Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of Lentilactobacillus buchneri DSM 32651 for all animal species (BioCC OÜ).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Lentilactobacillus buchneri DSM 32651 when used as a technological additive to improve ensiling of fresh plant material. The additive is intended for use in all fresh material for all animal species at a proposed minimum concentration of 1 × 108 colony forming units (CFU)/kg fresh plant material. The bacterial species L. buchneri is considered by EFSA to be suitable for the qualified presumption of safety approach to safety assessment. The identity of the strain was established and no acquired antimicrobial resistance genes of concern were detected. Therefore, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the use of the strain as a silage additive is considered safe for all the animal species, for consumers of products from animals fed the treated silage and for the environment. Regarding user safety, the additive should be considered as a potential skin and respiratory sensitiser, and any exposure through skin and respiratory tract is considered a risk. The additive is not an eye irritant. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive consisting of L. buchneri DSM 32651 at a minimum concentration of 1 × 108 CFU/kg fresh material may extend the aerobic stability of silage prepared from fresh plant material with a DM range of 28%-45%.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of l-valine produced with Escherichia coli CGMCC 22721 for all animal species (Eppen Europe SAS).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of l-valine produced by fermentation with a genetically modified strain of Escherichia coli (CGMCC 22721) as a nutritional additive for all animal species. The production strain and its DNA were not detected in the final additive. Therefore, the final product does not give raise to any safety concern regarding the genetic modification of the production strain. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concludes that l-valine produced using E. coli CGMCC 22721 is safe for the target species when supplemented in appropriate amounts to the diet according to the nutritional needs of the target species. The FEEDAP Panel has concerns on the use of amino acids in water for drinking for hygienic reasons, and due to the risk of imbalances when administered simultaneously via feed. The use of l-valine produced using E. coli CGMCC 22721 in animal nutrition is considered safe for the consumers and for the environment. The FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the potential of l-valine produced using E. coli CGMCC 22721 to irritant to the skin or eyes, a dermal or respiratory sensitiser due to the lack of data. The endotoxin activity of the additive does not represent a hazard for users handling the additive when exposed by inhalation. The additive l-valine produced by fermentation using E. coli CGMCC 22721 is regarded as an efficacious source of the essential amino acid l-valine for non-ruminant nutrition. For the supplemental l-valine to be as efficacious in ruminants as in non-ruminant species, it requires protection against degradation in the rumen.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of l-arginine produced with Escherichia coli CGMCC 7.401 for all animal species (Eppen Europe SAS).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of the feed additive consisting of l-arginine produced by fermentation with a genetically modified strain of Escherichia coli (CGMCC 7.401). The additive is intended to be used in feed and water for drinking for all animal species and categories. The genetic modifications introduced do not raise safety concerns. No viable cells or DNA of the production strain were detected in the final product. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive does not pose any safety concern with regard to the production strain. l-Arginine produced with E. coli CGMCC 7.401 is safe for the target species when supplemented in appropriate amounts to the diet according to the nutritional needs of the target species. The FEEDAP Panel has concerns on the use of amino acids in water for drinking for hygienic reasons, and due to the risk of imbalances when administered simultaneously via feed and water. The use of l-arginine produced with E. coli CGMCC 7.401 in animal nutrition is considered safe for the consumers and for the environment. The endotoxin activity of the additive does not represent a hazard for persons handling the additive. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the potential of the additive to be irritant to skin and/or eyes, or to be a dermal or respiratory sensitiser. The additive l-arginine produced with E. coli CGMCC 7.401 is regarded as an efficacious source of the essential amino acid l-arginine for non-ruminant species. For supplemental l-arginine to be as efficacious in ruminants as in non-ruminant species, it requires protection against degradation in the rumen.

