EFSA Journal最新文献

EFSA requested its Scientific Committee to prepare a guidance document on appraising and integrating evidence from epidemiological studies for use in EFSA's scientific assessments. The guidance document provides an introduction to epidemiological studies and illustrates the typical biases, which may be present in different epidemiological study designs. It then describes key epidemiological concepts relevant for evidence appraisal. This includes brief explanations for measures of association, exposure assessment, statistical inference, systematic error and effect modification. The guidance then describes the concept of external validity and the principles of appraising epidemiological studies. The customisation of the study appraisal process is explained including tailoring of tools for assessing the risk of bias (RoB). Several examples of appraising experimental and observational studies using a RoB tool are annexed to the document to illustrate the application of the approach. The latter part of this guidance focuses on different steps of evidence integration, first within and then across different streams of evidence. With respect to risk characterisation, the guidance considers how evidence from human epidemiological studies can be used in dose–response modelling with several different options being presented. Finally, the guidance addresses the application of uncertainty factors in risk characterisation when using evidence from human epidemiological studies.

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panel on Plant Health performed a quantitative risk assessment for the EU of Phlyctinus callosus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), a polyphagous pest occurring in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. The current risk assessment focused on potential pathways for entry, the climatic conditions allowing establishment, the expected spread capacity and the impact considering a time horizon of 10 years (2023–2032). The Panel identified the import of apples, cut flowers and table grapes as the most relevant entry pathways. Over the next 10 years, an annual median estimate of approximately 49.5 (90% certainty range, CR, ranging from 4.0 to 881.2) potential P. callosus founder populations are expected. When the probability of establishment is considered and climatic indicators are used to define the areas in the EU where establishment is possible, the model estimated a median of 1 founder population every 1.3 years (90% CR: 1 every 30.8 years to 23.3 per year) in the scenario where the areas are defined by the union of all the climatic indicators and 1 founder population every 11.9 years (90% CR: 1 every 256.6 years to 2.5 per year) in the scenario where establishment is possible only in the areas defined by the climatic indicator of minimum soil temperature. The estimated number of founder populations per year is mostly driven by the probability of establishment in the rural areas, infestation rate in table grapes and the probability of transfer to a suitable host in the rural area. The risk of entry for cut flowers and apples is substantially lower than the risk from the table grapes. If such founder populations were to establish, P. callosus is estimated to spread by natural dispersal and common agricultural practices at a rate of 15.5 m/year (90% CR 5.1–46.8 m/year) after a lag phase of 4.0 years (90% CR 1.3–8.7 years). The impact, expressed as percentage loss of the production directly attributable to P. callosus in the areas where establishment is possible and assuming farmers do not apply specific control measures was estimated at 0.5% (90% CR 0.01%–2.8%) for cut flowers/foliage, 5.2% (90% CR 2.2%–11.7%) for apples and 2% (90% CR 1.3%–5.2%) for table grapes. Options for risk reduction are discussed, but their effectiveness is not quantified.

The food enzyme triacylglycerol lipase (triacylglycerol acylhydrolase; EC 3.1.1.3) is produced with the non-genetically modified Penicillium caseifulvum strain AE-LRF by Amano Enzyme Inc. The food enzyme was free from viable cells of the production organism. It is intended to be used in four food manufacturing processes. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 0.013 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not indicate a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90-day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 69 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 5308. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. However, the Panel noted that traces of ■■■■■, used in the manufacture of the triacylglycerol lipase, may be found in the food enzyme. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure could not be excluded, particularly in individuals sensitised to fish. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns, under the intended conditions of use.

The conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) following the peer review of the initial risk assessments carried out by the competent authorities of the rapporteur Member State, Belgium, and co-rapporteur Member State, Austria, for the pesticide active substance lenacil are reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012, as amended by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 2018/1659. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative uses of lenacil as a herbicide on sugar and fodder beet (field use). The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified.

The food enzyme bacillolysin (EC 3.4.24.28) is produced with the non-genetically modified Bacillus amyloliquefaciens strain AE-NP by Amano Enzyme Inc. A safety evaluation of this food enzyme was made previously, in which EFSA concluded that this food enzyme did not give rise to safety concerns when used in thirteen food manufacturing processes. Subsequently, the applicant requested to extend its use to two additional processes. In this assessment, EFSA updated the safety evaluation of this food enzyme when used in a total of fifteen food manufacturing processes. As the food enzyme–total organic solids (TOS) are removed in two food manufacturing processes, the dietary exposure to the food enzyme–TOS was estimated only for the remaining thirteen processes. Dietary exposure was calculated to be up to 35.251 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. Based on the data provided for the previous evaluation and the revised dietary exposure in the present evaluation, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the revised intended conditions of use.

The EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP) assessed the safety of the recycling process Fucine Film (EU register number RECYC322), which uses the Reifenhäuser technology. The input material consists of hot caustic washed and dried poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) flakes mainly originating from collected post-consumer PET containers, including no more than 5% PET from non-food consumer applications. The flakes are extruded under vacuum into sheets. The recycled sheets are intended to be used at up to 100% for the manufacture of materials and articles for contact with all types of foodstuffs, excluded drinking water and beverages, for long-term storage at room temperature, with or without hotfill. Based on the limited data available, the Panel concluded that the information submitted to EFSA was inadequate to demonstrate that the recycling process Fucine Film is able to reduce potential unknown contamination of the input PET flakes to a concentration that does not pose a risk to human health.

