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: 204-783-1 | CAS number: 126-33-0
- 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
Sulfolane did not induce skin sensitization in a guinea pig study.
No animal or human data have been found with regard to respiratory sensitisation potential of sulfolane.
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
- Reliability:
- 2 (reliable with restrictions)
- Rationale for reliability incl. deficiencies:
- other: Not GLP compliant, available as unpublished report.
- Justification for type of information:
- .
- Qualifier:
- according to guideline
- Guideline:
- other: not specified
- GLP compliance:
- no
- Type of study:
- guinea pig maximisation test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- An LLNA study was not performed because there is an existing reliable study for skin sensitisation using the Guinea Pig Maximisation test method.
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Hartley
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Dutchland Laboratory Animals, Inc., USA
- Weight at study initiation: 300-500 g
- Housing: Individual animal per cage
- Diet: Purina Guinea Pig Chow ad libitum
- Water: Tap water ad libitum
- Acclimation period: minimum of one week - Route:
- other: epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- other: acetone
- Concentration / amount:
- 75% v/v for epicutaneous application
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- other: acetone
- Concentration / amount:
- 75% v/v for epicutaneous application
- No. of animals per dose:
- 5/sex (test and negative control groups)
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS: A primary skin irritation screen was used to determine the concentration of test material used during the main study. The maximum practicable concentration of the test material in the chosen vehicle was taken as 75% v/v for topical applications.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
A topical application of 75% sulfolane solution was applied to the shaved backs of 5 male and 5 female guinea pigs and covered by an occlusive dressing for six hours. The same induction procedures were carried out on a control group of five male and five female animals, except that the test material was replaced by the vehicle acetone. The test material and control vehicle were reapplied once per week for three weeks.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
Fifteen days following the last induction application, all animals were challenged by occluded application of 75% sulfolane in acetone for 4 to 6 hours. The condition of the test sites was assessed approximately 24, 48 and 72 hours later. - Challenge controls:
- The same induction procedures were carried out on a control group of five male and five female animals, except that the test material was replaced by vehicle in all doses. Challenge was identical as for test material, with application of a 75% sulfolane solution.
- Positive control substance(s):
- yes
- Remarks:
- Dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) at 0.15% and 0.1% was used for the induction and challenge phases, respectively.
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 75 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- other: 3rd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 75 %
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- other: 3rd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 72
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 75%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Dose level:
- Dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB) at 0.1% and 0.15%
- Remarks on result:
- other: See "Remarks"
- Remarks:
- Guinea pigs treated with 0.1% DNCB in acetone during the challenge phase only exhibited very slight erythema in 3/10 animals at 24 hours, which persisted in one animal at the 48-hr timepoint. Animals exposed to the same challenge concentration of DNCB, following the induction with 0.15% DNCB in acetone and a rest period, exhibited very slight to moderate to severe erythema at 24 hours, with persisted to some degree to the 48- and 72-hr timepoints in several animals. There was also slight edema in one animal at the 24-hr timepoint, and blanching in 4/10 animals at the 24-hr timepoint. It is concluded that the guinea pigs responded to hypersensitisation when a known sensitiser was used.
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of this study, repeated administration of sulfolane did not result in skin sensitisation to guinea-pigs.
- Executive summary:
Under the conditions of this study, repeated administration of sulfolane did not result in skin sensitisation to guinea-pigs.
- Endpoint:
- skin sensitisation: in vivo (non-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:
- other: Directive 84/449/EEC, Method B.6 (skin sensitisation)
- Principles of method if other than guideline:
- No information is available.
- GLP compliance:
- yes
- Type of study:
- Freund's complete adjuvant test
- Justification for non-LLNA method:
- An LLNA study was not performed because there is an existing reliable study for skin sensitisation using the Freund's complete adjuvant test method.
- Species:
- guinea pig
- Strain:
- Dunkin-Hartley
- Sex:
- male/female
- Details on test animals and environmental conditions:
- TEST ANIMALS
- Source: Harlan Porcellus
- Age at study initiation: 7-9 weeks
- Housing: up to five animals per stainless steel wire-mesh cage
- Diet: FD1, S.D.C., Special Diets Services Ltd., ad libitum
- Water: Tap water ad libitum
- Acclimation period: minimum of two weeks
ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
- Temperature (oC): 19-23oC
- Humidity (%): 30-70%
- Photoperiod (hrs dark/ hrs light): 12 hr day and 12 hr night - Route:
- intradermal and epicutaneous
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 2% m/v sulfolane in water/FCA for interdermal application; undiluted sulfolane for topical application.
- No.:
- #1
- Route:
- epicutaneous, occlusive
- Vehicle:
- water
- Concentration / amount:
- 2% m/v sulfolane in water/FCA for interdermal application; undiluted sulfolane for topical application.
- No. of animals per dose:
- 10/sex (test groups); 5/sex (control group).
- Details on study design:
- RANGE FINDING TESTS: Primary skin irritation screens – intradermal and topical application - were used to determine the concentration of test material used during the main study. The maximum practicable concentration of the test material in the chosen vehicle was taken as 2% for intradermal application and undiluted test material for topical applications.