Safety of a feed additive consisting of 3-phytase produced with Komagataella phaffii CECT 13171 (FSF10000/FLF1000) for poultry species, pigs for fattening and minor porcine species for fattening (Fertinagro Biotech S.L.).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of the feed additive consisting of 3-phytase produced with a genetically modified strain of Komagataella phaffii (CECT 13171). The additive is intended to be used as a zootechnical additive for poultry species, pigs for fattening and minor porcine species for fattening. In a previous opinion, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substance used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) Panel could not conclude on the taxonomic identification of the production strain. Moreover, the presence of viable cells of the production strain in the final formulations of the product could not be excluded. Therefore, no conclusions could be drawn on the safety for the target species, consumers, users and environment. In the present submission, the applicant provided supplementary information regarding the characterisation of the production strain and the absence of its viable cells in the final product. Based on the data provided, the identification of CECT 13171 as K. phaffii was confirmed and no viable cells of the production strain were detected in the final formulations of the additive. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the 3-phytase produced with the genetically modified strain K. phaffii CECT 13171 does not give rise to any safety concern as regard to the production strain. Consequently, the additive, in both its liquid and solid formulations, is safe for the target species, consumers, users and environment.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of a Camellia oleifera C.Abel seed extract for use in all animal species except fin fish (NOR-FEED SAS).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a Camellia oleifera C.Abel seed extract (Cosap®) as technological feed additive for all animal species except fin fish. In the absence of adequate tolerance studies in the target species or toxicological studies with the additive under assessment, the EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) could not conclude on the safety of C. oleifera extract for the target species. The use of the additive in animal nutrition is not expected to cause concern for consumer safety. The additive is considered as irritant to the eyes and mucous membranes. No conclusions can be reached on the potential of the additive to be irritant to the skin or to be a dermal sensitiser. The use of the additive under the proposed conditions of use is considered safe for the terrestrial compartment. However, no conclusion can be reached on the safety of the additive for the environment when used in feed of aquatic animals other than fin fish. The Panel concluded that the additive has the potential to be efficacious as an emulsifier when used according to proposed conditions of use.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of propionic acid for all terrestrial animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Eastman Chemical B.V., Perstorp AB, Dow Europe GmbH, BASF SE).

Propionic acid is currently authorised as a technological additive (functional group: silage additives) for all animal species. The applicants requested for the renewal of the authorisation of propionic acid when used as a feed additive for all terrestrial animal species. The applicants have provided evidence that the additive in the market complies with the conditions of the authorisation. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) confirms that the use of propionic acid under the current authorised conditions of use is safe for the target species, the consumers and the environment. Regarding user safety, the additive is corrosive to the skin and any exposure to users is considered a risk. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil derived from the leaves of Salvia officinalis ssp. lavandulifolia (Vahl) Gams (Spanish sage oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Spanish sage oil from the leaves of Salvia officinalis ssp. lavandulifolia (Vahl) Gams (Spanish sage oil) when used as a sensory additive in feed and in water for drinking for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive under assessment is considered safe up to the maximum use level of 14 mg/kg complete feed for all animal species. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use of Spanish sage oil in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. The use of Spanish sage oil in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the consumer and the environment. Regarding user safety, the essential oil under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Since the oil of the leaves of S. officinalis ssp. lavandulifolia (Vahl) Gams is recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Impact of Aficamten on Disease and Symptom Burden in Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Results From SEQUOIA-HCM.