The food enzyme subtilisin (EC 3.4.21.62) is produced with the non-genetically modified Bacillus paralicheniformis strain AP-01 by Nagase (Europa) GmbH. It was considered free from viable cells of the production organism. The food enzyme is intended to be used in five food manufacturing processes. Since residual amounts of food enzyme-total organic solids (TOS) are removed in one process, dietary exposure was calculated only for the remaining four food manufacturing processes. It was estimated to be up to 0.875 mg TOS/kg body weight per day in European populations. The production strain of the food enzyme has the capacity to produce bacitracin and thus failed to meet the requirements of the Qualified Presumption of Safety approach. Bacitracin was detected in the industrial fermentation medium but not in the food enzyme itself. However, the limit of detection of the analytical method used for bacitracin was not sufficient to exclude the possible presence of bacitracin at a level representing a risk for the development of antimicrobial resistant bacteria. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and twenty-eight matches with respiratory allergens, one match with a contact allergen and two matches with food allergens (melon and pomegranate) were found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions upon dietary exposure to this food enzyme, particularly in individuals sensitised to melon or pomegranate, cannot be excluded, but would not exceed the risk of consuming melon or pomegranate. Based on the data provided, the Panel could not exclude the presence of bacitracin, a medically important antimicrobial, and consequently the safety of this food enzyme could not be established.

Following an application from Egde Pharma Sp. z o.o, submitted for authorisation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of Poland, the EFSA Panel on Nutrition, Novel Foods and Food Allergens (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to citicoline and memory. The Panel considers that the food, citicoline (cytidine 5-diphosphocholine, CDP-Choline) inner salt, is sufficiently characterised. Improvement, maintenance or reduced loss of memory is a beneficial physiological effect for middle-aged or elderly adults encountering age-associated subjective memory impairment. The applicant identified three pertinent human intervention studies in healthy individuals that investigated the effect of citicoline on memory. In weighing the evidence, the Panel took into account that only one randomised controlled trial in healthy participants showed a beneficial effect of citicoline on episodic memory when consumed at doses of 500 mg/day for 12 weeks, whereas this effect has not been observed in another study using citicoline at doses of 1 g/day for 3 months or supported by data obtained in patients with dementia using doses of 1 g/day for 12 weeks and 12 months. No convincing evidence of a plausible mechanism by which citicoline or any of its components (in addition to their endogenous synthesis) could exert an effect on memory in humans has been provided. The Panel concludes that a cause-and-effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of citicoline (CDP-Choline) inner salt and improvement, maintenance or reduced loss of memory in middle-aged or elderly adults encountering age-associated subjective memory impairment.

Following an application from Cárnicas Joselito S.A. pursuant to Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of Spain, the Panel on Nutrition, Novel Foods and Food Allergens (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to ‘Joselito ham increases antioxidant substances in the body, reduces blood pressure and plasma triglycerides, decreases oxidative stress and prevents effect in diseases related to the cardiovascular and intestinal systems’. The scope of the application was proposed to fall under a health claim referring to disease risk reduction. The food constituent that is the subject of the health claim is Joselito, an Iberian ham characterised by a high content of oleic acid. The Panel considers that the food is sufficiently characterised. The Panel considers that lowering of LDL-cholesterol concentration and blood pressure is a beneficial effect by decreasing the risk of coronary heart disease. Upon a request from EFSA, the applicant identified one human intervention study as being pertinent to the claim. However, due to methodological limitations, the Panel considers that no conclusions can be drawn from this study for the scientific substantiation of the claim. The Panel notes that no human intervention studies from which conclusions could be drawn for the scientific substantiation of the claim were provided by the applicant. The Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the intake of Joselito® ham and the reduction of LDL-cholesterol concentration or blood pressure.

The food enzyme β-glucosidase (β-D-glucoside glucohydrolase; EC 3.2.1.21) is produced with the non-genetically modified Penicillium guanacastense strain AE-GLY by Amano Enzyme Inc. The food enzyme is intended to be used in four food manufacturing processes. Dietary exposure to the food enzyme-total organic solids (TOS) was estimated to be up to 4.054 mg TOS/kg body weight (bw) per day in European populations. Genotoxicity tests did not raise a safety concern. The systemic toxicity was assessed by means of a repeated dose 90-day oral toxicity study in rats. The Panel identified a no observed adverse effect level of 943 mg TOS/kg bw per day, the highest dose tested, which when compared with the estimated dietary exposure, resulted in a margin of exposure of at least 233. A search for the similarity of the amino acid sequence of the food enzyme to known allergens was made and no match was found. The Panel considered that the risk of allergic reactions by dietary exposure cannot be excluded, but the likelihood is low. Based on the data provided, the Panel concluded that this food enzyme does not give rise to safety concerns under the intended conditions of use.