An evolution of risk assessment for potential carcinogens in food: Scientific session proceedings.

Modern perspectives on the risk assessment of carcinogenic potential of chemicals have taken shape within the last two decades. This has been due to both developments in the understanding of the biology and etiology of cancer and by advances in in silico and in vitro assays. Moving away from a conventional binary carcinogen/non-carcinogen model, modern frameworks offer more nuanced classification structures based on the understanding of mechanisms involved or potentially involved in rodent carcinogenicity. Given these developments, a scientific session at the 2020 Winter Meeting of the Toxicology Forum was organized to explore the impact these innovative approaches will have on food safety assessments and what considerations should be addressed in developing a new carcinogenic risk assessment approach for substances in foods. The session reviewed challenges faced by food toxicologists and risk assessors, current standard approaches for evaluating carcinogenic risk of food substances, limitations of these standard approaches, and potential methods to implement next generation assays and modern carcinogenic frameworks into food safety assessments. Current perspectives of US regulatory, industry, and academic stakeholders were represented during speaker presentations and a moderated Panel Discussion. This Workshop Report provides an overview of key themes and information presented during the session. Summary statements were prepared by the authors and reviewed by the presenters but do not necessarily represent the position or policy of the FDA, the EPA, or other affiliations.

Safety Assessment of Bacillus subtilis MB40 for Use in Foods and Dietary Supplements.

With the growing popularity of probiotics in dietary supplements, foods, and beverages, it is important to substantiate not only the health benefits and efficacy of unique strains but also safety. In the interest of consumer safety and product transparency, strain identification should include whole-genome sequencing and safety assessment should include genotypic and phenotypic studies. Bacillus subtilis MB40, a unique strain marketed for use in dietary supplements, and food and beverage, was assessed for safety and tolerability across in silico, in vitro, and in vivo studies. MB40 was assessed for the absence of undesirable genetic elements encoding toxins and mobile antibiotic resistance. Tolerability was assessed in both rats and healthy human volunteers. In silico and in vitro testing confirmed the absence of enterotoxin and mobile antibiotic resistance genes of safety concern to humans. In rats, the no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) for MB40 after repeated oral administration for 14 days was determined to be 2000 mg/kg bw/day (equivalent to 3.7 × 1011 CFU/kg bw/day). In a 28 day human tolerability trial, 10 × 109 CFU/day of MB40 was well tolerated. Based on genome sequencing, strain characterization, screening for undesirable attributes and evidence of safety by appropriately designed safety evaluation studies in rats and humans, Bacillus subtilis MB40 does not pose any human health concerns under the conditions tested.

A weight of evidence assessment of the genotoxic potential of 4-methylimidazole as a possible mode of action for the formation of lung tumors in exposed mice.

4-Methylimidazole (4-MeI) is a byproduct formed during the cooking of foods containing carbohydrates and amino acids, including the production of flavors and coloring substances, e.g., class III and IV caramel colors, used in many food products with extensive human exposure. Two-year rodent bioassays via oral exposure conducted by the National Toxicology Program reported evidence of carcinogenicity only in B6C3F1 mice (increased alveolar/bronchial neoplasms). In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified 4-MeI as Group 2B, "possibly carcinogenic to humans". An expert panel was commissioned to assess the genotoxic potential of 4-MeI and the plausibility of a genotoxic mode of action in the formation of lung tumors in mice when exposed to high doses of 4-MeI. The panel defined and used a weight-of-evidence (WOE) approach that included thorough evaluation of studies assessing the genotoxic potential of 4-MeI. The panelists categorized each study, consisting of study weight, degree of technical performance, study reliability, and contribution to the overall WOE. Based on the reviewed studies' weighted contribution, the panel unanimously concluded that the WOE supports no clear evidence of in vivo genotoxicity of 4-MeI and no association for a genotoxic mode of action in the formation of mouse lung tumors.