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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 244-289-3 | CAS number: 21245-02-3
- 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
Skin sensitisation
Administrative data
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-LLNA)
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- key study
- Study period:
- Not reported
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- study well documented, meets generally accepted scientific principles, acceptable for assessment
Data source
Reference
- Reference Type:
- study report
- Title:
- Unnamed
- Year:
- 1 974
- Report date:
- 1974
Materials and methods
Test guideline
- Qualifier:
- no guideline available
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- A repeated insult patch test was carried out on 50 human volunteers to determine if the test material is capable of irritating the skin of humans under controlled test conditions and if so, to classify the test material as a primary irritant, fatiguing agent and/or sensitiser on the basis of the visible clinical responses.
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Remarks:
- The study pre-dates the inception of GLP
- Type of study:
- patch test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- Study conducted using human volunteers prior to the adoption of the LLNA guideline.
Test material
- Reference substance name:
- 2-ethylhexyl 4-(dimethylamino)benzoate
- EC Number:
- 244-289-3
- EC Name:
- 2-ethylhexyl 4-(dimethylamino)benzoate
- Cas Number:
- 21245-02-3
- Molecular formula:
- C17H27NO2
- IUPAC Name:
- 2-ethylhexyl 4-(dimethylamino)benzoate
Constituent 1
In vivo test system
Test animals
- Species:
- other: human
- Strain:
- other: Not applicable
- Sex:
- not specified
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST SUBJECTS
- Source: Volunteers from a local population
QUALIFYING CRITERIA
- General well-being
- Absence of any skin disease which might be confused with skin reactions from the test material
- Willingness to cooperate
- Dependability and intelligence in following directions
- Reading, understanding and signing an informed-consent contract (in the case of minors, parental consent was obtained)
Study design: in vivo (non-LLNA)
Induction
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- Test material applied as received (4.0 % in U.S.P. white petroleum)
- Day(s)/duration:
- 24 hours of contact followed by 24 hours of rest (Monday to Friday) then 48 hours of rest over the weekend for fifteen applications
- Adequacy of induction:
- not specified
Challenge
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- unchanged (no vehicle)
- Concentration / amount:
- Test material applied as received (4.0 % in U.S.P. white petroleum)
- Day(s)/duration:
- 24 hours
- Adequacy of challenge:
- not specified
- No. of animals per dose:
- 50 human volunteers were exposed
- Details on study design:
- A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 15
- Exposure period: A lintine pad was moistened with the test material as supplied. The treated pad was placed on its predesignated site, covered and sealed with overlapping strips of Blenderm tape. This cover was kept intact for twenty-four hours. At the end of twenty-four hours, the seal was broken and the patch removed.
- Test groups: Test material as received (4 % in U.S.P. white petrolatum)
- Control group: No
- Site: The upper arm
- Frequency of applications: After the patch was removed, the contact sites were rested for twenty-four hours. They were then re-examined to determine if any changes had occurred since the previous examination. If the contact sites manifested no changes, the test material was re-applied to the same site. If significant irritation (2+ or more) was observed, the investigator, at his discretion, had the option either of resting the individual or of applying the test material to a new site for the next contact period. This cycle was repeated in this manner on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. On weekends, a forty-eight-hour rest period was permitted between removal and re-application of the test material.
- Scoring: The skin sites were examined after patch removal and gross changes, if present, were graded on a scale of 1 to 4. Absence of any visible changes was assigned a 0 value.
Scoring Criteria:
0 = No reactions
1+ = Slight erythema
2+ = Marked erythema
3+ = Marked erythema, oedema, with or without a few vesicles
4+ = Marked erythema, oedema, with vesicles and oozing
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
- No. of exposures: 1
- Day(s) of challenge: After the fifteenth induction application, the participants were rested for two weeks before being challenged. The sites of contact used previously were challenged.
- Exposure period: Twenty-four hours under occlusion.
- Test groups: Test material as received (4 % in U.S.P. white petrolatum)
- Control group: No
- Site: The upper arm
- Evaluation (hr after challenge): After patch removal, the contact site was examined immediately and following at intervals of twenty-four and forty-eight hours.
- Scoring: The skin sites were examined after patch removal and gross changes, if present, were graded on a scale of 1 to 4. Absence of any visible changes was assigned a 0 value. - Positive control substance(s):
- no
Results and discussion
In vivo (non-LLNA)
Resultsopen allclose all
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- Test material applied as received (4.0 % in U.S.P. white petroleum)
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 50
- Clinical observations:
- No observations
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- Test material applied as received (4.0 % in U.S.P. white petroleum)
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 50
- Clinical observations:
- No observations
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
Applicant's summary and conclusion
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Remarks:
- not skin sensitizer (4%)
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of this study, the test material was determined not to be a skin sensitiser.
- Executive summary:
The skin sensitisation potential of the test material was investigated in human volunteers using a repeated insult patch test.
The patch test was performed on a group of 50 individuals from a local population who volunteered to participate in the study. Individuals selected for the study met the following criteria: General well-being, absence of any skin disease which might be confused with skin reactions from the test material, willingness to cooperate, dependability and intelligence in following directions and reading, understanding and signing an informed-consent contract.
A lintine pad was moistened with the test material as supplied (at a 4.0 % concentration in U.S.P. white petrolatum). The treated pad was placed on its predesignated site on the upper arm, covered, and sealed with overlapping strips of tape. This cover was kept intact for twenty-four hours. At the end of twenty-four hours, the seal was broken and the patch removed. The skin sites were examined and gross changes and if they were present, were graded on a scale of 1 to 4. Absence of any visible changes was assigned a 0 value. After the patch was removed, the contact sites were rested for twenty-four hours. They were then re-examined to determine if any changes had occurred since the previous examination. If the contact sites manifested no changes, the test material was reapplied to the same site. If significant irritation was observed, the investigator, at his discretion, had the option either of resting the individual or of applying the test material to a new site for the next contact period. This cycle was repeated in this manner on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays. On weekends, a forty-eight-hour rest period was permitted between removal and re-application of the test material.
After the fifteenth application, the participants were rested for two weeks before being challenged. The sites of contact used previously were challenged with the test material for twenty-four hours under occlusion. After removal, the contact site was examined immediately and following at intervals of twenty-four and forty-eight hours. Observations were recorded on a daily basis during treatment.
No visible skin changes signifying reaction to injury were observed in any of the 50 subjects following any of the test material applications, including the challenge.
Under the conditions of this study, the test material was not capable of eliciting visible skin changes consistent with the criteria deemed characteristic of a primary irritant, fatiguing agent or sensitiser.
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.