Guidance on aneugenicity assessment

Risk assessment of food contact materials

Food Contact Materials (FCMs), such as plastics, papers, ceramics and inks used in food packaging, containers, kitchen utensils and tableware are subject to scrutiny due to their potential to release toxic compounds into food. In the European Union, materials and articles intended for contact with food must adhere to stringent safety regulations and novel materials not explicitly covered by existing legislation require individual risk assessment. This project focused on the assessment of the genotoxic potential of two substances used in FCMs, specifically neodecanoic acid (NDA) and di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (DEHP), for which data gaps have been identified in genotoxicity studies. NDA was selected because it was re-evaluated due to the intention to approve its use in printing inks for FCMs. For DEHP, various studies on genotoxicity are available, which, however, differ in their outcome. DEHP is commonly used as a plasticiser to enhance the flexibility, transparency, durability of plastics and is ubiquitously detected in daily life. The present study followed the EFSA strategy for the assessment of genotoxicity applying in vitro methods in bacterial and mammalian cells as well as in silico approaches. In this context, aneuploidy, a thresholded genotoxic effect, received particular attention since few indications are available on the aneugenic activity of FCMs. The results showed significant findings that require further investigation.

Exploring the role of oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction in β-damascone-induced aneuploidy

BACKGROUND

The rose ketone β-damascone (β-Dam) elicits positive results in the in vitro micronucleus (MN) assay using human lymphocytes, but shows negative outcomes in the Ames test and combined in vivo MN and comet assays. This has led to the interpretation that the in vitro MN result is a misleading positive result. Oxidative stress has been suggested as an indirect mode of action (MoA) for in vitro MN formation, with the α, β-unsaturated carbonyl moiety of the β-Dam chemical structure expected to cause misleading positive results through this MoA. In this study, we investigated the role of oxidative stress in β-Dam-induced in vitro MN formation by co-treatment with the antioxidant N-acetyl-L-cysteine (NAC), thereby highlighting a possible link between mitochondrial dysfunction and aneugenicity.

RESULTS

β-Dam induced MN formation in both CHL/IU and BEAS-2B cells, with the response completely inhibited by co-treatment with NAC. Moreover, β-Dam induced oxidative stress-related reporter activity in the ToxTracker assay and increased reactive oxygen species levels, while decreasing glutathione levels, in BEAS-2B cells in the high-content analysis. All of these effects were suppressed by NAC co-treatment. These findings indicate that β-Dam elicits oxidative stress, which causes DNA damage and ultimately leads to MN induction. However, no significant DNA damage-related reporter activities were observed in the ToxTracker assay, nor was there an increased number of γH2AX foci in the high-content analysis. These data suggest that MN formation is not a DNA-reactive MoA. Considering recent reports of aneuploidy resulting from chromosome segregation defects caused by mitochondrial dysfunction, we investigated if β-Dam could cause such dysfunction. We observed that the mitochondrial membrane potential was dose-dependently impaired in BEAS-2B cells exposed to β-Dam.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that the oxidative stress induced by β-Dam exposure may be explained through an aneugenic MoA via mitochondrial dysfunction, thereby contributing to MN formation in mammalian cells.

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.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance amidosulfuron

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, Finland, and co-rapporteur Member State, Croatia, for the pesticide active substance amidosulfuron and the assessment of confirmatory data following the Article 12 MRL review 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 amidosulfuron as a post-emergence herbicide on winter cereals, spring cereals, flax and grass/pasture (all field uses). 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.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance flufenacet

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 Poland and co-rapporteur Member State France for the pesticide active substance flufenacet are reported. In addition, the assessment of the confirmatory data following the Article 12 maximum residue limit (MRL) review of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 is also reported. The context of the peer review was that required by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 844/2012. The conclusions were reached on the basis of the evaluation of the representative use of flufenacet as a herbicide on winter cereals. Confirmatory data following the Article 12 MRL review were assessed. The reliable end points, appropriate for use in regulatory risk assessment and the assessment of confirmatory data following the Article 12 MRL review, are presented. Missing information identified as being required by the regulatory framework is listed. Concerns are reported where identified.

