Follow-up of the re-evaluation of glycerol esters of wood rosins (E 445) as a food additive.

Glycerol esters of wood rosin (GEWR) (E 445) were re-evaluated in 2018. On the toxicity database and given the absence of reproductive and developmental toxicity data, the acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 12.5 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day for GEWR (E 445) established by the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) in 1994 was considered temporary. The conclusions of the assessment were restricted to GEWR derived from Pinus palustris and Pinus elliottii and with a chemical composition in compliance with GEWR used in the toxicological testing. Following a European Commission call for data to submit data to fill the data gaps, the present follow-up opinion assesses data provided by interested business operators (IBOs). Considering the technical data submitted by IBOs, the EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF Panel) recommended some modifications of the existing EU specifications for E 445, mainly a revision of the definition of the food additive and lowering the limits for toxic elements. Considering the available toxicological database evaluated during the re-evaluation of E 445 by the ANS Panel in 2018, and the toxicological studies submitted by the IBOs, the Panel established an ADI of 10 mg/kg bw per day based on the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 976 mg/kg bw per day from the newly available dietary reproduction/developmental toxicity screening study in rats and applying an uncertainty factor of 100. Since GEWR from P. palustris and P. elliottii were tested in the toxicity studies considered to establish the ADI and in the absence of detailed information on the chemical composition (major constituents) in GEWR generated from other Pinus species, thus not allowing read across, the ADI is restricted to the GEWR (E 445) manufactured from P. palustris and P. elliottii. The Panel concluded that there was no safety concern for the use of GEWR (E 445), at either the maximum permitted levels or at the reported uses and use levels.

Follow-up of the re-evaluation of indigo carmine (E 132) as a food additive.

Indigo carmine (E 312) was re-evaluated in 2014 by the EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient sources added to Food (ANS). The ANS Panel confirmed the acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 5 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day for indigo carmine allocated by JECFA (1975). The ANS Panel indicated that the ADI was applicable to a material with a purity of 93% pure colouring and manufactured using processes resulting in comparable residuals as material used in the Borzelleca et al. studies (1985, 1986) and Borzelleca and Hogan (1985) which were the basis for deriving the ADI. The ANS Panel considered that any extension of the ADI to indigo carmine of lower purity and/or manufactured using a different process would require new data to address the adverse effects on the testes observed in the Dixit and Goyal (2013) study. Following a European Commission call for data to submit data to fill the data gaps, an IBO submitted technical and toxicological data. Considering the technical data, the EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF Panel) recommended some modifications of the existing EU specifications for E 132, mainly to lower the limits for toxic elements. Considering the toxicological data, an IBO has submitted a 56-day dietary study to address the adverse effects on testes using a material with 88% purity. The results of this study submitted did not confirm the severe adverse effects observed in the Dixit and Goyal study. Considering all the available information, the Panel confirmed the ADI of 5 mg/kg bw per day for indigo carmine (E 132) disodium salts, meeting the proposed revisions of the specifications (85% minimum for the colouring matter). The Panel concluded that there is no safety concern for the use of indigo carmine (E 132) disodium salts at the reported use levels and submitted analytical data.

Re-evaluation of the risks to public health related to the presence of bisphenol A (BPA) in foodstuffs.

In 2015, EFSA established a temporary tolerable daily intake (t-TDI) for BPA of 4 µg/kg body weight (bw) per day. In 2016, the European Commission mandated EFSA to re-evaluate the risks to public health from the presence of BPA in foodstuffs and to establish a tolerable daily intake (TDI). For this re-evaluation, a pre-established protocol was used that had undergone public consultation. The CEP Panel concluded that it is Unlikely to Very Unlikely that BPA presents a genotoxic hazard through a direct mechanism. Taking into consideration the evidence from animal data and support from human observational studies, the immune system was identified as most sensitive to BPA exposure. An effect on Th17 cells in mice was identified as the critical effect; these cells are pivotal in cellular immune mechanisms and involved in the development of inflammatory conditions, including autoimmunity and lung inflammation. A reference point (RP) of 8.2 ng/kg bw per day, expressed as human equivalent dose, was identified for the critical effect. Uncertainty analysis assessed a probability of 57-73% that the lowest estimated Benchmark Dose (BMD) for other health effects was below the RP based on Th17 cells. In view of this, the CEP Panel judged that an additional uncertainty factor (UF) of 2 was needed for establishing the TDI. Applying an overall UF of 50 to the RP, a TDI of 0.2 ng BPA/kg bw per day was established. Comparison of this TDI with the dietary exposure estimates from the 2015 EFSA opinion showed that both the mean and the 95th percentile dietary exposures in all age groups exceeded the TDI by two to three orders of magnitude. Even considering the uncertainty in the exposure assessment, the exceedance being so large, the CEP Panel concluded that there is a health concern from dietary BPA exposure.

Follow-up of the re-evaluation of sulfur dioxide (E 220), sodium sulfite (E 221), sodium bisulfite (E 222), sodium metabisulfite (E 223), potassium metabisulfite (E 224), calcium sulfite (E 226), calcium bisulfite (E 227) and potassium bisulfite (E 228).

