DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NIOSH Skin Notation (SK) Profiles

Ethyl Acrylate

[CAS No. 140-88-5]
ii Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate

This document is in the public domain and may be freely 

copied or reprinted.

Disclaimer

Mention of any company or product does not constitute endorsement by the National Institute 

for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). In addition, citations to websites external to 

NIOSH do not constitute NIOSH endorsement of the sponsoring organizations or their programs or products. Furthermore, NIOSH is not responsible for the content of these websites. 

Ordering Information

To receive documents or other information about occupational safety and health topics, contact 

NIOSH:

Telephone: 1–800–CDC–INFO (1–800–232–4636)

TTY: 1–888–232–6348

E-mail: cdcinfo@cdc.gov

or visit the NIOSH website at www.cdc.gov/niosh.

For a monthly update on news at NIOSH, subscribe to NIOSH eNews by visiting 

www.cdc.gov/niosh/eNews.

Suggested Citation

NIOSH [2014]. NIOSH skin notation profiles: ethyl acrylate. By Hudson NL, Dotson GS. 

Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) 

Publication No. 2014-144

DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2014-144

August 2014

Safer • Healthier • PeopleTM
Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate iii

Foreword

As the largest organ of the body, the skin performs multiple critical functions, such as serving 

as the primary barrier to the external environment. For this reason, the skin is often exposed to 

potentially hazardous agents, including chemicals, which may contribute to the onset of a spectrum of adverse health effects ranging from localized damage (e.g., irritant contact dermatitis 

and corrosion) to induction of immune-mediated responses (e.g., allergic contact dermatitis 

and pulmonary responses), or systemic toxicity (e.g., neurotoxicity and hepatoxicity). Understanding the hazards related to skin contact with chemicals is a critical component of modern occupational safety and health programs. In 2009, the National Institute for Occupational 

Safety and Health (NIOSH) published 

Current Intelligence Bulletin (CIB) 61: A Strategy for Assigning New NIOSH Skin Notations 

[NIOSH 2009-147]. This document provides the scientific rationale and framework for the 

assignment of multiple hazard-specific skin notations (SK) that clearly distinguish between 

the systemic effects, direct (localized) effects, and immune-mediated responses caused by skin 

contact with chemicals. The key step within assignment of the hazard-specific SK is the determination of the hazard potential of the substance, or its potential for causing adverse health 

effects as a result of skin exposure. This determination entails a health hazard identification 

process that involves us e of the following:

• Scientific data on the physicochemical properties of a chemical

• Data on human exposures and health effects

• Empirical data from in vivo and in vitro laboratory testing

• Computational techniques, including predictive algorithms and mathematical 

models that describe a selected process (e.g., skin permeation) by means of analytical or numerical methods. 

This Skin Notation Profile provides the SK assignments and supportive data for ethyl acrylate.

In particular, this document evaluates and summarizes the literature describing the hazard potential of the substance and its assessment according to the scientific rationale and framework 

outlined in CIB 61. In meeting this objective, this Skin Notation Profile intends to inform the 

audience—mostly occupational health practitioners, researchers, policy- and decision-makers, 

employers, and workers in potentially hazardous workplaces—so that improved risk-management practices may be developed to better protect workers from the risks of skin contact with 

the chemicals of interest.

John Howard, M.D.

Director, National Institute for 

 Occupational Safety and Health

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
This page intentionally left blank.
Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate v

Contents

Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

Glossary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 General Substance Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.2 Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.3 Overview of SK Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2 Systemic Toxicity from Skin Exposure (SK: SYS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

3 Direct Effects on Skin (SK: DIR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

4 Immune-mediated Responses (SK: SEN) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Appendix: Calculation of the SI Ratio For Ethyl acrylate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
vi Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate

Abbreviations

ACGIH American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists 

CIB Current Intelligence Bulletin

cm2 square centimeter(s)

cm/hour centimeter(s) per hour

DEREK Deductive Estimation of Risk from Existing Knowledge

DIR skin notation indicating the potential for direct effects to the skin following 

contact with a chemical

EC European Commission 

EC3 Effective concentration inducing a 3-fold increase in proliferation of lymph 

node cells 

FCAT Freund’s complete adjuvant test

GHS Globally Harmonized System for Classification and Labelling of Chemicals

GPMT guinea pig maximization test

IARC International Agency for Research on Cancer

(IRR) subnotation of SK: DIR indicating the potential for a chemical to be a skin 

irritant following exposure to the skin

k

aq coefficient in the watery epidermal layer 

k

p skin permeation coefficient 

kpol coefficient in the protein fraction of the stratum corneum

k

psc permeation coefficient in the lipid fraction of the stratum corneum 

LD50 dose resulting in 50% mortality in the exposed population

LDLo dermal lethal dose

LLNA local lymph node assay

LOAEL lowest-observed-adverse-effect level 

log KOW base-10 logarithm of a substance’s octanol–water partition

M molarity

m3 cubic meter(s)

μmoles micromoles

μL microliter(s)

mg milligram(s)

mg/kg milligram(s) per kilogram body weight

mg/kg-day milligrams per kilogram body weight per day

mg/m3 milligram(s) per cubic meter

mL milliliter(s)

MW molecular weight

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

NOAEL no-observed-adverse-effect level

NTP National Toxicology Program

OEL occupational exposure limit
Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate vii

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

REL recommended exposure limit

RF retention factor 

SEN skin notation indicating the potential for immune-mediated reactions following 

exposure of the skin

SI ratio ratio of skin dose to inhalation dose

SK skin notation

SW solubility 

SYS skin notation indicating the potential for systemic toxicity following exposure of 

the skin

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency 

μmoles micromoles 

μL microliters
viii Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate

Glossary 

Absorption—The transport of a chemical from the outer surface of the skin into both 

the skin and systemic circulation (including penetration, permeation, and resorption). 