Di(2-ethylexyl) phthalate and chromosomal damage: Insight on aneugenicity from the cytochalasin-block micronucleus assay

Bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate is the most abundant phthalate used as plasticizer to soften plastics and polymers included in medical devices. Human and environmental exposure may occur because DEHP is not chemically bound to plastics and can easily leach out of the materials. This phthalate is classified as reproductive toxicant and possible carcinogen to humans. The genotoxic potential has still to be clarified, but there are indications suggesting that DEHP may have aneugenic effects. To further investigate DEHP genotoxicity, the cytochalasin-block micronucleus assay was applied and combined with the CREST staining to characterise micronucleus content and gain insights on its genotoxic mode of action. Chromosomal damage was also analysed in metaphase and ana-telophase cells and the morphology of the mitotic spindle was investigated to evaluate the possible involvement of this cellular apparatus as a target of DEHP. Our findings indicated that DEHP induced a statistically significant increase in the frequency of micronuclei as well as in the frequency of CREST-positive micronuclei. Consistently, disturbance of chromosome segregation and induction of numerical chromosome changes were observed together with changes in spindle morphology, formation of multipolar spindles and alteration of the microtubule network. Experiments performed without metabolic activation demonstrated a direct action of DEHP on chromosome segregation not mediated by its metabolites. In conclusion, there is consistent evidence for an aneugenic activity of DEHP. A thresholded genotoxic activity was identified for DEHP, disclosing possible implications for risk assessment.

Skin Rejuvenation Efficacy and Safety Evaluation of Kaempferia parviflora Standardized Extract (BG100) in Human 3D Skin Models and Clinical Trial

Polymethoxyflavones from Kaempferia parviflora rhizomes have been shown to effectively combat aging in skin cells and tissues by inhibiting senescence, reducing oxidative stress, and enhancing skin structure and function. This study assessed the anti-aging effects and safety of standardized K. parviflora extract (BG100), enriched with polymethoxyflavones including 5,7-dimethoxyflavone, 5,7,4'-trimethoxyflavone, 3,5,7,3',4'-pentamethoxyflavone, 3,5,7-trimethoxyflavone, and 3,5,7,4'-tetramethoxyflavone. We evaluated BG100's impact on skin rejuvenation and antioxidant properties using photoaged human 3D full-thickness skin models. The potential for skin irritation and sensitization was also assessed through studies on reconstructed human epidermis and clinical trials. Additionally, in vitro genotoxicity testing was performed following OECD guidelines. Results indicate that BG100 promotes collagen and hyaluronic acid production, reduces oxidative stress, and minimizes DNA damage in photoaged full-thickness 3D skin models. Furthermore, it exhibited non-irritating and non-sensitizing properties, as supported by tests on reconstructed human epidermis and clinical settings. BG100 also passed in vitro genotoxicity tests, adhering to OECD guidelines. These results underscore BG100's potential as a highly effective and safe, natural anti-aging agent, suitable for inclusion in cosmeceutical and nutraceutical products aimed at promoting skin rejuvenation.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of muramidase produced with Trichoderma reesei DSM 32338 (Balancius™) for laying hens (DSM nutritional products)

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of muramidase produced with Trichoderma reesei DSM 32338 (Balancius™) as a feed additive for laying hens. The additive is already authorised as a zootechnical additive (functional group: other zootechnical additives) for chickens, turkeys and minor poultry species for fattening or reared for breeding, and for weaned piglets. The enzyme is produced by fermentation with a genetically modified strain of Trichoderma reesei; viable cells of the production strain and its recombinant DNA were not detected in the additive. The EFSA Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) concluded that the additive does not give rise to safety concerns regarding the genetic modification of the production strain. Based on the data available from a sub-chronic oral toxicity study, the Panel concluded that the additive is safe for laying hens at the maximum recommended level of 60,000 LSU(F) (muramidase activity units)/kg feed. The Panel also concluded that the additive is safe for the consumers and the environment. The liquid formulation of the additive is considered not irritant to the skin or eyes. The solid formulation of the additive is considered not irritant to the skin. The Panel cannot conclude on the potential of the additive (both formulations) to be a dermal sensitiser or on the potential of the solid formulation to be irritant to the eyes. Due to the proteinaceous nature, both forms of the additive should be considered respiratory sensitisers. The additive has the potential to be efficacious as a zootechnical additive for laying hens at 30,000 LSU(F)/kg feed.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of Patent Blue V for all non-food-producing animal species for the renewal of its authorisation (Versele-Laga NV)

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of Patent Blue V as a sensory feed additive for non-food-producing animals. The additive is already authorised for use with non-food-producing animals. The applicant has not provided evidence that the additive currently on the market complies with the existing conditions of authorisation. The FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude whether the additive remains safe for the target species due to the non-compliance with the specifications and the lack of adequate data on the potential aneugenicity of the additive. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the potential of the additive to be a dermal and eye irritant nor a dermal and respiratory sensitiser. Since the potential genotoxicity of the additive was not ruled out, the exposure to the additive of the unprotected users should be minimised. The Panel retains that the previously made conclusion on the efficacy remains valid.

