Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1,1-diethoxyheptane, CAS Registry Number 688-82-4

Api, A. M. ; Belsito, D. ; Botelho, D. ; Bruze, M. LU ; Burton, G. A. ; Buschmann, J. ; Dagli, M. L. ; Date, M. ; Dekant, W. and Deodhar, C. , et al. (2018) In Food and Chemical Toxicology 122(Suppl. 1). p.558-565
Abstract

The use of this material under current conditions is supported by existing information. 1,1-Diethoxyheptane was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data from the read-across analog octanal dimethyl acetal (CAS # 10022-28-3) show that 1,1-diethoxyheptane is not expected to be genotoxic. Based on the application of the non-reactive DST, 1,1-diethoxyheptane does not present a concern for skin sensitization. The repeated dose, developmental and reproductive, and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were completed using the TTC for a Cramer Class I material (0.03 mg/kg/day, 0.03 mg/kg/day, and 1.4... (More)

The use of this material under current conditions is supported by existing information. 1,1-Diethoxyheptane was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data from the read-across analog octanal dimethyl acetal (CAS # 10022-28-3) show that 1,1-diethoxyheptane is not expected to be genotoxic. Based on the application of the non-reactive DST, 1,1-diethoxyheptane does not present a concern for skin sensitization. The repeated dose, developmental and reproductive, and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were completed using the TTC for a Cramer Class I material (0.03 mg/kg/day, 0.03 mg/kg/day, and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on UV spectra. The environmental endpoints were evaluated; 1,1-diethoxyheptane was found not to be PBT as per the IFRA Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., PEC/PNEC), are <1.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and , et al. (More)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and (Less)
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Food and Chemical Toxicology
volume
122
issue
Suppl. 1
pages
558 - 565
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • scopus:85054608406
  • pmid:30300725
ISSN
0278-6915
DOI
10.1016/j.fct.2018.10.019
language
English
LU publication?
no
id
9b15a2a7-e648-4ae2-a42d-749fcf54f4eb
date added to LUP
2018-12-10 09:48:19
date last changed
2024-10-01 12:13:54
@article{9b15a2a7-e648-4ae2-a42d-749fcf54f4eb,
  abstract     = {{<p>The use of this material under current conditions is supported by existing information. 1,1-Diethoxyheptane was evaluated for genotoxicity, repeated dose toxicity, reproductive toxicity, local respiratory toxicity, phototoxicity/photoallergenicity, skin sensitization, and environmental safety. Data from the read-across analog octanal dimethyl acetal (CAS # 10022-28-3) show that 1,1-diethoxyheptane is not expected to be genotoxic. Based on the application of the non-reactive DST, 1,1-diethoxyheptane does not present a concern for skin sensitization. The repeated dose, developmental and reproductive, and local respiratory toxicity endpoints were completed using the TTC for a Cramer Class I material (0.03 mg/kg/day, 0.03 mg/kg/day, and 1.4 mg/day, respectively). The phototoxicity/photoallergenicity endpoint was completed based on UV spectra. The environmental endpoints were evaluated; 1,1-diethoxyheptane was found not to be PBT as per the IFRA Environmental Standards, and its risk quotients, based on its current volume of use in Europe and North America (i.e., PEC/PNEC), are &lt;1.</p>}},
  author       = {{Api, A. M. and Belsito, D. and Botelho, D. and Bruze, M. and Burton, G. A. and Buschmann, J. and Dagli, M. L. and Date, M. and Dekant, W. and Deodhar, C. and Francis, M. and Fryer, A. D. and Jones, L. and Joshi, K. and La Cava, S. and Lapczynski, A. and Liebler, D. C. and O'Brien, D. and Patel, A. and Penning, T. M. and Ritacco, G. and Romine, J. and Sadekar, N. and Salvito, D. and Schultz, T. W. and Sipes, I. G. and Sullivan, G. and Thakkar, Y. and Tokura, Y. and Tsang, S.}},
  issn         = {{0278-6915}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{Suppl. 1}},
  pages        = {{558--565}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier}},
  series       = {{Food and Chemical Toxicology}},
  title        = {{RIFM fragrance ingredient safety assessment, 1,1-diethoxyheptane, CAS Registry Number 688-82-4}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2018.10.019}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.fct.2018.10.019}},
  volume       = {{122}},
  year         = {{2018}},
}