Acute exposure—Contact with a chemical that occurs once or for only a short period 

of time. 

Cancer—Any one of a group of diseases that occurs when cells in the body become 

abnormal and grow or multiply out of control. 

Contaminant—A chemical that is (1) unintentionally present within a neat substance 

or mixture at a concentration less than 1.0% or (2) recognized as a potential carcinogen 

and present within a neat substance or mixture at a concentration less than 0.1%. 

Cutaneous (or percutaneous)—Referring to the skin (or through the skin). 

Dermal—Referring to the skin. 

Dermal contact—Contact with (touching) the skin. 

Direct effects—Localized, non-immune-mediated adverse health effects on the skin, 

including corrosion, primary irritation, changes in skin pigmentation, and reduction/

disruption of the skin barrier integrity, occurring at or near the point of contact with 

chemicals. 

Immune-mediated responses—Responses mediated by the immune system, including 

allergic responses. 

Sensitization—A specific immune-mediated response that develops following exposure 

to a chemical, which, upon re-exposure, can lead to allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) 

or other immune-mediated diseases such as asthma, depending on the site and route of 

re-exposure. 

Substance—A chemical. 

Systemic effects—Systemic toxicity associated with skin absorption of chemicals after 

exposure of the skin.
Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate ix

Acknowledgments

This document was developed by the Education and Information Division (Paul Schulte, Ph.D., 

Director). G. Scott Dotson, Ph.D., was the project officer for this document, assisted in great 

part by Naomi Hudson, Dr.P.H., MPH, Matt Dahm, M.Sc., and Clayton B’Hymer, Ph.D. 

The basis for this document was a report (Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment [TERA]) 

contracted by NIOSH and prepared by Bernard Gadagbui, Ph.D., and Andrew Maier, Ph.D. 

For their contribution to the technical content and review of this document, special acknowledgment is given to the following NIOSH personnel:

Denver Field Office

Eric Esswein, M.Sc.

Division of Applied Research and Technology 

John Snawder, Ph.D.

Mark Toraason, Ph.D.

Division of Respiratory Disease Studies 

Gregory A. Day, Ph.D. 

Aleksander Stefaniak, Ph.D. 

Division of Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations, and Field Studies

Todd Niemeier, M.Sc.

Aaron Sussell, Ph.D. 

Loren Tapp, M.D. 

Education and Information Division

Devin Baker, M.Ed.

Charles L. Geraci, Ph.D.

Thomas J. Lentz, Ph.D.

Richard Niemeier, Ph.D.

Sudha Pandalai. M.D., Ph.D. 

Health Effects Laboratory Division

Stacey Anderson, Ph.D. 

H. Fredrick Frasch, Ph.D. 

Vic Johnson, Ph.D. 

Michael Luster, Ph.D.

Anna Shvedova, Ph.D.

Paul Siegel, Ph.D.

Berran Yucesoy, Ph.D. 

National Personal Protection Technology Laboratory

Heinz Ahlers, M.Sc.

Angie Shepherd

For their contribution to the technical content and review of this document, special acknowledgment is given to the following CDC personnel:

Office of Surveillance, Epidemiology and Laboratory Services/Epidemiology 

and Analysis Program Office 

Barbara Landreth, M.A.
x Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate

In addition, special appreciation is expressed to the following individuals for serving as independent, external reviewers and providing comments that contributed to the development or 

improvement of this document:

Shane Stephen Que Hee, M.Sc., Ph.D., University of California at Los Angeles, School of 

Public Health, Los Angeles, CA

Glenn Sipes, Ph.D., University of Arizona, College of Medicine, Tucson, AZ

G. Frank Gerberick, Ph.D., The Procter and Gamble Company, Cincinnati, OH

Dori Germolec, Ph.D., National Toxicology Program, National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle, NC

Ben Hayes, M.D., Ph.D., Division of Dermatology, Vanderbilt School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 

Jennifer Sahmel, M.Sc., CIH, ChemRisk, Boulder, CO

James Taylor, M.D., Industrial Dermatology, The Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate 1

Ethyl acrylate

1.2 Purpose 

This Skin Notation Profile presents (1) a brief 

summary of epidemiological and toxicological 

data associated with skin contact with ethyl 

acrylate and (2) the rationale behind the hazard-specific skin notation (SK) assignment 

for ethyl acrylate. The SK assignment is based 

on the scientific rationale and logic outlined 

in the Current Intelligence Bulletin (CIB) 61: A 

Strategy for Assigning New NIOSH Skin Notations [NIOSH 2009]. The summarized information and health hazard assessment are limited to an evaluation of the potential health 

effects of dermal exposure to ethyl acrylate. A 

literature search was conducted through May 

2014 to identify information on ethyl acrylate, 

including but not limited to data relating to 

its toxicokinetics, acute toxicity, repeated-dose 

systemic toxicity, carcinogenicity, biological 

system/function–specific effects (including 

reproductive and developmental effects and 

immunotoxicity), irritation, and sensitization. 

Information was considered from studies of 

humans, animals, or appropriate modeling 

systems that are relevant to assessing the effects of dermal exposure to ethyl acrylate. 

1.3 Overview of SK Assignment

Ethyl acrylate is potentially capable of causing numerous adverse health effects following 

skin contact. A critical review of available data 

has resulted in the following SK assignment 

for ethyl acrylate: SK: SYS-DIR (COR)-

SEN. Table 1 provides an overview of the 

critical effects and data used to develop the 

SK assignment for ethyl acrylate. 

1 Introduction 

1.1 General Substance Information

Chemical: Ethyl acrylate

CAS No: 140-88-5

Molecular weight (MW): 100.1

Molecular formula: CH2=CHCOOC2H2

Structural formula:

Synonyms:

Ethyl acrylate (inhibited); Ethyl ester of 

acrylic acid; Ethyl propenoate

Uses:

Ethyl acrylate is used primarily as a chemical 

intermediate during the production of polymers including resins, plastics, and rubber 

[HSDB 2010].