The Effects of Acute Bisphenol A Toxicity on the Hematological Parameters, Hematopoiesis, and Kidney Histology of Zebrafish (Danio rerio)

In this study, the results of evaluating the acute toxicity of Bisphenol A on Danio rerio are presented, encompassing peripheral blood parameters, the composition of hematopoietic cells of erythroid and myeloid lines in the head kidney, and data from histological studies. The LC50 values of Bisphenol A for adult zebrafish individuals for 12, 24, and 48-96 h were determined, which were 18.04, 7.55, and 6.22 mg/L, respectively. The study includes data on the morphology and quantitative frequency of specific cells in the hematopoietic tissue of the head kidney, along with the consideration of adaptive mechanisms in hematopoiesis under BPA exposure. The application of polynomial regression analysis to reveal the concentration-effect relationship for some hematological and histological parameters was demonstrated. Significant increases in the frequency of erythrocyte nuclear abnormalities were observed at BPA concentrations of 6 and 8 mg/L, which indicates a genotoxic effect. BPA's impact on fish peripheral blood parameters manifested as an increase in the number of erythrocytes (RBC) and immature erythrocytes, as well as a decrease in the number of lymphocytes. The most notable pathological changes in the head kidney's hematopoietic tissue included circulatory disturbances and the formation of inflammation/degradation foci, as confirmed by histopathologic indices. At BPA concentrations of 2 and 4 mg/L, the observed changes were compensated for by hematopoietic adaptation mechanisms; however, at concentrations of 6 and 8 mg/L, acute systemic toxicity was evident.

Scientific opinion on the renewal of the authorisation of Fumokomp (SF-009) as a smoke flavouring Primary Product

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the safety of the smoke flavouring Primary Product Fumokomp (SF-009), for which a renewal application was submitted in accordance with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003 (in the renewal application the Primary Product is reported as 'Fumokomp Conc.'). This opinion refers to an assessment of data submitted on chemical characterisation, dietary exposure and genotoxicity of the Primary Product. Fumokomp Conc. is produced by pyrolysis of beech and hornbeam woods. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) was applied for both identification and quantification of the volatile constituents of the Primary Product. Given the limitations of the method, the Panel cannot judge with confidence whether the applied method meets the legal quality criterion that at least 80% of the volatile fraction shall be identified and quantified. Moreover, the Panel concluded that the absence of furan-2(5H)-one from the Primary Product was not convincingly demonstrated. At the maximum proposed use levels, dietary exposure estimates calculated with FAIM ranged from 0.04 to 0.9 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day at the mean and from 0.1 to 1.5 mg/kg bw per day at the 95th percentile. The information available on the 32 identified components of the Primary Product, although limited, did not indicate a concern for genotoxicity for any of these substances. However, whole mixture testing in an in vitro mouse lymphoma assay gave positive results which would require an adequate in vivo follow-up study. In addition, the potential for aneugenicity of the Primary Product has not been adequately investigated. Accordingly, the potential safety concern for genotoxicity of the Primary Product cannot be ruled out.

Scientific opinion on the renewal of the authorisation of SmokEz Enviro-23 (SF-006) as a smoke flavouring Primary Product

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the safety of the smoke flavouring Primary Product SmokEz Enviro-23 (SF-006), for which a renewal application was submitted in accordance with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003. This opinion refers to the assessment of data submitted on chemical characterisation, dietary exposure and genotoxicity of the Primary Product. SmokEz Enviro-23 is obtained by pyrolysis of oak, maple, hickory, ash, birch, beech and cherry woods. Given the limitations of the quantification approach employed by the applicant, the Panel could not judge whether the applied methods meet the legal quality criterion that at least 80% of the volatile fraction shall be identified and quantified. At the maximum proposed use levels, dietary exposure estimates calculated with DietEx ranged from 0.01 to 3.2 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day at the mean and from no dietary exposure to 9.5 mg/kg bw per day at the 95th percentile. The Panel concluded that four components in the Primary Product raise a potential concern for genotoxicity. In addition, a potential concern for genotoxicity was identified for the unidentified part of the mixture. The Primary Product contains furan-2(5H)-one and benzene-1,2-diol, for which a concern for genotoxicity was identified in vivo upon oral administration. Considering that the exposure estimates for these two components are above the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) of 0.0025 μg/kg bw per day for DNA-reactive mutagens and/or carcinogens, the Panel concluded that the Primary Product raises concern with respect to genotoxicity.

