsopen allclose all
Reading:
1st reading
Hours after challenge:
24
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
0.1 mL 50% dilution
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
None
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 1st reading. . Hours after challenge: 24.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 0.1 mL 50% dilution. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: None.
Reading:
2nd reading
Hours after challenge:
48
Group:
test chemical
Dose level:
0.1 mL 50% dilution
No. with + reactions:
0
Total no. in group:
20
Clinical observations:
None
Remarks on result:
other: Reading: 2nd reading. . Hours after challenge: 48.0. Group: test group. Dose level: 0.1 mL 50% dilution. No with. + reactions: 0.0. Total no. in groups: 20.0. Clinical observations: None.

Any other information on results incl. tables

A study using such a formulation is considered relevant to use for this substance since such formulations represent 95% of the end use of this substance.

Applicant's summary and conclusion

Interpretation of results:
not sensitising
Remarks:
Migrated information
Conclusions:
Brake FLuid DOT 4 Super is not sensitising
Executive summary:

Brake Fluid DOT 4 Super was tested for sensitisation in Guinea pigs using the Magnusson and Kligman assay. No evidence of sensitsation was observed, and the formulation was considered to be non-sensitising.