Table 1. Summary of the SK assignment for ethyl acrylate

Skin notation Critical effect Data available

SK: SYS Acute toxicity Sufficient animal data

SK: DIR (COR) Skin corrosion Sufficient animal data

SK: SEN Skin allergy Sufficient human and animal data
2 Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate

Ethyl acrylate

2 Systemic Toxicity from Skin 

Exposure (SK: SYS)

No in vivo or in vitro toxicokinetic data that 

estimated the dermal absorption of ethyl acrylate following dermal exposure were identified. Some evidence of absorption through 

the skin was provided by acute dermal toxicity studies in which dermal application of the 

substance resulted in the deaths of rats, mice, 

and rabbits [Pozzani 1949; Treon et al. 1949; 

Sokal et al. 1980; Rohm and Haas Company 

1986]. The potential of ethyl acrylate to pose 

a skin absorption hazard was also evaluated, 

with use of a predictive algorithm for estimating and evaluating the health hazards of dermal exposure to substances [NIOSH 2009]. 

The evaluation method compares an estimated dose accumulated in the body from skin 

absorption and an estimated dose from respiratory absorption associated with a reference 

occupational exposure limit. On the basis of 

this algorithm, a ratio of the skin dose to the 

inhalation dose (SI ratio) of 1.09 was calculated for ethyl acrylate. An SI ratio of ≥0.1 indicates that skin absorption may significantly 

contribute to the overall body burden of a 

substance [NIOSH 2009]; therefore, ethyl 

acrylate is considered to be absorbed through 

the skin following dermal exposure. Additional information on the SI ratio and the 

variables used in its calculation are included in 

the appendix. 

No dermal lethal doses (LDLo) of ethyl acrylate for humans have been identified. However, dermal LD50 (the dose resulting in 50% 

mortality in the exposed animals) values of 

1200-2000 milligrams per kilogram body 

weight (mg/kg) in rabbits [Pozzani et al. 1949; 

Dow Chemical Company 1957; Bio/dynamics Inc. 1990; Mellon Institute 1972; Soka 

et al. 1980], and 1800 mg/kg to greater than 

5000 mg/kg in rats [Rohm and Haas Company 1986; Soka et al. 1980] have been reported. Because the reported acute dermal LD50

values for rabbits are lower than the critical 

dermal LD50 value of 2000 mg/kg that identifies chemical substances with the potential for 

acute dermal toxicity [NIOSH 2009], ethyl 

acrylate demonstrates acute toxicity following 

dermal exposure.

No systemic effects associated with occupational exposures to ethyl acrylate or standard, repeat-dose studies in animals were 

identified. However, a mouse skin-painting 

study evaluated the systemic effects of ethyl 

acrylate. In this study, Nylander-French and 

French [1998] applied 60, 300 or 600 micromoles (μmoles) of ethyl acrylate in 200 microliters (μL) acetone vehicle to the skin of female transgenic mice, 3 times per week for 20 

weeks. Although no statistical analysis of the 

systemic effects observed was provided, graphical representation indicated that the LowestObserved-Adverse-Effect Level (LOAEL) 

for ethyl acrylate that produced systemic 

toxicity, as evidenced by depression of body 

weights, was 60 μmoles/mouse [corresponding to 200 milligrams per kilogram per day 

(mg/kg-day)] [Nylander-French and French 

1998]. Acetone has been noted as a mild skin 

irritant after long periods of exposure [Smyth 

et al. 1962], which may compromise the skin 

such that more ethyl acrylate may be absorbed 

than if another vehicle had been used. A NoObserved-Adverse-Effect Level (NOAEL) 

of 300 μmoles/mouse [corresponding to 1000 

mg/kg-day] was also identified in the study. 

Based on this study, ethyl acrylate is systemically available and toxic because the LOAEL 

and NOAEL is at or lower than the critical 

dermal NOAEL value of 1000 mg/kg-day 

that identifies chemical substances with the 

potential for repeated-dose dermal toxicity 

[NIOSH 2009].

No standard toxicity or specialty studies 

evaluating biological system/function specific 

effects (including reproductive and developmental effects and immunotoxicity) following 

dermal exposure to ethyl acrylate were identified. Few studies were identified that evaluated the carcinogenicity potential of ethyl 

acrylate following dermal exposure. Union 

Carbide Corporation [1982] and DePass et 

al. [1984] evaluated the dermal carcinogenic 

potential of ethyl acrylate by applying 25 μL 
Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate 3

Ethyl acrylate

of the undiluted substance [corresponding to 

23 mg] to the backs of male C3H/HeJ mice 

three times a week throughout the lifetime 

of the animals and observed no formation of 

skin tumors and reported no significant effects on survival. Table 2 summarizes carcinogenic designations of multiple governmental and nongovernmental organizations for 

ethyl acrylate. 

No studies that evaluated the dermal absorption of ethyl acrylate were identified. However, 

mathematical modeling, several dermal acute 

toxicity studies [Pozzani et al. 1949; Treon 

et al. 1949; Dow Chemical Company 1957; 

Sokal et al. 1980; Bio/dynamics Inc. 1990], 

and a repeat-dose study [Nylander-French 

and French 1998] indicate that the substance 

is absorbed through the skin and can cause 

systemic toxicity including bodyweight depression. Therefore, on the basis of the data 

for this assessment, ethyl acrylate is assigned 

the SK: SYS notation. 

