Dissipation, persistence, and risk assessment of fluxapyroxad and penthiopyrad residues in perilla leaf (Perilla frutescens var. japonica Hara).

The objective of this study was to determine the residual characteristics and to calculate the persistence of the fungicides fluxapyroxad (15.3% suspension concentrate) and penthiopyrad (20% emulsifiable concentrate) on the leaves of greenhouse-cultivated perilla (Perilla frutescens var. japonica Hara). Fluxapyroxad was diluted 2,000-fold and penthiopyrad was diluted 4,000-fold. Each solution was sprayed 3 times onto crops at 7-d intervals before harvest. Leaf samples were collected at 3 h (0 d), 1, 3, 5 and 7 d after the third and final treatment. The recovery ranges of fluxapyroxad and penthiopyrad and their metabolites were 74.2%-104.1%. Pesticide residue analyses indicated that fluxapyroxad and penthiopyrad residues in perilla leaves dissipated over time. The persistence of fluxapyroxad and penthiopyrad residues 7 d after the final spray were 50.0% ± 4.9% and 44.2% ± 2.8% of those measured 3 h (0 d) after the final spray, respectively. The percent acceptable daily intake (%ADI)-which was assessed according to the daily food intake by Koreans according to age-was < 7.3%. Therefore, it was determined that the health risk was low. The perception that residual pesticides are present in large amounts in perilla leaf has led to consumer concern. However, in this study, the amounts of pesticide in perilla leaf decreased over time. Although it has been hypothesized that the risk of pesticide intake would be higher in younger children, the results actually suggest the opposite. Therefore, the pesticides in question are considered to be safe for use on perilla leaves.

Multinational Prospective Study of Patient-Reported Outcomes After Prostate Radiation Therapy: Detailed Assessment of Rectal Bleeding.

PURPOSE: The new short Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP) patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) tool has removed the rectal bleeding question from the previous much longer version, EPIC-26. Herein, we assess the impact of losing the dedicated rectal bleeding question in 2 independent prospective multicenter cohorts. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In a prospective multicenter test cohort (n=865), EPIC-26 patient-reported HRQOL data were collected for 2 years after treatment from patients treated with prostate radiation therapy from 2003 to 2011. A second prospective multicenter cohort (n=442) was used for independent validation. A repeated-effects model was used to predict the change from baseline in bowel summary scores from longer EPIC instruments using the change in EPIC-CP bowel summary scores with and without rectal bleeding scores. RESULTS: Two years after radiation therapy, 91% of patients were free of bleeding, and only 2.6% reported bothersome bleeding problems. Correlations between EPIC-26 and EPIC-CP bowel scores were very high (r2=0.90-0.96) and were statistically improved with the addition of rectal bleeding information (r2=0.94-0.98). Considering all patients, only 0.2% of patients in the test cohort and 0.7% in the validation cohort reported bothersome bleeding and had clinically relevant HRQOL changes missed with EPIC-CP. However, of the 2.6% (n=17) of men with bothersome rectal bleeding in the test cohort, EPIC-CP failed to capture 1 patient (6%) as experiencing meaningful declines in bowel HRQOL. CONCLUSIONS: Modern prostate radiation therapy results in exceptionally low rates of bothersome rectal bleeding, and <1% of patients experience bothersome bleeding and are not captured by EPIC-CP as having meaningful HRQOL declines after radiation therapy. However, in the small subset of patients with bothersome rectal bleeding, the longer EPIC-26 should strongly be considered, given its superior performance in this patient subset.