BACKGROUND: Aficamten is a cardiac myosin inhibitor that mitigates left ventricular outflow gradients in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM). The clinical efficacy of aficamten across multiple outcome domains in oHCM has not been fully defined. OBJECTIVES: This responder analysis from the SEQUOIA-HCM (Phase 3 Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Aficamten Compared to Placebo in Adults With Symptomatic oHCM) trial characterizes the clinical impact of aficamten. METHODS: Patients who were symptomatic of oHCM were randomized to aficamten (n = 142) or placebo (n = 140) daily for 24 weeks. Outcomes assessed included the proportion of patients with complete hemodynamic response (rest and Valsalva gradient <30 mm Hg and <50 mm Hg, respectively), relief in limiting symptoms (≥1 improvement in NYHA functional class and/or ≥10-point change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score), enhanced exercise capacity (≥1.5 mL/kg/min change in peak oxygen uptake), and ≥50% reduction in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide. Eligibility for septal reduction therapy was also evaluated. RESULTS: At 24 weeks, patients treated with aficamten vs placebo showed significant improvement in limiting symptoms (71% vs 42%), were more likely to have complete hemodynamic response (68% vs 7%), demonstrated enhanced exercise capacity (47% vs 24%), and showed a decrease ≥50% in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (84% vs 8%) (P ≤ 0.002 for all). An improvement in ≥1 of these outcome measures was achieved in 97% of patients treated with aficamten (vs 59% placebo), including 23% on aficamten who achieved all 4 outcomes compared with none in placebo. Among 32 patients receiving aficamten and 29 patients receiving placebo who were eligible for septal reduction therapy, 28 (88%) from the aficamten group were no longer eligible at 24 weeks compared with 15 (52%) from the placebo group (P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with aficamten was associated with substantial improvements across a broad range of clinically relevant efficacy measures. These results underscore the wide-ranging potential of aficamten for treatment of patients with symptomatic oHCM (Phase 3 Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Aficamten Compared to Placebo in Adults with oHCM [SEQUOIA-HCM]; NCT05186818).

Standard-of-Care Medication Withdrawal in Patients With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Receiving Aficamten in FOREST-HCM.

BACKGROUND: Standard-of-care (SoC) medications for the treatment of obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) are recommended as first-line therapy despite the lack of evidence from controlled clinical trials and well known off-target side effects. OBJECTIVES: We describe the impact of SoC therapy downtitration and withdrawal in patients already receiving aficamten in FOREST-HCM (Follow-Up, Open-Label, Research Evaluation of Sustained Treatment with Aficamten in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy; NCT04848506). METHODS: Patients receiving SoC therapy (beta-blocker, nondihydropyridine calcium-channel blocker, and/or disopyramide) were eligible for protocol-guided SoC downtitration and withdrawal at the discretion of the investigator and after achieving a stable dose of aficamten for ≥4 weeks. Successful SoC withdrawal was defined as at least a 50% dose-reduction in ≥1 medication. Adverse events (AEs) were prospectively evaluated 1 to 2 weeks after any SoC withdrawal. RESULTS: Of 145 patients with oHCM who were followed for at least 24 weeks (mean age 60.5 ± 13.2 years; 44.8% female; 42% NYHA functional class III), 136 (93.8%) were receiving ≥1 SoC therapy; of those, 64 (47%) had an attempt at withdrawal, with 59 (92.2%) successful. Thirty-eight (64.4%) patients completely discontinued ≥1 medication, and 27 (45.8%) achieved aficamten monotherapy with 2 later restarting a SoC medication. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics on day 1 in FOREST-HCM in those with a SoC-withdrawal vs no-withdrawal attempt. In patients who underwent successful SoC therapy withdrawal, NYHA functional class improved by ≥1 class in 79.2% from baseline, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score improved to 83.0 ± 15.8 points, and resting and Valsalva left ventricular outflow tract gradient improved to 14.3 ± 10.9 and 32.9 ± 21.4 mm Hg, respectively. N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels improved to a median of 220.0 pg/mL (Q1-Q3: 102.0-554.0.0 pg/mL) and high-sensitivity troponin I improved to a median of 6.0 ng/L (Q1-Q3:3.5-10.7 ng/L). Downtitration and withdrawal of SoC therapy did not impact these results (all P values for change were >0.05), and these changes were similar in patients who did not undergo SoC therapy withdrawal. There were no serious AEs attributed to SoC withdrawal and treatment emergent AEs were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In FOREST-HCM, one-half of the patients with oHCM attempted downtitration and withdrawal of SoC medications while receiving aficamten treatment, with infrequent instances of resumption of SoC. Stopping and dose reduction of SoC medications were well tolerated with no adverse consequences in clinical measures of efficacy (Follow-Up, Open-Label, Research Evaluation of Sustained Treatment with Aficamten in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy [FOREST-HCM]; NCT04848506).