3 Direct Effects on Skin 

(SK: DIR)

No human or animal in vivo studies for corrosivity of ethyl acrylate or in vitro tests for 

corrosivity using human or animal skin models or in vitro tests of skin integrity using cadaver skin were identified. No standard irritation studies were identified for humans upon 

which the skin corrosion or irritation potential 

of ethyl acrylate can be evaluated. Hazardous 

polymerization of ethyl acrylate may occur if 

it is subject to heat, light or peroxides, which 

may result in containers to violently, rupture 

or burst [HSDB 2010]. As such, ethyl acrylate may potentially have extensive contact 

with the skin. 

Several studies conducted according to standard methods were identified in animals that 

show ethyl acrylate is corrosive or a skin irritant. An in vitro study was identified that assessed the irritating potential for ethyl acrylate 

using the MATREX LDM (Living Dermal 

Model) and TESTSKIN LSE (Living Skin 

Equivalent)-high human dermis models and 

also Tokumura reported an EC50 (concentration of the compound that caused death in half 

of the culture cells) of 6700–7500 parts per 

million (ppm) [corresponding to 6700–7500 

mg/kg] in the LDM and LSE models, respectively. Rohm and Haas Company [1991] 

reported that ethyl acrylate was corrosive to 

the skin of rabbits following application of 0.5 

milliliters (mL) [corresponding to 450 mg/

Table 2. Summary of the carcinogenic designations* for ethyl acrylate 

by numerous governmental and nongovernmental organizations

Organization Skin hazard designation

NIOSH [2005] Potential occupational carcinogen

NTP [2011] No designation

USEPA [2014] No designation

European Parliament [2008] No designation

IARC [2012] Group 2B: Possibly carcinogenic to humans

EC [2014]† No designation

ACGIH [2001] Group A4: Not classifiable as a human carcinogen

ACGIH = American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists; EC = European Commission, Joint Research, Institute for 

Health and Consumer Protection; IARC = International Agency for Research on Cancer; NIOSH = National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; NTP = National Toxicology Program; USEPA = United States Environmental Protection Agency.

*The listed cancer designations were based on data from nondermal (such as oral or inhalation) exposure rather than dermal exposure.

†

Date accessed.
4 Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate

Ethyl acrylate

kg] of undiluted ethyl acrylate to the shaved 

intact skin for 4 hours under occlusive conditions. Application of 25 μL [corresponding to 

23 mg] of undiluted ethyl acrylate to the skin 

of mice three times per week for the life of 

the mouse caused epidermal necrosis, keratin 

necrosis, dermal fibrosis, and hyperkeratosis 

[Union Carbide Corporation 1982; DePass 

et al. 1984], indicating that prolonged and 

repeated exposure to the substance can lead 

to severe skin effects (skin corrosion). Earlier 

studies conducted by Pozzani et al. [1949] 

and Dow Chemical Company [1957] also 

showed that repeated, prolonged contact with 

the skin causes tissue damage. Other studies reported that undiluted ethyl acrylate applied occluded to rabbit skin was moderately 

to severely irritating [Treon et al. 1949; Dow 

Chemical Company 1957; Safepharm Laboratories Limited 1984]. Applications under 

unoccluded conditions were slightly irritating [Pozzani et al. 1949]. However, Industrial 

Bio-Test Laboratories Inc. [1972] found ethyl 

acrylate applied undiluted under occlusive 

conditions to abraded or intact skin of rabbits 

to be non-corrosive after rabbits were exposed 

to ethyl acrylate for four hours. Ethyl acrylate 

at concentrations up to 30% did not induce 

significant irritancy as measured by ear swelling in mice [Hayes and Meade 1999]. Tokumura et al. [2010] assessed dermal irritation, 

using the Draize method, after applying ethyl 

acrylate in occluded conditions to the shaved 

backs in rabbits for 24 hours. The lowest erythema dose (the concentration at which the 

compound caused very slight erythema) for 

ethyl acrylate was 1500 ppm [corresponding 

to 1500 mg/kg]. These studies indicate that 

the severity of irritation and tissue damage 

is dependent upon the concentration, duration, and frequency of exposure. The structure 

activity relationship model, Deductive Estimation of Risk from Existing Knowledge 

(DEREK) for Windows, predicted ethyl acrylate to be negative for skin irritation.

In a short-term carcinogenicity skin-painting study in female Tg.AC mice, NylanderFrench and French [1998] found no statistically significant increase in skin papillomas 

when mice were administered doses of 60–600 

μmoles/200 μL of ethyl acrylate in acetone 

(corresponding to 200 mg to 2000 mg/kgday) 3 times per week for 20 weeks compared 

to acetone controls. In another transgenic 

mice study, Tennant et al. [1995] found topically applied ethyl acrylate (30 mg, 3 times per 

week for 20 weeks) to be inactive. These studies suggest that ethyl acrylate is not carcinogenic under the conditions of the tests.

Although human data were not located, sufficient data were identified from standard irritation tests. There are sufficient data to indicate 

that ethyl acrylate is an irritant, and prolonged 

and repeated dermal exposure studies to the 

undiluted substance in animal’s causes skin 

corrosion [Pozzani et al. 1949; Treon et al. 

1949; Dow Chemical Company 1957; Union 

Carbide Corporation 1982; DePass et al. 

1984; Safepharm Laboratories Limited, 

1984; Rohm and Haas Company 1991]. On 

the basis of the assembled data, ethyl acrylate 

is assigned the SK: DIR (COR) notation. 

4 Immune-mediated 

Responses (SK: SEN)

Several studies were identified that evaluated the potential of ethyl acrylate to cause 

skin sensitization in humans and animals. 