Scientific opinion on the renewal of the authorisation of Zesti Smoke Code 10 (SF-002) as a smoke flavouring Primary Product

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the safety of the smoke flavouring Primary Product Zesti Smoke Code 10 (SF-002), for which a renewal application was submitted in accordance with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003. This opinion refers to the assessment of data submitted on chemical characterisation, dietary exposure and genotoxicity of the Primary Product. Zesti Smoke Code 10 is obtained by pyrolysis of hickory and oak woods. Given the limitations of the quantification approach employed by the applicant, the Panel could not judge whether the applied methods meet the legal quality criterion that at least 80% of the volatile fraction shall be identified and quantified. At the maximum proposed use levels, dietary exposure estimates calculated with DietEx ranged from 0.02 to 4.6 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day at the mean and from no dietary exposure to 13.0 mg/kg bw per day at the 95th percentile. The Panel concluded that four components in the Primary Product raise a potential concern for genotoxicity. In addition, a potential concern for genotoxicity was identified for the unidentified part of the mixture. The Primary Product contains furan-2(5H)-one and benzene-1,2-diol, for which a concern for genotoxicity was identified in vivo upon oral administration. Considering that the exposure estimates for these two components are above the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) of 0.0025 μg/kg bw per day for DNA-reactive mutagens and/or carcinogens, the Panel concluded that the Primary Product raises concern with respect to genotoxicity.

Scientific opinion on the renewal of the authorisation of proFagus Smoke R709 (SF-008) as a smoke flavouring Primary Product

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the safety of the smoke flavouring Primary Product proFagus Smoke R709 (SF-008), for which a renewal application was submitted in accordance with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003. This opinion refers to the assessment of data submitted on chemical characterisation, dietary exposure and genotoxicity of the Primary Product. ProFagus Smoke R709 is obtained by pyrolysis of beech and oak wood as main source materials. The panel concluded that the compositional data provided on the Primary Product are adequate. At the maximum proposed use levels, dietary exposure estimates calculated with DietEx ranged from 0.8 to 12.2 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day at the mean and from 2.3 to 51.4 mg/kg bw per day at the 95th percentile. The Panel concluded that three components in the Primary Product raise a potential concern for genotoxicity. In addition, a potential concern for genotoxicity was identified for the unidentified part of the mixture. The Primary Product contains furan-2(5H)-one, for which a concern for genotoxicity was identified in vivo upon oral administration. Considering that the exposure estimates for this component are above the TTC of 0.0025 μg/kg bw per day for DNA-reactive mutagens and/or carcinogens, the panel concluded that the Primary Product raises concern with respect to genotoxicity.

Scientific opinion on the renewal of the authorisation of proFagus Smoke R714 (SF-001) as a smoke flavouring Primary Product

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the safety of the smoke flavouring Primary Product proFagus Smoke R714 (SF-001), for which a renewal application was submitted in accordance with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003. This opinion refers to the assessment of data submitted on chemical characterisation, dietary exposure and genotoxicity of the Primary Product. ProFagus Smoke R714 is obtained by pyrolysis of beech and oak woods as main source materials. Based on the compositional data, the Panel noted that the identified and quantified proportion of the solvent-free fraction amounts to 39 weight (wt)%, thus the applied method does not meet the legal quality criterion that at least 50% of the solvent-free fraction shall be identified and quantified. At the maximum proposed use levels, dietary exposure estimates calculated with DietEx ranged from 0.7 to 10.9 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day at the mean and from 2.2 to 42.5 mg/kg bw per day at the 95th percentile. The Panel concluded that three components in the Primary Product raise a potential concern for genotoxicity. In addition, a potential concern for genotoxicity was identified for the unidentified part of the mixture. The Primary Product contains furan-2(5H)-one, for which a concern for genotoxicity was identified in vivo upon oral administration. Considering that the exposure estimates for this component are above the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) of 0.0025 μg/kg bw per day for DNA-reactive mutagens and/or carcinogens, the Panel concluded that the Primary Product raises concern with respect to genotoxicity.