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of tartrazine for its use in baits for freshwater fish (GIFAP).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of tartrazine as sensory additive (functional group: (a) colourants: (i) substances that add or restore colour in feedingstuffs). Tartrazine is intended to be incorporated in fishing baits up to a maximum of 30 mg/kg in complementary feed in order to colour them and attract fish in freshwater (ponds, rivers), for both recreational and competitive fishing. The additive is not intended for use in aquaculture. Tartrazine is already authorised for use with cats and dogs, ornamental fish, grain-eating ornamental birds and small rodents. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the use of tartrazine in the preparation of baits for freshwater fish under the proposed conditions of use is of no concern for the target animals. The use of tartrazine as a feed additive under the proposed conditions of use is considered safe for the consumer and the environment. Regarding the user safety, the additive should be considered a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Inhalation and dermal exposure are considered a risk. The FEEDAP Panel could not conclude on the irritation potential of the additive. In absence of data, no conclusion can be reached on the efficacy of tartrazine in freshwater fish baits.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of ammonium propionate for all terrestrial animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (BASF SE, Tamnico Finland Oy).

Ammonium propionate is authorised as a liquid preparation of ≥ 19% ammonium propionate, ≤ 80% propionic acid and ≤ 30% water. The applicant requested for the renewal of the authorisation of ammonium propionate when used as a feed additive for all terrestrial animal species. The applicant has provided evidence that the additive in the market complies with the conditions of the authorisation. The Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP Panel) confirms that the use of ammonium propionate under the current authorised conditions of use is safe for the target species, the consumers and the environment. Concerning the user safety, the additive is corrosive to skin and eyes. Any exposure is considered a risk. There is no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Prevalence and correlates of driving under the influence of alcohol and cannabis among Spanish adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: Driving under the influence (DUI) of substances is the first cause of death among young populations. Unfortunately, there is a paucity of research looking at DUI risk factors in adolescents. This study aimed to estimate the past-year prevalence and correlates of DUI of alcohol (DUI-A), cannabis (DUI-C), and both (DUI-A+C) in adolescents who reported past-year alcohol and cannabis use. METHOD: The study sample comprised 3,175 [(47.9 % females; Mage (SD) = 16.76 (.70)] Spanish adolescents from a national representative survey (ESTUDES) conducted by the Spanish Ministry of Health. Hierarchical regression models were conducted to identify correlates of DUI-A only, DUI-C only, and both behaviors, including sociodemographic, substance use and parental control variables. RESULTS: Past-year prevalence of DUI was 9.9 % among past-year alcohol and cannabis users. Past-year DUI of substances was more likely among males (15.4 %) relative to females (6 %) [χ2 = 73.39, p = <.001, Φ = .152]. Being male, reporting higher past-month days of cannabis use and cannabis-related problems were common risk factors for DUI-C and DUI-A+C. Risk factors of DUI-A were greater money availability for going out, higher past-month frequency of heavy drinking episodes and lower past-month cannabis use days. Specific correlates of DUI-A+C were being 18, past-year simultaneous alcohol and cannabis use, and earlier age of alcohol use initiation. CONCLUSIONS: There is a need to address DUI in substance use prevention in school settings. Screening should be particularly focused on adolescent substance users, while interventions should target attitudes and risk of substance use and driving.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil derived from the flowering tops of Thymbra capitata (L.) Cav. (Spanish type origanum oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil from the flowering tops of Thymbra capitata (L.) Cav. (Spanish type origanum oil) when used as a sensory additive in feed and in water for drinking for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive under assessment is considered safe up to the maximum use level in complete feed of 15 mg/kg for poultry species, 30 mg/kg for pigs and horses, 20 mg/kg for ruminants, 25 mg/kg for rabbits, dogs, cats and ornamental fish, and 125 mg/kg for salmonids. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For any other species, the additive is safe at 15 mg/kg complete feed. The FEEDAP Panel considered that the use level in water for drinking is safe provided that the total daily intake of the additive does not exceed the daily amount that is considered safe when consumed via feed. The use of the additive in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the consumer and the environment. Regarding user safety, the essential oil under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Since T. capitata and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of lutein-rich extract of Tagetes erecta L. for turkeys for fattening (EW Nutrition).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of lutein-rich extract of Tagetes erecta L. as sensory additive (functional group: Colourants (ii) substances which, when fed to animals, add colours to food of animal origin) for turkeys for fattening. The additive is already authorised for use in feed for chickens for fattening and minor poultry for fattening and laying hens and minor poultry for laying. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the use of lutein-rich extract of T. erecta is safe for turkeys for fattening when used up to the maximum proposed use level of 80 mg total carotenoids/kg complete feed. The Panel concluded that the use of lutein-rich extract of T. erecta in feed for turkeys for fattening under the proposed conditions of use would not be of concern for the consumer, considering also its use in other poultry for fattening and for laying hens. Regarding user safety, the lutein-rich extract of T. erecta extract is irritant to skin and eyes and any exposure is considered a risk. The conclusions on user safety reached for the lutein-rich extract of T. erecta would, in principle, apply to preparations made with it. The use of the additive in feed for turkeys for fattening under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the environment. The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the additive has the potential to colour the skin of turkeys for fattening at the proposed conditions of use.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil derived from leaves and terminal branchlets of Melaleuca alternifolia (Maiden & Betche) Cheel (tea tree oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of tea tree oil obtained from leaves and terminal branchlets of Melaleuca alternifolia (Maiden & Betche) Cheel when used as a sensory additive for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that tea tree oil was very unlikely to be of safety concern for long-living and reproductive animals and is of no concern for target species for fattening at the following concentrations in complete feed: 1.1 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 1.5 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 1.7 mg/kg for laying hens, 2.0 mg/kg for piglets, 2.4 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 3.1 mg/kg for sows, 5.0 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer) and salmonids, 4.4 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, sheep/goats and horses, 2.9 mg/kg for dairy cows, 1.8 mg/kg for rabbits, 0.9 mg/kg for cats, 5.3 mg/kg for dogs, 6.6 for crustaceans and 15 mg/kg for ornamental fish. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For any other species, the additive is very unlikely to be of safety concern at 1.1 mg/kg complete feed. No concerns for consumers and the environment were identified following the use of the additive up to the highest safe use level in feed. Regarding user safety, tea tree oil should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. It is classified as a reprotoxic substance (category 1B) following CLP criteria and should be handled accordingly. Since M. alternifolia and its preparations were recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of an essential oil derived from the flowering tops of Lavandula angustifolia Mill. (lavender oil) for use in all animal species (FEFANA asbl).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of an essential oil from the fresh flowering tops of Lavandula angustifolia Mill. (lavender oil) when used as a sensory additive in feed and in water for drinking for all animal species. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive under assessment is considered safe up to the maximum proposed use levels in complete feed of 30 mg/kg for dogs and ornamental fish. For the other target species, the calculated safe concentrations were 9 mg/kg for chickens for fattening, 13 mg/kg for laying hens, 12 mg/kg for turkeys for fattening, 19 mg/kg for pigs for fattening, 16 mg/kg for piglets, 23 mg/kg for sows, 39 mg/kg for veal calves (milk replacer) and salmonids, 35 mg/kg for cattle for fattening, sheep/goats and horses, 22 mg/kg for dairy cows, 14 mg/kg for rabbits and 7 mg/kg for cats. These conclusions were extrapolated to other physiologically related species. For any other species, the additive is safe at 7 mg/kg complete feed. The use of lavender oil in water for drinking was considered safe provided that the total daily intake does not exceed the daily amount considered safe when consumed via feed. The use of lavender oil in animal feed under the proposed conditions of use is safe for the consumer and the environment. Regarding user safety, the essential oil under assessment should be considered as an irritant to skin and eyes and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Since the oil of the flowering tops of L. angustifolia is recognised to flavour food and its function in feed would be essentially the same as that in food, no further demonstration of efficacy was considered necessary.