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Please be aware that this old REACH registration data factsheet is no longer maintained; it remains frozen as of 19th May 2023.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: 214-426-1 | CAS number: 1126-79-0
- 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
QSAR assessment of Skin sensitising potential using OASIS Times and DEREK
In vitro assessment of skin sensitising potential using Keratinosense assay and DPRA
Key value for chemical safety assessment
Skin sensitisation
Link to relevant study records
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- other: QSAR
- Type of information:
- (Q)SAR
- Adequacy of study:
- supporting study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Prediction made with a valid QSAR model; substance was in the applicability domain for the model
- Justification for type of information:
- QSAR prediction: migrated from IUCLID 5.6
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- QSAR prediction made using Derek Nexus: 4.1.0, Nexus: 2.0.0
- Type of study:
- other: QSAR
- Interpretation of results:
- not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- The substance was within the applicability domain for the QSAR tool (DEREK). No alerts were identified for skin sensitising potential, thus it was concluded that this substance was unlikely to be a skin sensitiser.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation
- Remarks:
- other: QSAR
- Type of information:
- (Q)SAR
- Adequacy of study:
- supporting study
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: QSAR prediction made using a valid model; substance is within the applicability domain for the model
- Justification for type of information:
- QSAR prediction: migrated from IUCLID 5.6
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- Prediction of skin sensitising potential using OASIS Times v2.27.16.8
- Type of study:
- other: QSAR
- Interpretation of results:
- not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- The substance (and metabolites) was in domain for the QSAR tool and was predicted not to be a sensitiser.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in chemico
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- 2017
- Reliability:
- 1 (reliable without restriction)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- guideline study
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- OECD Guideline 442C (In Chemico Skin Sensitisation: Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA))
- GLP compliance:
- yes (incl. QA statement)
- Type of study:
- direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA)
- Details on the study design:
- Study design is in accordance with OECD Guidance: OECD (2015), Test No. 442C: In Chemico Skin Sensitisation: Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA), OECD Publishing, Paris.
Positive control: Cinnamic Aldehyde (CAS 104-55-2) at a concentration of 100 mM in acetonitrile. - Positive control results:
- Cinnamic Aldehyde depleted Cysteine and Lysine by 74.6 and 62.52% respectively
- Key result
- Run / experiment:
- other: Definitive
- Parameter:
- other: % Cysteine Depletion
- Value:
- 0.64
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Key result
- Run / experiment:
- other: definitive
- Parameter:
- other: % Lysine depletion
- Value:
- 0.28
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Key result
- Run / experiment:
- other: Definitive
- Parameter:
- other: Mean % Cysteine and lysine depletion
- Value:
- 0.46
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- valid
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- The test material did not deplete Cysteine or Lysine in the DPRA assay. Therefore it is concluded that this substance is unlikely to be a Skin sensitiser
- Executive summary:
The Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay was used to assess the skin sensitization potenetial of the test substance Butyl Phenyl Ether (Lot# 22466). The skin sensitization potential of the test substance was evaluated by measuring the depletion of synthetic peptides containing either cysteine or lysine aminoacids following incubation with the test substance, using the protocol that is consistent with the OECD Test Guideline 442C “In Chemico Skin Sensitization: Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA)”[1]. Based upon the results of this study, the test substance, Butyl Phenyl Ether, was not classified as a skin sensitizer.
[1] OECD Test Guideline 442C “In ChemicoSkin Sensitization: Direct Peptide Reactivity Assay (DPRA)”, Adopted 4 February 2015.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vitro
- Type of information:
- experimental study
- Adequacy of study:
- weight of evidence
- Study period:
- 2016
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: A non-glp, OECD guideline in vitro assessment of skin sensitising potential
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: OECD 442D
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Remarks:
- THe study was conducted in accordance with the principles of GLP (reporting, data auditing, data retention, GLP qualification fo all equipment and study personel) but was not officially conducted as a GLP study.