Scientific opinion on the renewal of the authorisation of Scansmoke SEF7525 (SF-004) as a smoke flavouring Primary Product

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the safety of the smoke flavouring Primary Product Scansmoke SEF7525 (SF-004), for which a renewal application was submitted in accordance with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003. This opinion refers to the assessment of data submitted on chemical characterisation, dietary exposure and genotoxicity of the Primary Product. Scansmoke SEF7525 is obtained from a tar produced from a mixture of red oak, white oak, maple, beech and hickory. Based on the compositional data, the Panel noted that the identified and quantified proportion of the solvent-free fraction amounts to 32.6 weight (wt)%, thus the applied method does not meet the legal quality criterion that at least 50% of the solvent-free fraction shall be identified and quantified. At the maximum proposed use levels, dietary exposure estimates calculated with Food Additive Intake Model (FAIM) ranged from 0.6 to 3.8 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day at the mean and from 1.1 to 10.1 mg/kg bw per day at the 95th percentile. Based on the available information on genotoxicity on 44 identified components, the Panel concluded that two substances in the Primary Product, styrene and benzofuran, raise a potential concern for genotoxicity. In addition, a potential concern for genotoxicity was identified for the unidentified part of the mixture. Considering that the exposure estimates for styrene and benzofuran are above the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) value of 0.0025 kg/kg bw per day for DNA-reactive mutagens and/or carcinogens and since further data are needed to clarify their potential genotoxicity, the Panel concluded that the potential safety concern for genotoxicity of the Primary Product cannot be ruled out.

Scientific opinion on the renewal of the authorisation of Smoke Concentrate 809045 (SF-003) as a smoke flavouring Primary Product

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the safety of the smoke flavouring Primary Product Smoke Concentrate 809045 (SF-003), for which a renewal application was submitted in accordance with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003. This opinion refers to the assessment of data submitted on chemical characterisation, dietary exposure and genotoxicity of the Primary Product. Product Smoke Concentrate 809045 is obtained by pyrolysis of beech wood. The Panel concluded that the compositional data provided on the Primary Product are adequate. At the maximum proposed use levels, dietary exposure estimates calculated with DietEx ranged from 0.1 to 1.5 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day at the mean and from 0.2 to 5.2 mg/kg bw per day at the 95th percentile. The Panel concluded that eleven components in the Primary Product raise a potential concern for genotoxicity. In addition, a potential concern for genotoxicity was identified for the unidentified part of the mixture. The Primary Product contains furan-2(5H)-one and benzene-1,2-diol, for which a concern for genotoxicity was identified in vivo upon oral administration. Considering that the exposure estimates for these two components are above the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) of 0.0025 μg/kg bw per day for DNA-reactive mutagens and/or carcinogens, the Panel concluded that the Primary Product raises concern with respect to genotoxicity.

Scientific opinion on the renewal of the authorisation of SmokEz C-10 (SF-005) as a smoke flavouring Primary Product

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the safety of the smoke flavouring Primary Product SmoKEz C-10 (SF-005), for which a renewal application was submitted in accordance with Article 12(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003. This opinion refers to the assessment of data submitted on chemical characterisation, dietary exposure and genotoxicity of the Primary Product. SmoKEz C-10 is obtained by pyrolysis of maple, oak, hickory, ash, birch, beech and cherry woods. Given the limitations of the quantification approach employed by the applicant, the Panel could not judge whether the applied methods meet the legal quality criterion that at least 80% of the volatile fraction shall be identified and quantified. At the maximum proposed use levels, dietary exposure estimates calculated with DietEx ranged from 0.01 to 5.1 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day at the mean and from no dietary exposure to 18.1 mg/kg bw per day at the 95th percentile. The Panel concluded that five components in the Primary Product raise a potential concern for genotoxicity. In addition, a potential concern for genotoxicity was identified for the unidentified part of the mixture. The Primary Product contains furan-2(5H)-one and benzene-1,2-diol, for which a concern for genotoxicity was identified in vivo upon oral administration. Considering that the exposure estimates for these two components are above the threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) of 0.0025 μg/kg bw per day for DNA-reactive mutagens and/or carcinogens, the Panel concluded that the Primary Product raises concern with respect to genotoxicity.

Genotoxicity assessment: opportunities, challenges and perspectives for quantitative evaluations of dose-response data

Genotoxicity data are mainly interpreted in a qualitative way, which typically results in a binary classification of chemical entities. For more than a decade, there has been a discussion about the need for a paradigm shift in this regard. Here, we review current opportunities, challenges and perspectives for a more quantitative approach to genotoxicity assessment. Currently discussed opportunities mainly include the determination of a reference point (e.g., a benchmark dose) from genetic toxicity dose-response data, followed by calculation of a margin of exposure (MOE) or derivation of a health-based guidance value (HBGV). In addition to new opportunities, major challenges emerge with the quantitative interpretation of genotoxicity data. These are mainly rooted in the limited capability of standard in vivo genotoxicity testing methods to detect different types of genetic damage in multiple target tissues and the unknown quantitative relationships between measurable genotoxic effects and the probability of experiencing an adverse health outcome. In addition, with respect to DNA-reactive mutagens, the question arises whether the widely accepted assumption of a non-threshold dose-response relationship is at all compatible with the derivation of a HBGV. Therefore, at present, any quantitative genotoxicity assessment approach remains to be evaluated case-by-case. The quantitative interpretation of in vivo genotoxicity data for prioritization purposes, e.g., in connection with the MOE approach, could be seen as a promising opportunity for routine application. However, additional research is needed to assess whether it is possible to define a genotoxicity-derived MOE that can be considered indicative of a low level of concern. To further advance quantitative genotoxicity assessment, priority should be given to the development of new experimental methods to provide a deeper mechanistic understanding and a more comprehensive basis for the analysis of dose-response relationships.