Sulfur dioxide-sulfites (E 220-228) were re-evaluated in 2016, resulting in the setting of a temporary ADI of 0.7 mg SO2 equivalents/kg bw per day. Following a European Commission call for data, the present follow-up opinion assesses data provided by interested business operators (IBOs) and additional evidence identified in the publicly available literature. No new biological or toxicological data addressing the data gaps described in the re-evaluation were submitted by IBOs. Taking into account data identified from the literature search, the Panel concluded that there was no substantial reduction in the uncertainties previously identified in the re-evaluation. Therefore, the Panel considered that the available toxicity database was inadequate to derive an ADI and withdrew the current temporary group acceptable daily intake (ADI). A margin of exposure (MOE) approach was considered appropriate to assess the risk for these food additives. A lower confidence limit of the benchmark dose of 38 mg SO2 equivalents/kg bw per day, which is lower than the previous reference point of 70 mg SO2 equivalents/kg bw per day, was estimated based on prolonged visual evoked potential latency. An assessment factor of 80 was applied for the assessment of the MoE. At the estimated dietary exposures, when using a refined exposure scenario (Data set D), MOEs at the maximum of 95th percentile ranges were below 80 for all population groups except for adolescents. The dietary exposures estimated using the maximum permitted levels would result in MOEs below 80 in all population groups at the maximum of the ranges of the mean, and for most of the population groups at both minimum and maximum of the ranges at the 95th percentile. The Panel concluded that this raises a safety concern for both dietary exposure scenarios. The Panel also performed a risk assessment for toxic elements present in sulfur dioxide-sulfites (E 220-228), based on data submitted by IBOs, and concluded that the maximum limits in the EU specifications for arsenic, lead and mercury should be lowered and a maximum limit for cadmium should be introduced.

On the impact of second generation mating and offspring in multi-generation reproductive toxicity studies on classification and labelling of substances in Europe.

The possible impact on classification and labelling decisions of effects observed in second generation parental (P1) and offspring (F2) parameters in multi-generation studies was investigated. This was done for 50 substances classified as reproductive toxicants in Europe, for which a multi-generation study was available. The P1 and F2 effects were compared to parental (P0) and first generation offspring (F1) effects with regard to type of effect as well as incidence, magnitude and severity (IMS), at any dose level. For every study with unique P1/F2 effects, or differences in IMS, the influence of the P1/F2 findings on the classification decision was investigated. Unique P1/F2 generation findings did not play a crucial role in the classification decision of any of the 50 classified substances, except for fenarimol. This substance however provided abundant alerts on the basis of its endocrine activity and developmental neurotoxicity and would therefore also be expected to be identified as a developmental neurotoxicant in an Extended One Generation Reproductive Toxicity Study (EOGRTS). These findings, in addition to the increased number of parameters analysed, increased statistical power and reduced animal use, provide strong further support for replacement of the classical two-generation reproductive toxicity study by the EOGRTS in regulatory reproductive toxicity assessment.

Safety assessment of titanium dioxide (E171) as a food additive.

The present opinion deals with an updated safety assessment of the food additive titanium dioxide (E 171) based on new relevant scientific evidence considered by the Panel to be reliable, including data obtained with TiO2 nanoparticles (NPs) and data from an extended one-generation reproductive toxicity (EOGRT) study. Less than 50% of constituent particles by number in E 171 have a minimum external dimension < 100 nm. In addition, the Panel noted that constituent particles < 30 nm amounted to less than 1% of particles by number. The Panel therefore considered that studies with TiO2 NPs < 30 nm were of limited relevance to the safety assessment of E 171. The Panel concluded that although gastrointestinal absorption of TiO2 particles is low, they may accumulate in the body. Studies on general and organ toxicity did not indicate adverse effects with either E 171 up to a dose of 1,000 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day or with TiO2 NPs (> 30 nm) up to the highest dose tested of 100 mg/kg bw per day. No effects on reproductive and developmental toxicity were observed up to a dose of 1,000 mg E 171/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested in the EOGRT study. However, observations of potential immunotoxicity and inflammation with E 171 and potential neurotoxicity with TiO2 NPs, together with the potential induction of aberrant crypt foci with E 171, may indicate adverse effects. With respect to genotoxicity, the Panel concluded that TiO2 particles have the potential to induce DNA strand breaks and chromosomal damage, but not gene mutations. No clear correlation was observed between the physico-chemical properties of TiO2 particles and the outcome of either in vitro or in vivo genotoxicity assays. A concern for genotoxicity of TiO2 particles that may be present in E 171 could therefore not be ruled out. Several modes of action for the genotoxicity may operate in parallel and the relative contributions of different molecular mechanisms elicited by TiO2 particles are not known. There was uncertainty as to whether a threshold mode of action could be assumed. In addition, a cut-off value for TiO2 particle size with respect to genotoxicity could not be identified. No appropriately designed study was available to investigate the potential carcinogenic effects of TiO2 NPs. Based on all the evidence available, a concern for genotoxicity could not be ruled out, and given the many uncertainties, the Panel concluded that E 171 can no longer be considered as safe when used as a food additive.