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of a preparation containing a smoke flavouring extract for cats and dogs for the renewal of the authorisation (Azelis Denmark A/S).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for the renewal of authorisation of a preparation containing a smoke flavouring extract for cats and dogs. The applicant provided data demonstrating that the additive currently on the market does not fully comply with the conditions of authorisation, but with newly proposed specifications based on different analytical methods. Considering that the additive under assessment contains benzofuran and styrene, for which a potential concern for genotoxicity has been identified, and that the whole mixture raises a potential concern for genotoxicity, additional data would be needed to complete the assessment. Therefore, the FEEDAP Panel is not in the position to conclude on the safety for cats and dogs. The additive is authorised for use in feed for cats and dogs, and therefore, there is no need to perform an assessment of the safety for the consumer and the environment. Regarding user safety, the additive should be considered as irritant to skin and eyes, and as a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. When handling the additive, exposure of unprotected users to potential genotoxic substances may occur. Therefore, to reduce the risk, the exposure of the users should be minimised. There was no need for assessing the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of fumaric acid for all animal species for the renewal of its authorisation and extension of use (Life SUPPLIES NV).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the assessment of the application for the renewal of the authorisation of fumaric acid as a technological and sensory additive (functional groups: preservative and flavouring compounds, respectively) and for a new use of the additive as a technological additive (functional group: acidity regulator) for all animal species. The applicant provided evidence that the additive currently in the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that fumaric acid remains safe under the authorised conditions of use for the terrestrial animals, consumers and the environment. However, the Panel cannot conclude on the safety for the aquatic animals under all authorised condition of use. Fumaric acid is irritant to skin, eyes and respiratory tract, and should be considered a skin and respiratory sensitiser due to the presence of nickel. The Panel also considers that the new use of the additive as an acidity regulator under proposed conditions of use would not introduce risks not already considered. There is no need to assess the efficacy of the additive in the context of the renewal of the authorisation (for its use as preservative and flavouring compound). The Panel is not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of fumaric acid as an acidity regulator in feed.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of endo-1,4-ß-xylanase produced with Trichoderma reesei CBS 114044 (ECONASE® XT) for pigs for fattening, laying hens and minor poultry species (AB Enzymes Finland Oy).

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of a product containing endo-1,4-ß-xylanase (ECONASE® XT) as a zootechnical feed additive (digestibility enhancer) for pigs for fattening, laying hens and minor poultry species. ECONASE® XT is available in two liquid and three solid forms and is produced with a genetically modified strain of Trichoderma reesei (CBS 114044). The FEEDAP Panel concluded that the genetic modification of the production strain does not raise any safety concerns, and viable cells of the production strain and its DNA were not detected in the final products. The Panel also concluded that ECONASE® XT is safe for pigs for fattening, laying hens and minor poultry species at the proposed conditions of use. The use of the additive raises no safety concerns for the consumers of products derived from animals fed with the additive or for the environment. The liquid and solid forms of ECONASE® XT are non-irritant to the skin, but only the liquid forms were confirmed as non-irritant to the eyes and not dermal sensitisers. The Panel could not conclude on the irritation potential to the eyes and the dermal sensitisation potential for the solid forms. Due to the proteinaceous nature of the active substance, the additive is considered to be a respiratory sensitiser. The additive has the potential to be efficacious in pigs for fattening at 20,000 BXU/kg complete feed, in all laying poultry species at 12,000 BXU/kg complete feed and in minor poultry species other than laying birds at 8000 BXU/kg complete feed.