Guidance document on the impact of water treatment processes on residues of active substances or their metabolites in water abstracted for the production of drinking water

This guidance document provides a tiered framework for risk assessors and facilitates risk managers in making decisions concerning the approval of active substances (AS) that are chemicals in plant protection products (PPPs) and biocidal products, and authorisation of the products. Based on the approaches presented in this document, a conclusion can be drawn on the impact of water treatment processes on residues of the AS or its metabolites in surface water and/or groundwater abstracted for the production of drinking water, i.e. the formation of transformation products (TPs). This guidance enables the identification of actual public health concerns from exposure to harmful compounds generated during the processing of water for the production of drinking water, and it focuses on water treatment methods commonly used in the European Union (EU). The tiered framework determines whether residues from PPP use or residues from biocidal product use can be present in water at water abstraction locations. Approaches, including experimental methods, are described that can be used to assess whether harmful TPs may form during water treatment and, if so, how to assess the impact of exposure to these water treatment TPs (tTPs) and other residues including environmental TPs (eTPs) on human and domesticated animal health through the consumption of TPs via drinking water. The types of studies or information that would be required are described while avoiding vertebrate testing as much as possible. The framework integrates the use of weight-of-evidence and, when possible alternative (new approach) methods to avoid as far as possible the need for additional testing.

Peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance flutolanil

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, the Netherlands, and co-rapporteur Member State, the United Kingdom, for the pesticide active substance flutolanil, and the assessment of applications for maximum residue levels (MRLs) 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 flutolanil as a fungicide on potatoes, tulips and iris (field uses). MRLs were assessed for a potato in-furrow treatment. 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.

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.

Assessment of the feed additive consisting of robenidine hydrochloride (Cycostat® 66G) for rabbits for breeding and rabbits for fattening for the renewal of its authorisation (Zoetis)

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Additives and Products or Substances used in Animal Feed (FEEDAP) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the feed additive consisting of robenidine hydrochloride (Cycostat® 66G) for rabbits for breeding and rabbits for fattening for the renewal of its authorisation. Since the potential aneugenic activity of robenidine hydrochloride cannot be excluded, the FEEDAP Panel is not in the position to conclude on the safety of the additive for the target species and the consumer. In the absence of data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude on the safety of robenidine hydrochloride for the environment. Robenidine hydrochloride has potential for bioaccumulation; however, a risk for secondary poisoning for worm/fish-eating birds and mammals is not likely to occur. No concern for groundwater is expected. Robenidine hydrochloride is not a skin or eye irritant and not a skin sensitiser. Due to the lack of data on the genotoxicity (aneugenicity) of the substance, the exposure to the additive of the unprotected users should be minimised. Owing to the lack of sufficient data, the FEEDAP Panel cannot conclude that robenidine hydrochloride from Cycostat® 66G is still efficacious against recent Eimeria spp. strains in rabbits.

Flavouring Group Evaluation 21 Revision 6 (FGE.21Rev6): thiazoles, thiophenes, thiazoline and thienyl derivatives from chemical groups 29 and 30

The Panel on Food additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the flavouring substances 2,4-dimethyl-3-thiazoline [FL-no: 15.060] and 2-isobutyl-3-thiazoline [FL-no: 15.119] in Flavouring Group Evaluation 21 revision 6 (FGE.21Rev6). FGE.21Rev6 deals with 41 flavouring substances of which 39 have been already evaluated to be of no safety concern when based on the MSDI approach. For [FL-no: 15.060 and 15.119], a concern for genotoxicity was raised in FGE.21. Genotoxicity data have been submitted for the supporting substance 4,5-dimethyl-2-isobutyl-3-thiazoline [FL-no: 15.032] evaluated in FGE.76Rev2. The concerns for gene mutations and clastogenicity are ruled out for [FL-no: 15.032] and for the structurally related substances [FL-no: 15.060 and 15.119], but not for aneugenicity. Therefore, the aneugenic potential of [FL-no: 15.060 and 15.119] should be investigated in studies with the individual substances. For [FL-no: 15.054, 15.055, 15.057, 15.079 and 15.135], (more reliable) information on uses and use levels is needed to (re)calculate the mTAMDIs in order to finalise their evaluation. Provided that information is submitted for [FL-no: 15.060 and 15.119] with respect to potential aneugenicity, that would allow evaluation of these substances through the Procedure, also for these two substances, more reliable data on uses and use levels would be required. Upon submission of such data, additional data on toxicity may become necessary for all seven substances. For [FL-no: 15.054, 15.057, 15.079 and 15.135], information on the actual percentages of stereoisomers in the material of commerce based on analytical data should be provided.

