| 1. |
- Alexander, Jan, et al.
(författare)
-
Scientific Opinion on Hexabromocyclododecanes (HBCDDs) in Food
- 2011
-
Ingår i: EFSA Journal. - 1831-4732. ; 9:7, s. 2296-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- EFSA was asked by the European Commission to deliver a scientific opinion on hexabromocyclododecanes (HBCDDs) in food. HBCDDs are additive flame retardants primarily used in expanded and extruded polystyrene applied as construction and packing materials, and in textiles. Technical HBCDD predominantly consists of three stereoisomers (α-, β- and γ-HBCDD). Also δ- and ε-HBCDD may be present but at very low concentrations. HBCDDs are present in the environment and likewise in biota and in food and feed. Data from the analysis of HBCDDs in 1,914 food samples were provided to EFSA by seven European countries, covering the period from 2000 to 2010. The Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM Panel) selected α-, β- and γ-HBCDD to be of primary interest. Since all toxicity studies were carried out with technical HBCDD, a risk assessment of individual stereoisomers was not possible. Main targets were the liver, thyroid hormone homeostasis and the reproductive, nervous and immune systems. HBCDDs are not genotoxic. The CONTAM Panel identified neurodevelopmental effects on behaviour as the critical endpoint, and derived a benchmark dose lower confidence limit for a benchmark response of 10 % (BMDL10) of 0.79 mg/kg body weight. Due to the limitations and uncertainties in the current data base, the CONTAM Panel concluded that it was inappropriate to use this BMDL to establish a health based guidance value, and instead used a margin of exposure (MOE) approach for the health risk assessment of HBCDDs. Since elimination characteristics of HBCDDs in animals and humans differ, the Panel used the body burden as starting point for the MOE approach. The CONTAM Panel concluded that current dietary exposure to HBCDDs in the European Union does not raise a health concern. Also additional exposure, particularly of young children, to HBCDDs from house dust is unlikely to raise a health concern
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Alexander, Jan, et al.
(författare)
-
Scientific Opinion on Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) and its derivatives in food : EFSA Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM)
- 2011
-
Ingår i: EFSA Journal. - : Wiley. - 1831-4732. ; 9:12, s. 2477-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- EFSA was asked by the European Commission to deliver a scientific opinion on tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) and its derivatives in food. TBBPA and its derivatives are widely used as flame retardants. TBBPA is primarily used as reactive flame retardant covalently bound to epoxy and polycarbonate resins. TBBPA derivatives are used as either reactive or additive intermediates in polymer manufacture. Data from the analysis of TBBPA in 344 food samples were submitted to EFSA by two European countries (Norway and Spain), covering the period from 2007 to 2010. All samples were in the food group “Fish and other seafood”, and all analytical results were reported as less than the limit of quantification (LOQ) (about 1 ng/g wet weight). Toxicological studies with TBBPA have been carried out using different experimental designs with single or repeated administration during gestation, postnatally or in adulthood. The main target is thyroid hormone homeostasis. TBBPA is not genotoxic. There are no indications that TBBPA might be carcinogenic. The Panel on Contaminants in the Food Chain (CONTAM Panel) identified a lower confidence limit for a benchmark response of 10 % (BMDL10) of 16 mg/kg b.w. reported for changes in thyroid hormones as the critical reference point. Due to the limitations and uncertainties in the database, the CONTAM Panel concluded that it was inappropriate to use this BMDL to establish a health based guidance value, and therefore used a margin of exposure (MOE) approach for the health risk assessment of TBBPA. In view of the large MOEs, the CONTAM Panel concluded that current dietary exposure to TBBPA in the European Union does not raise a health concern. Also exposure of infants via human milk does not raise a health concern. Additional exposure, particularly of young children, to TBBPA from house dust is unlikely to raise a health concern.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Canaparo, Roberto, et al.