In humans, Kanerva et al. [1997] compiled statistics on 10 years of patch testing with 30 (meth)acrylates and reported 

the frequency of allergic reactions caused 

by ethyl acrylate (0.1% ) as 16/192 (8.3%) 

during 1985–1995, 9/124 (7.3%) from 

1985–1990, and 7/68 (10.3%) during 

1991–1995. In an earlier study, Kanerva 

et al. [1988] reported that 3/24 patients 

were sensitized to ethyl acrylate (0.5% in 

petrolatum). Drucker and Pratt [2011] 

conducted a retrospective chart review of 

patients attending a contact dermatitis 

clinic in Ontario, Canada and reported 

28 (64%) patients had positive reactions 

when patch tested to ethyl acrylate. Tucker and Beck [1999] patch tested patients 

with a history of exposure (occupational 
Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate 5

Ethyl acrylate

and non-occupational) to (meth) acrylates 

with Chemotechniqes series and to their 

own suspected products when possible. 

Out of 255 patients tested, 22 (8.6%) were 

sensitized to ethyl acrylate at a concentration of 0.5%. Bjorkner et al. [1980] reported two of six patients patch tested with 

ethyl acrylate showed positive allergic reactions. A manicurist who presented with 

dermatitis tested positive to ethyl acrylate 

and other acrylates when patch tested using the International Contact Dermatitis 

Research Group (ICDRG) recommendations [Torres et al. 2005]. Brandao [2001] 

described a nurse who, after developing 

skin lesions, edema, and erythema from 

working with bone cement, showed crossreactivity to (meth) acrylates, including 

ethyl acrylate. Pérez-Formoso et al. [2010] 

noted that 1 of 8 patients patch tested to 

acrylates had a positive reaction for ethyl 

acrylate.

In guinea pigs, ethyl acrylate (greater than 

99% pure) was reported to be a skin sensitizer 

in Freund’s complete adjuvant test (FCAT) 

[van der Walle et al. 1982a, 1982b], but not a 

sensitizer in the guinea pig maximization test. 

Warbrick et al. [2001] conducted murine local 

lymph node assays and reported a maximum 

stimulation index of 5.01 in response to ethyl 

acrylate when a concentration of 50% was 

applied, with indices of less than 3 reported 

when lower concentrations (10 and 25%) were 

applied. Based on these results, these investigators estimated the effective concentration 

(EC3) value (%) [the concentration of chemical required to induce a stimulation index of 

three in LLNA] to be 28.7%. Dearman et 

al. [2007] reported an EC3 value of 36.8%, 

indicating ethyl acrylate is a skin sensitizer. 

However, in an earlier study, ethyl acrylate 

at concentrations up to 30% did not increase 

lymph node cell proliferation over controls 

in the LLNA [Hayes and Meade 1999]. The 

same concentrations of ethyl acrylate did 

not exhibit allergic potential as measured 

by the mouse ear swelling test [Hayes and 

Meade 1999]. These investigators also found 

no cross-reactivity between ethyl acrylate, 

n-butyl acrylate or trimethylol propane triacrylate. DEREK predicted ethyl acrylate to be a

 plausible skin sensitizer.

Based on numerous reports of sensitization in 

humans [Bjorkner et al. 1980; Kanerva et al. 

1988, 1997; Tucker and Beck 1999; Drucker 

and Pratt 2011], and the weight of evidence 

from standard skin sensitization tests in animals including FCAT and LLNA [van der 

Walle 1982a, 1982b; Warbrick et al. 2001; 

Dearman et al. 2007], supported by the prediction from structure-activity relationship 

model, this assessment concludes that sufficient data exist to conclude that ethyl acrylate 

is a skin sensitizer in humans and animals. 

Therefore, on the basis of the data for this assessment, ethyl acrylate is assigned the SK: 

SEN notation. 

5 Summary

Although no studies that evaluated the dermal absorption of ethyl acrylate were identified, mathematical modeling, several acute 

dermal [Pozzani 1949; Treon et al. 1949; 

Dow Chemical Company 1957; Sokal et al. 

1980; Bio/dynamics Inc. 1990], and repeatdose [Nylander-French and French 1998]

toxicity studies show that the substance is 

absorbed through the skin and can cause systemic toxicity including body weight depression. No studies were identified that evaluated 

the potential of ethyl acrylate to cause skin 

effects in humans following dermal exposure. 

However, sufficient data were identified from 

standard skin irritation tests and prolonged 

and repeated-dose studies that showed that 

the undiluted substance is corrosive to the 

skin of rabbits and mice [Pozzani et al. 1949; 

Union Carbide Corporation 1982; DePass 

et al. 1984; Rohm and Haas Company 1991], 

while the diluted substance tends to be irritating. Numerous reports of skin sensitization in 

humans [Bjorkner et al. 1980; Kanerva et al. 

1988, 1997; Tucker and Beck 1999; Drucker 

and Pratt 2011], and the weight of evidence 

from standard skin sensitization tests in animals (FCAT and LLNA) [van der Walle 
6 Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate

Ethyl acrylate

1982a, 1982b; Warbrick et al. 2001; Dearman et al. 2007], supported by the prediction 

from structure-activity relationship model, 

demonstrate that ethyl acrylate is a skin sensitizer in both humans and animals. Therefore, 

on the basis of these assessments, ethyl acrylate is assigned a composite skin notation of 

SK: SYS-DIR (COR)-SEN. 

Table 3 summarizes the skin hazard designations for ethyl acrylate previously issued by 

NIOSH and other organizations. The equivalent dermal designations for ethyl acrylate, 

according to the Global Harmonization System (GHS) of Classification and Labelling 

of Chemicals, are Acute Toxicity Category 4 

(Hazard statement: Harmful in contact with 

skin), Skin Irritation Category 2 (Hazard 

statement: Causes skin irritation), and Skin 

Sensitization Category 1 (Hazard statement: 

May cause an allergic skin reaction) [European Parliament 2008].

References

ACGIH (American Conference of Governmental 

Industrial Hygienists) [2001]. Ethyl acrylate. 