Exposure-triggered reproductive toxicity testing under the REACH legislation: a proposal to define significant/relevant exposure.

Under the new REACH legislation, toxicological testing is required in relation to annual tonnages produced or imported. Requirements for toxicological information increase when production volume increases. The respective information requirements are laid down in the REACH Annexes VII-X. Concerning human toxicology, certain toxicological tests may be waived under specific conditions. Aside from waiving criteria such as technical feasibility, exposure plays a decisive role in the waiving process with the consequence that toxicological testing will not be required in case of "no relevant exposure", "limited exposure", "no exposure" or "no significant exposure" (as expressed in the documents). However, up to now criteria are lacking which precisely define these terms. Attempts have been made to establish cut-off criteria between "non-relevant" and "relevant" (detrimental) exposure based on external exposure concentrations and the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) principle. In this paper we make a proposal and describe a strategy how to define the currently insufficiently described terms "relevant/significant" exposure. We propose to define relevant/significant exposure based on an endpoint-specific TTC approach, starting from a comparison of the tentative external exposure to the specific TTC. This can be followed by a refinement of exposure estimates and may culminate in the experimental determination of internal and target tissue exposure. This strategy enables a well-founded assessment of what "no relevant exposure" is and safeguards an appropriate level of protection of the general population. The feasibility of the approach is demonstrated for reproductive toxicity endpoints.

Continuing harmonization of terminology and innovations for methodologies in developmental toxicology: Report of the 8th Berlin Workshop on Developmental Toxicity, 14-16 May 2014.

This article is a report of the 8th Berlin Workshop on Developmental Toxicity held in May 2014. The main aim of the workshop was the continuing harmonization of terminology and innovations for methodologies used in the assessment of embryo- and fetotoxic findings. The following main topics were discussed: harmonized categorization of external, skeletal, visceral and materno-fetal findings into malformations, variations and grey zone anomalies, aspects of developmental anomalies in humans and laboratory animals, and innovations for new methodologies in developmental toxicology. The application of Version 2 terminology in the DevTox database was considered as a useful improvement in the categorization of developmental anomalies. Participants concluded that initiation of a project for comparative assessments of developmental anomalies in humans and laboratory animals could support regulatory risk assessment and university-based training. Improvement of new methodological approaches for alternatives to animal testing should be triggered for a better understanding of developmental outcomes.

Reproductive toxicity risk assessment for pesticides.

Human health risk assessment for pesticides is based mainly on animal studies submitted by the applicant and aims to determine safe exposure levels for operators (farmers and agricultural workers) and consumers of all age groups. Critical effects, including those resulting from reproductive toxicity, are identified during hazard assessment from an evaluation of all studies in the toxicity package. Reproductive or developmental effects are considered critical if they are more severe or occur at lower doses than other toxicities. Reference values for human exposure are then derived from No Adverse Effect Levels for the relevant critical effects by applying safety factors. This paper describes methods and caveats applicable to the evaluation of prenatal toxicity and two-generation studies from the view of a regulator, stressing the importance of individual litter data and the relationship between different endpoints.

Harmonization of description and classification of fetal observations: achievements and problems still unresolved: report of the 7th Workshop on the Terminology in Developmental Toxicology Berlin, 4-6 May 2011.

This article summarizes the 7th Workshop on the Terminology in Developmental Toxicology held in Berlin, May 4-6, 2011. The series of Berlin Workshops has been mainly concerned with the harmonization of terminology and classification of fetal anomalies in developmental toxicity studies. The main topics of the 7th Workshop were knowledge on the fate of anomalies after birth, use of Version 2 terminology for maternal-fetal observations and non-routinely used species, reclassification of "grey zone" anomalies and categorization of fetal observations for human health risk assessment. The paucity of data on health consequences of the postnatal permanence of fetal anomalies is relevant and further studies are needed. The Version 2 terminology is an important step forward and the terms listed in this glossary are considered also to be appropriate for most observations in non-routinely used species. Continuation of the Berlin Workshops was recommended. Topics suggested for the next Workshop were grouping of fetal observations for reporting and statistical analysis.

Developmental toxicity of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs): a systematic review of experimental data.

Experimental reproductive and developmental toxicity studies with polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) are reviewed in brief to determine their relevance for current environmental exposure of humans during the prenatal and postnatal developmental periods. Additional material is published in electronic form only, which contains graphic overviews on individual PCBs and various mixtures that are linked with the relevant citations. In this comprehensive article we focus on interactions of PCBs with biological substrates that could mediate adverse effects observed in experimental animals and in children, and the shortcomings of many of the animal studies available. A main point of criticism involves the relative lack of animal data on several of those persistent congeners, either as individual compounds or as environmentally relevant mixtures, which are currently used as a measure of human exposure. Experimental studies in animals are frequently conducted with commercial PCB mixtures, a test design that does not reflect the exposure situation in humans. Important improvements of animal experiments could be achieved by more complete reporting of litter data (pre- and post-natal losses, toxic signs in the dam and the offspring, birth weights and postnatal growth data), the inclusion of endpoints that have been found previously to be affected by PCBs, and measurements of internal exposure data.