Scientific Guidance on the data required for the risk assessment of flavourings to be used in or on foods

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA developed a new scientific guidance to assist applicants in the preparation of applications for the authorisation of flavourings to be used in or on foods. This guidance applies to applications for a new authorisation as well as for a modification of an existing authorisation of a food flavouring, submitted under Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008. It defines the scientific data required for the evaluation of those food flavourings for which an evaluation and approval is required according to Article 9 of Regulation (EC) No 1334/2008. This applies to flavouring substances, flavouring preparations, thermal process flavourings, flavour precursors, other flavourings and source materials, as defined in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1334/2008. Information to be provided in all applications relates to: (a) the characterisation of the food flavouring, including the description of its identity, manufacturing process, chemical composition, specifications, stability and reaction and fate in foods; (b) the proposed uses and use levels and the assessment of the dietary exposure and (c) the safety data, including information on the genotoxic potential of the food flavouring, toxicological data other than genotoxicity and information on the safety for the environment. For the toxicological studies, a tiered approach is applied, for which the testing requirements, key issues and triggers are described. Applicants should generate the data requested in each section to support the safety assessment of the food flavouring. Based on the submitted data, EFSA will assess the safety of the food flavouring and conclude whether or not it presents risks to human health and to the environment, if applicable, under the proposed conditions of use.

Scientific opinion on Flavouring group evaluation 216 revision 2 (FGE.216Rev2): consideration of the genotoxicity potential of α,β-unsaturated 2-phenyl-2-alkenals from subgroup 3.3 of FGE.19

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the genotoxic potential of five flavouring substances from subgroup 3.3 of FGE.19, in the Flavouring Group Evaluation 216 (FGE.216). In FGE.216 and in FGE.216Rev1, the CEF Panel requested additional genotoxicity data on 2-phenylcrotonaldehyde [FL-no: 05.062], the representative for these five substances. New experimental data on [FL-no: 05.062] were provided and are evaluated in the present revision of FGE.216 (FGE.216Rev2). Based on the new data, the Panel concluded that, for all the five substances, the concerns for gene mutations and clastogenicity are ruled out by the negative results observed in an in vivo gene mutation assay and in an in vivo comet assay, respectively. In vitro, [FL-no: 05.062] induced micronuclei through an aneugenic mode of action. The available in vivo micronucleus studies were inconclusive and cannot be used to rule out potential aneugenicity of [FL-no: 05.062] in vivo. Therefore, the Panel compared the lowest concentration resulting in aneugenicity in vitro with the use levels reported for this substance. Based on this comparison, the Panel concluded that the use of the flavouring substance [FL-no: 05.062] at the reported use levels in several food categories would raise a concern for aneugenicity. Based on structural similarity, for the remaining four substances in this FGE [FL-no: 05.099, 05.100, 05.175 and 05.222], an aneugenic potential may also be anticipated. For these four substances, individual data are needed to establish whether they have aneugenic potential. Accordingly, it is currently not appropriate to assess any of these five substances through the Procedure for the evaluation of flavouring substances.

Scientific opinion on Prosmoke BW 01

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) was requested to evaluate the safety of Prosmoke BW 01 as a new smoke flavouring primary product, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2065/2003. Prosmoke BW01 is produced by pyrolysis of beechwood (Fagus sylvatica L.) sawdust. Its water content is estimated at 56 wt%, the total identified volatile fraction accounts for 28 wt% of the primary product, corresponding to 64% of the solvent-free mass, while the unidentified fraction amounts to 16 wt% of the primary product. Analytical data provided for three batches demonstrated that their batch-to-batch-variability was sufficiently low. However, for the batch used for the toxicological studies, there were substantial deviations in the concentration of nearly all the constituents compared to the other three batches. The dietary exposure of Prosmoke BW 01 was estimated to be between 6.2 and 9.2 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day, respectively, using SMK-EPIC and SMK-TAMDI. Using the FAIM tool, the 95th percentile exposure estimates ranged from 3.2 mg/kg bw per day for the elderly to 17.9 mg/kg bw per day for children. The Panel noted that furan-2(5H)-one is present in all batches of the primary product at an average concentration of 0.88 wt%. This substance was evaluated by the FAF Panel as genotoxic in vivo after oral exposure. The Panel considered that the (geno)toxicity studies available on the whole mixture were not adequate to support the safety assessment, due to limitations in these studies and because they were performed with a batch which may not be representative for the material of commerce. Considering that the exposure estimates for furan-2(5H)-one are above the TTC value of 0.0025 μg/kg bw per day (or 0.15 μg/person per day) for DNA-reactive mutagens and/or carcinogens, the Panel concluded that Prosmoke BW 01 raises a concern with respect to genotoxicity.

Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of acacia gum (gum Arabic) for all animal species (A.I.P.G. Association for International Promotion of Gums)

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety and efficacy of acacia gum (gum Arabic) as a feed additive for all animal species. Acacia gum is safe up to approximately 280 mg/kg complete feed for chickens for fattening, 375 mg/kg complete feed for turkeys for fattening, 400 mg/kg complete feed for rabbit, 500 and 600 mg/kg complete feed for piglets and pigs for fattening, respectively, 1,100 mg/kg complete feed for cattle for fattening and 1,250 mg/kg complete feed for veal calves and salmonids. No conclusions can be reached on the safety for long living and reproductive animal, until the genotoxic potential of the additive is fully assessed in the framework of its use as a feed additive. No exposure of the consumer to the additive or its metabolites is expected. Therefore, the use of the additive in animal nutrition is considered safe for the consumers. Acacia gum is a potential dermal and respiratory sensitiser. No conclusion can be reached on the irritating potential to the skin or eyes. The use of acacia gum in animal nutrition is considered safe for the environment. The FEEDAP Panel is not in the position to conclude on the efficacy of acacia gum.

Statement on the active substance flupyradifurone

Flupyradifurone is a novel butenolide insecticide, first approved as an active substance for use in plant protection products by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2084. Following concerns that this substance may pose high risks to humans and the environment, the French authorities, in November 2020, asked the Commission to restrict its uses under Article 69 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. To support this request, competent Authorities from France cited a series of literature papers investigating its hazards and/or exposure to humans and the environment. In addition, in June 2020, the Dutch Authorities notified the Commission, under Article 56 of Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009, of new information on flupyradifurone on the wild bee species Megachile rotundata. This notification is also referred to in the French notification on flupyradifurone. Consequently, the EFSA PPR Panel was mandated to quantify the likelihood of this body of evidence constituting proof of serious risks to humans or the environment. Therefore, the EFSA PPR Panel evaluated the likelihood of these studies indicating new or higher hazards and exposure to humans and the environment compared to previous EU assessments. A stepwise methodology was designed, including: (i) the initial screening; (ii) data extraction and critical appraisal based on the principles of OHAT/NTP; (iii) weight of evidence, including consideration of the previous EU assessments; (iv) uncertainty analysis, followed, whenever relevant, by an expert knowledge elicitation process. For the human health, only one study was considered relevant for the genotoxic potential of flupyradifurone in vitro. These data did not provide sufficient information to overrule the EU assessment, as in vivo studies already addressed the genotoxic potential of flupyradifurone. Environment: All available data investigated hazards in bee species. For honey bees, the likelihood of the new data indicating higher hazards than the previous EU assessment was considered low or moderate, with some uncertainties. However, among solitary bee species - which were not addressed in the previous EU assessment - there was evidence that Megachile rotundata may be disproportionately sensitive to flupyradifurone. This sensitivity, which may partially be explained by the low bodyweight of this species, was mechanistically linked to inadequate bodily metabolisation processes.

Scientific Guidance for the submission of dossiers on Food Enzymes

Following a request from the European Commission, EFSA developed an updated scientific guidance to assist applicants in the preparation of applications for food enzymes. This guidance describes the scientific data to be included in applications for the authorisation of food enzymes, as well as for the extension of use for existing authorisations, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008 and its implementing rules. Information to be provided in applications relates to source, production and characteristics of the food enzyme, toxicological data, allergenicity and dietary exposure estimation. Source, production and characteristics of the food enzyme are first considered only for enzymes of microbial origin and subsequently for those enzymes derived from plants and for enzymes from animal sources. Finally, the data requested for toxicology, allergenicity and dietary exposure applies to all food enzymes independent of the source. On the basis of the submitted data, EFSA will assess the safety of food enzymes and conclude whether or not they present a risk to human health under the proposed conditions of use.