In: Documentation of threshold limit values 

and biological exposure indices 7th ed., Vol. 

2. Cincinnati, OH: American Conference of 

Governmental Industrial Hygienists.

Bio/dynamics Inc. [1990]. Acute dermal toxicity study in rabbits with ethyl acrylate. Bio/

dynamics Inc., Project #4361-87 for Hoechst 

Celanese Corporation. Submitted to the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency under TSCA 

Section 8D. OTS #0524345. Document #86-

900000468.

Bjorkner B, Dahlquist I, Fregert S [1980]. Allergic Contact Dermatitis From Acrylates in 

Ultraviolet Curing Inks. Contact Dermatitis 

6(6):405–409.

Brandao FM [2001]. Palmar contact dermatitis 

due to (meth)acrylates. Contact dermatitis 

44(3):186–187.

Dearman RJ, Betts CJ, Farr C, McLaughlin J, Berdasco N, Wiench K, Kimber I [2007]. Comparative analysis of skin sensitization potency 

of acrylates (methyl acrylate, ethyl acrylate, 

butyl acrylate, and ethylhexyl acrylate) using 

the local lymph node assay. Contact Dermatitis 

57(4):242–247.

DePass LR [1984]. Dermal oncogenicity bioassays 

of acrylic acid, ethyl acrylate, and butyl acrylate. 

J Toxicol Environ Health 14:115–120.

Dow Chemical Company [1957]. Results of the 

range finding toxicological tests on ethyl acrylate. Midland, MI: Dow Chemical Company. 

On file with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under TSCA Section 8D. OTS 

#0520693. Document #86-890001181S. 

Drucker AM, Pratt MD [2011] Acrylate contact 

allergy: Patient characteristics and evaluation of 

screening allergens. Dermatitis 22(2): 98–101. 

EC (European Commission) [ND]. Ethyl acrylate. 

In: EINICS (European Inventory of Exisiting 

Commerical Chemical Substances), http://esis.

jrc.ec.europa.eu/. Accessed: 05-01-14.

European Parliament, Council of the European 

Union [2008]. Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 

of the European Parliament and of the Council 

Table 3. Summary of previous skin hazard designations for ethyl acrylate

Organization Skin hazard designation

NIOSH [2005] [skin]

OSHA [2014]* [skin]: Potential for dermal absorption

ACGIH [2001] No designation

EC [2014]* R21: Harmful if in contact with skin

R38: Irritating to skin

R43: May cause sensitization by skin contact

ACGIH = American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists; EC = European Commission, Joint Research, Institute 

for Health and Consumer Protection; NIOSH = National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; OSHA = Occupational 

Safety and Health Administration.

*Date accessed.
Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate 7

Ethyl acrylate

of 16 December 2008 on classification, labeling and packaging of substances and mixtures, 

amending and repealing Directives 67/548/

EEC and 1999/45/EC, and amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006. OJEU, Off J 

Eur Union L353:1–1355, http://eurex.europa.eu/

LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:35

3:0001:1355:EN:PDF. Accessed: 05-01-14.

Hayes BB, Meade BJ [1999]. Contact sensitivity 

to selected acrykate compounds in B6C3F1 

mice: relative potency, cross reactivity, and 

comparison of test methods. Drug and Chemical Toxicology 22(3):491–506.

HSDB (Hazardous Substances Data Bank) 

[2011]. Ethyl acrylate. In: HSDB (Hazardous Substances Data Bank), http://toxnet.nlm.

nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/htmlgen?HSDB. Accessed: 

05-01-14.

IARC (International Agency for Research on 

Cancer) [2012]. Agents reviewed by the IARC 

monographs. In: IARC monographs on the 

evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans, 

http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/

PDFs/index.php. Accessed: 05-01-14.

Industrial Bio-test Laboratories Inc. [1972]. Primary skin irritation tests with eighteen materials in albino rabbits. Northbrook, IL: Industrial 

Bio-test Laboratories Inc., IBT #A1854, report 

to Celanese Chemical Company. On file with 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under TSCA Section 8D. OTS #0520783. Document #86-890001277.

Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R [1988]. Sensitization to patch test acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 18:10–15.

Kanerva L, Jolanki R, Estlander T [1997]. 10 years 

of patch testing with the (meth)acrylate series. 

Contact Dermatitis 37:255–258.

Mellon Institute [1972]. (Methylcarbanyl)ethyl 

acrylate 1972-MCEA: range finding toxicity 

studies. Pittsburgh: Mellon Institute, Report 

35-33 for Union Carbide Corporation. On file 

with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under TSCA Section 8D. OTS #0537571. 

Document #88-920004590.

NIOSH [2005]. Ethyl acrylate. In: NIOSH pocket guide to chemical hazards. Cincinnati, OH: 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety 

and Health, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 

2005-149, http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/. 

Accessed: 05-01-14.

NIOSH [2009]. Current intelligence bulletin 

61: a strategy for assigning new NIOSH skin 

notations. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department 

of Health and Human Services, Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 

DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2009-147, 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2009-147/

pdfs/2009-147.pdf. Accessed: 05-01-14.

NTP [2011]. Report on Carcinogens. Twelfth 

Edition; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. National 

Toxicology Program, http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/

ntp/roc/twelfth/roc12.pdf. Accessed 05-01-14.

Nylander-French, French [1998]. Tripropylene 

glycol diacrylate but no ethyl acrylate induces 

skin tumors in a twenty-week short-term tumorigenesis study in Tg.AC (v-Ha-ras) Mice. 

Toxicologic Pathology 16(4):476–483.

OSHA [ND]. Ethyl acrylate. In: OSHA occupational chemical database, http://www.osha.gov/

chemicaldata/chemResult.html?recNo=259. 

Accessed: 05-01-14.