MAIN STUDY
A. INDUCTION EXPOSURE
Two rows of intradermal injections were made, one on either side of the mid-line, of the shaved backs of guinea pigs. In the test animals: 0.1 ml of emulsified Freunds Complete Adjuvant (FCA) to the anterior sites; 0.1 ml 2% sulfolane in water to the middle sites; and 0.1 ml 2% sulfolane in FCA to the posterior sites. For the control animals: 0.1 ml FCA to the anterior sites; 0.1 ml of water (vehicle) to the middle sites; and 0.1 ml of water (vehicle) in FCA to the posterior sites. One week after induction by intradermal injection, the same area of skin was shaven and a patch of filter paper, moistened with 0.2 ml undiluted sulfolane was placed over the intradermal sites, covered with occlusive tape and held in place by elastic adhesive bandage for 48 hours. Similar patches of filter paper moistened with the vehicle alone were applied to the control group of guinea pigs. The dermal test sites were washed with water after removal of the dressings.
B. CHALLENGE EXPOSURE
Three weeks following the intradermal phase of induction, all animals were challenged by occluded application of undiluted sulfolane in acetone for. After 24 hours, the patches were removed and the challenge sites were washed with water. The condition of the test sites was assessed shortly after removal of the challenge patches, and 24 and 48 hours after removal of the challenge patches.
- Challenge controls:
- The same induction procedures were carried out on a control group of five male and five female animals, except that the test material was replaced by vehicle in all doses. Challenge was identical as for test material, with application of a 75% sulfolane solution.
- Positive control substance(s):
- not specified
- Positive control results:
- No information is available.
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 2%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- test chemical
- Dose level:
- 2%
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- Undiluted
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 2nd reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 48
- Group:
- negative control
- Dose level:
- Undiluted
- No. with + reactions:
- 0
- Total no. in group:
- 10
- Remarks on result:
- no indication of skin sensitisation
- Key result
- Reading:
- 1st reading
- Hours after challenge:
- 24
- Group:
- positive control
- Remarks on result:
- other: Positive control not specified
- Interpretation of results:
- GHS criteria not met
- Conclusions:
- Under the conditions of this study, repeated administration of sulfolane did not result in skin sensitisation to guinea-pigs.
- Executive summary:
In the guinea pig sensitisation test using the method of Magnusson and Kligman, repeated administration of sulfolane did not result in skin sensitisation to guinea pigs.
Referenceopen allclose all
Guinea pigs receiving 75% sulfolane in acetone during the challenge phase only and those animals exposed to the same challenge dose following the induction with 75% sulfolane in acetone exhibited no dermal irritation at any timepoint.
Positive control: Guinea pigs treated with 0.1% DNCB in acetone during the challenge phase only exhibited very slight erythema in 3/10 animals at 24 hours, which persisted in one animal at the 48-hr timepoint. Animals exposed to the same challenge concentration of DNCB, following the induction with 0.15% DNCB in acetone and a rest period, exhibited very slight to moderate to severe erythema at 24 hours, with persisted to some degree to the 48- and 72-hr timepoints in several animals. There was also slight edema in one animal at the 24-hr timepoint, and blanching in 4/10 animals at the 24-hr timepoint. It is concluded that the guinea pigs responded to hypersensitisation when a known sensitiser was used.
Guinea pigs receiving undiluted sulfolane during the challenge phase only and those animals exposed to the same challenge dose following the induction with a single intradermal injection of 2% sulfolane in water/Freund’s adjuvant plus a topical application of undiluted sulfolane exhibited no dermal irritation at any timepoint.
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no adverse effect observed (not sensitising)
- Additional information:
Dermal Sensitisation
In a Freund's complete adjuvant test (SRC, 1993), a test group of 20 guinea pigs received 2% sulfolane in vehicle(water) or Freund's adjuvant for intradermal induction, followed by percutaneous induction with undiluted sulfolane under occlusive dressing for 48 hours. For challenge, undiluted sulfolane (in acetone) in vehicle was applied to the intact skin for 24 hours (occlusive). The challenge in no response in all test animals.
Hazleton (1982a) reported in a guinea pig maximisation test that sulfolane was not a dermal sensitiser to guinea pigs. A test group of 10 animals received a topical application of 75% sulfolane in vehicle (acetone) under occlusive dressing for six hours, once per week for three weeks. All animals were challenged by occluded application of 75% sulfolane in acetone for 4 to 6 hours. There was no irritation response in any of the test animals.
Respiratory sensitisation
Endpoint conclusion
- Endpoint conclusion:
- no study available
- Additional information:
Respiratory Sensitisation
No animal or human data have been found with regard to respiratory sensitisation.
Justification for classification or non-classification
Dermal Sensitisation
Classification proposal regarding dermal sensitisation: GHS/CLP: None.
Respiratory Sensitisation
Although there are no specific data on respiratory respiration, there is no evidence that classification is warranted under GHS/CLP.
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.