- Type of study:
- activation of keratinocytes
- Positive control results:
- In the two independent replicates, the positive control compound, cinnamic aldehyde, exhibited a dose-dependent increase in luciferase activity with EC1.5 values of 7.41 and 6.55 µM, respectively. In replicate 1, and 2, cinnamic aldehyde exhibited a maximum luciferase induction (Imax) of 18.49-, and 11.54-fold, relative to the vehicle control. In addition, the average variability in the solvent control wells was below the acceptable 20% in each of the two replicates, thereby demonstrating appropriate assay conduct.
- Key result
- Run / experiment:
- other: Average of 2 replicates
- Parameter:
- other: Imax Fold Luciferase induction
- Value:
- 1.04
- Vehicle controls validity:
- valid
- Negative controls validity:
- not applicable
- Positive controls validity:
- valid
- Remarks on result:
- other: Luciferase activity was not induced above 1.5 fold of control
- Remarks:
- Negative.
- Interpretation of results:
- not sensitising
- Remarks:
- Migrated information Criteria used for interpretation of results: EU
- Conclusions:
- Butyl Phenyl Ether was cytotoxic in this assay but did not produce an increase in the luciferase activity above 1.5 fold of control at levels that were not cytotoxic.
Consequently this substance was not considered to be a skin sensitiser.
Referenceopen allclose all
The substance was within the applicability domain for the QSAR tool (DEREK). No alerts were identified for skin sensitising potential, thus it was concluded that this substance was unlikely to be a skin sensitiser.
Butyl Phenyl Ether was assessed for skin sensitising potential using the QSAR tool OASIS Times. Parent compound and metabolites were with the domain of the tool and all predicted to be negative for sensitising potential.
Butyl phenyl ether was tested at twelve concentrations ranging from 1 to 2000 µM in two independent assay replicates.
In replicate 1, and 2, butyl phenyl ether exhibited a maximum luciferase induction (Imax) of 0.96-, and 1.12-fold, relative to the vehicle control. Therefore in both replicates, butyl phenyl ether did not induce luciferase activity above the threshold 1.5-fold. In both replicates, butyl phenyl ether caused cytotoxicity (cell viability < 70%) at 250 µM and higher concentrations.
Therefore, based on the findings of this study, butyl phenyl ether was considered negative for skin sensitization potential in the in vitro KeratinoSens assay.
Butyl phenyl etherinterpretation criteria |
Results |
Interpretation |
|||
|
Rep-1 |
Rep-2 |
Average |
|
|
Imax (relative fold) |
0.96 |
1.12 |
1.04 |
|
|
EC 1.5 (µM) |
NA |
NA |
NA |
Potential non-sensitizer |
|
Cell viability at EC 1.5 (%) |
NA |
NA |
NA |
|
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
No in vivo skin sensitising potential data are available for butyl phenyl ether therefore two QSAR models and In vitro assays (Keratinosense and DPRA) were used to predict skin sensitising potential in accordance with the AOP for skin sensitising potential.
QSAR predictions:
For both QSAR models (DEREK and OASIS Times) butyl phenyl ether was within the applicability domain for the model, and as such the predictions can be considered to be reliable. Both models predicted that butyl phenyl ether would not be a skin sensitisier.
In vitro:
The in vitro Keratinosense assay butyl phenyl ether failed to induce luciferase activity to greater than 1.5 fold above control in the absence of cytotoxicity.
In the DPRA assay, butyl phenyl ether did not significantly deplete either Cysteine or Lysine (0.64 and 0.28% respectively). Therefore it is concluded that it is unlikely to be a potential sensitiser.
Based on the absence of structural alerts for sensitising potential and the negative in vitro and in chemico assays it is concluded that butyl phenyl ether is not a skin sensitiser and a further in vitro assay to assess sensitising potential was deemed to be unnecessary.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
Justification for classification or non-classification
All assays (in silico, in chemico and in vitro) were negative. Butyl Phenyl Ether is therefore not considered to be a skin 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.