Pérez-Formoso JL, de Anca-Fernández J, MaravíCecilia R, Díaz-Torres JM [2010]. Contact 

dermatitis caused by acrylates among 8 workers in an elevator factor. Actas Dermosifilogr 

101(4):336–340.

Pozzani U, Weil CS, Carpenter CP [1949]. 

Subacute vapor toxicity and range-finding 

data for ethyl acrylate. J Ind Hyg Toxicol 

31:311–316.

Rohm and Haas Company [1986]. Acute toxicity 

report on ethyl acrylate monomer (final report). 

Spring House, PA: Rohm and Haas Company. 

On file with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under TSCA Section 8D. OTS 

#0520999. Document #86-890001364S.

Rohm and Haas Company [1991]. Ethyl acrylate 

(15 ppm MEHQ) skin irritation study in rabbits. Spring House, PA: Rohm and Haas Company. On file with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under TSCA Section 8D. OTS 

#0529735. Document #88-910000100.

Safepharm Laboratories Limited [1984]. Federal 

register skin irritation test: determination of the 

degree of primary cutaneous irritation caused 

by ethylacrylate in the rabbit. Derby, United 

Kingdom: Safepharm Laboratories Limited, 

experiment #657/8410 for Mitsubishi Petrochemical Company Limited. On file with the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under 

TSCA Section 8D. OTS #0557581. Document 

#86950000068.
8 Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate

Ethyl acrylate

Smyth HF Jr, Carpenter CP, Weil CS, Pozzani 

UC, Striegel JA [1962]. Range-finding toxicity 

data: List VI. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 23:95–107.

Sokal J, Barański B, Czajkowska T, Kyrsiak B, Majka J, Szendzikowski S, Stetkiewicz J, Tarkowski 

S [1980]. Preliminary project of the standard 

minimal scope and methods of testing acute 

toxicity of industrial chemical substances. Pol J 

Pharmacol Pharm 32(2):223–229 

Tennant RW, French JE, Spalding JW [1995]. 

Identifying chemical carcinogens and assessing potential risk in short-term bioassays using 

transgenic mouse models. Environ Health Perspect 103(10):942–950.

Tokumura F, Matsui T, Suzuki Y, Sado M, Taniguchi M, Kobayashi I, Kamiyama M, Suda S, 

Nakamura A, Yamazaki Y, Yamori A, Igarashi 

R, Kwai J, Oka K [2010]. The potential dermal irritating effect of residual (meth) acrylic 

monomers in pressure sensitive adhesive tapes. 

Drug Chem Toxicol 33(1):1–7.

Torres MC, Linares T, Hernandez MD [2005]. 

Acrylates induced rhinitis and contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 53:114.

Treon JF, Sigmon H, Wright H, Kitzmiller KV 

[1949]. The toxicity of methyl and ethyl acrylate. J Ind Hygiene Toxicol 31(6):317–326.

Tucker SC, Beck MH [1999]. A 15-year study 

of patch testing to (methyl)acrylates. Conatct 

Dermatitis. 40(5): 278–279.

Union Carbide Corporation [1982]. Ethyl acrylate: lifetime dermal carcinogenesis study in 

male C3H/HeJ mice. Export, PA: Union Carbide Corporation, report 45-313. On file with 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under TSCA Section 8D. OTS #0520847. Document #86-890001346S. 

USEPA (United States Environmental Protection 

Agency) [2012]. Integrated risk information 

system (IRIS), http://www.epa.gov/ncea/iris/. 

Accessed: 05-01-14.

Van der Walle HB, Delbkessine LPC, and Seutter 

E [1982a]. Concomitant sensitization to hydroquinone and P-methoxyphenol in the guinea pig; inhibitors in acrylic monomers. Contact 

Dermatitis 8:147–154.

Van der Walle HB, Klecak G, Geleick H, Bensink 

T [1982b]. Sensitizing potential of 14 mono 

(meth) acrylates in the guinea pig. Contact 

Dermatitis. 8:223–235.

Warbrick EV, Rebecca J. Dearman RJ, Ashby J, 

Schmezer P, Kimber I [2001]. Preliminary assessment of the skin sensitizing activity of selected rodent carcinogens using the local lymph 

node assay. Toxicology 163:63–69.
Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate 9

Ethyl acrylate

Appendix: Calculation of the SI Ratio For Ethyl acrylate

This appendix presents an overview of the 

SI ratio and a summary of the calculation of 

the SI ratio for ethyl acrylate. Although the 

SI ratio is considered in the determination of 

a substance’s hazard potential following skin 

contact, it is intended only to serve as supportive data during the assignment of the NIOSH 

SK. An in-depth discussion on the rationale 

and calculation of the SI ratio can be found 

in Appendix B of the Current Intelligence Bulletin (CIB) 61: A Strategy for Assigning New 

NIOSH Skin Notations [NIOSH 2009]. 

Overview 

The SI ratio is a predictive algorithm for estimating and evaluating the health hazards of 

skin exposure to substances. The algorithm is 

designed to evaluate the potential for a substance to penetrate the skin and induce systemic toxicity [NIOSH 2009]. The goals for 

incorporating this algorithm into the proposed strategy for assigning SYS notation are 

as follows:

1. Provide an alternative method to evaluate substances for which no clinical reports or animal toxicity studies exist or 

for which empirical data are insufficient 

to determine systemic effects.

2. Use the algorithm evaluation results to 

determine whether a substance poses a 

skin absorption hazard and should be labeled with the SYS notation.

The algorithm evaluation includes three steps:

1. determining a skin permeation coefficient (k

p

) for the substance of interest,

2. estimating substance uptake by the skin 

and respiratory absorption routes, and 

3. evaluating whether the substance poses a 

skin exposure hazard.

The algorithm is flexible in the data requirement and can operate entirely on the basis of 

the physicochemical properties of a substance 

and the relevant exposure parameters. Thus, 

the algorithm is independent of the need for 

biologic data. Alternatively, it can function 

with both the physicochemical properties and 

the experimentally determined permeation 

coefficient when such data are available and 

appropriate for use.

The first step in the evaluation is to determine the k

p

 for the substance to describe the 

transdermal penetration rate of the substance 

[NIOSH 2009]. The k

p

, which represents the 

overall diffusion of the substance through the 

stratum corneum and into the blood capillaries of the dermis, is estimated from the 

compound’s molecular weight (MW) and 

base-10 logarithm of its octanol–water partition coefficient (log KOW). In this example, 

k

p

is determined for a substance with use of 

Equation 1. A self-consistent set of units must 

be used, such as outlined in Table A1. Other 

model-based estimates of k

p

 may also be used 

[NIOSH 2009].

Equation 1: Calculation of Skin Permeation 

Coefficient (kp)

psc pol aq

p

k k k

k 1 1

1

+

+

=

where k

psc is the permeation coefficient in the 

lipid fraction of the stratum corneum, kpol is 

the coefficient in the protein fraction of the 

stratum corneum, and kaq is the coefficient in 

the watery epidermal layer. These components 

are individually estimated by

log k

psc = −1.326 + 0.6097 × log Kow

 − 0.1786 × MW 0.5

kpol = 0.0001519 × MW−0.5

k

aq

 = 2.5 × MW−0.5

The second step is to calculate the biologic 

mass uptake of the substance from skin absorption (skin dose) and inhalation (inhalation 
10 Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate

Ethyl acrylate

dose) during the same period of exposure. 

The skin dose is calculated as a mathematical 

product of the kp, the water solubility (SW) of 

the substance, the exposed skin surface area, 

and the duration of exposure. Its units are milligrams (mg). Assume that the skin exposure 

continues for 8 hours to unprotected skin on 

the palms of both hands (a surface area of 360 

square centimeters [cm2]). 

Equation 2: Determination of Skin Dose 

Skin dose 

= k

p

 × Sw × Exposed skin surface area × 

 Exposure time

= k

p

(cm/hour) × Sw (mg/cm3) 

 × 360 cm2 × 8 hours

The inhalation dose (in mg) is derived on 

the basis of the occupational exposure limit 

(OEL) of the substance—if the OEL is developed to prevent the occurrence of systemic 

effects rather than sensory/irritant effects or 

direct effects on the respiratory tract. Assume 

a continuous exposure of 8 hours, an inhalation volume of 10 cubic meters (m3

) inhaled 

air in 8 hours, and a factor of 75% for retention of the airborne substance in the lungs 

during respiration (retention factor, or RF).

Equation 3: Determination of Inhalation Dose

Inhalation dose 

= OEL × Inhalation volume × RF

= OEL (mg/m3) × 10 m3 × 0.75

The final step is to compare the calculated 

skin and inhalation doses and to present the 

result as a ratio of skin dose to inhalation dose 

(the SI ratio). This ratio quantitatively indicates (1) the significance of dermal absorption as a route of occupational exposure to the 

substance and (2) the contribution of dermal 

uptake to systemic toxicity. If a substance has 

an SI ratio greater than or equal to 0.1, it is 

considered a skin absorption hazard.

Calculation 

Table A1 summarizes the data applied in the 

previously described equations to determine 

the SI ratio for ethyl acrylate. The calculated 

SI ratio was 1.09. On the basis of these results, 

ethyl acrylate is predicted to represent a skin 

absorption hazard.

Appendix References 

NIOSH [2005]. NIOSH pocket guide to chemical 

hazards. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute 

for Occupational Safety and Health, DHHS 

(NIOSH) Publication No. 2005–149, http://

www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/. Accessed: 05-01-14.

NIOSH [2009]. Current intelligence bulletin 

61: a strategy for assigning new NIOSH skin 

notations. Cincinnati, OH: U.S. Department 

of Health and Human Services, Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, 

DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2009-147, 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2009-147/

pdfs/2009-147.pdf. Accessed: 05-01-14.

SRC [2009]. Interactive PhysProp database demo, 

http://www.srcinc.com/what-we-do/databaseforms.aspx?id=386. Accessed: 05-01-14.
Skin Notation Profiles | Ethyl acrylate 11

Ethyl acrylate

Table A1. Summary of data used to calculate the SI ratio for ethyl acrylate

Variables used in calculation Units Value

Skin permeation coefficient

Permeation coefficient of stratum corneum lipid path(k

psc) cm/hr 4.043 × 10-3

Permeation coefficient of the protein fraction of the stratum 

corneum (kpol)

cm/hr 1.152 × 10-5

Permeation coefficient of the watery epidermal layer (kaq) cm/hr 0.2499

Molecular weight (MW)* amu 100.1

Base-10 logarithm of its octanol–water partition coefficient 

(Log Kow)

*

None 1.18

Calculated skin permeation coefficient (k

p

) cm/hr 3.992 × 10-3

Skin dose

Water solubility (SW)

* mg/cm3 15

Calculated skin permeation coefficient (k

p

) cm/hr 3.992 × 10-3

Estimated skin surface area (palms of hand) cm2 360

Exposure time hr 8

Calculated skin dose mg 172.45

Inhalation Dose

Occupational exposure limit (OEL)† mg/m3 21

Inhalation volume m3 10

Retention factor (RF) None 0.75

Inhalation dose mg 157.5

Skin dose–to–inhalation dose (SI) ratio None 1.09

*

Variables identified from SRC [2009].

†

The OEL used in calculation of the SI ratio for ethyl acrylate was the NIOSH recommended exposure limit (REL) 

[NIOSH 2005].
This page intentionally left blank.
This page intentionally left blank.
This page intentionally left blank.