(författare)
-
Expression of cytochromes P450 3A and P-glycoprotein in human large intestine in paired tumour and normal samples
- 2007
-
Ingår i: Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology. - : Wiley. - 1742-7843 .- 1742-7835. ; 100:4, s. 240-248
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Our objective was to investigate the expression of different cytochromes P450 3A (CYP3A4, CYP3A5, and CYP3A7) and P-glycoprotein (ABCBI) genes along the human large intestine in paired tumour and normal samples. Real-time reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction was used to measure CYP3A4-, CYP3A5-, CYP3A7- and ABCB1-specific mRNA expression, and Western blot analysis was used to measure membrane protein levels of CYP3A4/7, CYP3A5 and P-glycoprotein. Levels of mRNA and membrane protein fractions in the large intestine were compared with those of normal human liver. The mRNA expressions of CYP3A4, CYP3A5, CYP3A7 and ABCB1 in the large intestine were found to be highly variable, but overall the levels were significantly lower than those measured in liver (P < 0.0001, P < 0.00 1, P < 0.0001 and P < 0.01, respectively). At the membrane protein level, CYP3A4/7 was detected in all large intestine samples examined and the levels were substantially higher than those of the liver (P < 0.01). Although expression of CYP3A5 was detected in all large intestine samples, in most the levels were too low to allow quantification. P-glycoprotein was readily detected at levels slightly higher than those of liver (P < 0.05). Comparison between paired samples of normal and tumour in large intestine showed no significant differences in either the mRNA or membrane protein levels of these genes. In conclusion, this work suggests a potential role of the large intestine in the absorption and metabolism of xenobiotics and nutrients and no difference in the CYP3A and P-glycoprotein membrane protein fractions and mRNA expression between normal and tumour tissues.
|
|
| 6. |
- Schenk, Linda, 1980-
(författare)
-
Setting occupational exposure limits : Practices and outcomes of toxicological risk assessment
- 2011
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Occupational Exposure Limits (OELs) are used as an important regulatory instrument to protect workers’ health from adverse effects of chemical exposures. The main objective of this thesis is to study risk assessment practices in the setting of OEL in order to produce knowledge that will help improve the consistency and transparency of OELs.For the purpose of paper I a database of OELs for a total of 1341 substances was compiled. Of these, only 25 substances have OELs from all 18 included organisations while more than one third of the substances are only regulated by one organisation alone. The average level of OELs differs substantially between organisations; the US OSHA exposure limits are (on average) nearly 40 % higher than those of Poland.In paper II six EU member states’ OELs are compared to the European Commission’s OELs. Also within Europe there is a large difference concerning the average level of OELs (35%). The average level of lists tends to decrease over time, although there are exceptions to this. There are also indications that the exposure limits of EU member states are converging towards the European Commission’s OELs.The work presented in paper III identifies steps in the risk assessment that could account for the large differences in OELs for 14 different substances. Differences in the identification of the critical effect could explain the different level of the OELs for half of the substances. But the age of the data review could not account for all the differences in data selection, only one fifth of the documents referred to all available key studies. Also the evaluation of the key studies varied significantly.The aim of paper IV was to investigate how the Scientific Committee on Occupational Exposure Limits (SCOEL) of the European Commission uses assessment factors when proposing health-based indicative OELs. For only one third of the investigated OELs were explicit assessment factors given. On average the safety margin of the recommendations was 2.1 higher when an explicit assessment factor had been used. It is recommended that the SCOEL develop and adhere to a more articulate framework on the use of assessment factors.Paper V focuses on the Derived No-Effect Levels (DNELs) which are to be calculated under the new European Union REACH legislation. It is a comparison of the safety margins of 88 SCOEL recommendations with those of the corresponding worker-DNELs, derived according to the default approach as described in the REACH guidance document. Overall, the REACH safety margins were approximately six times higher than those derived from the SCOEL documentations but varied widely with REACH/SCOEL safety margin ratios ranging by two orders of magnitude, from 0.3 to 58.
|
|
| 7. |
- Solecki, Roland, et al.
(författare)
-
Scientific principles for the identification of endocrine-disrupting chemicals : a consensus statement
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Archives of Toxicology. - : Springer. - 0340-5761 .- 1432-0738. ; 91:2, s. 1001-1006
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Endocrine disruption is a specific form of toxicity, where natural and/or anthropogenic chemicals, known as "endocrine disruptors" (EDs), trigger adverse health effects by disrupting the endogenous hormone system. There is need to harmonize guidance on the regulation of EDs, but this has been hampered by what appeared as a lack of consensus among scientists. This publication provides summary information about a consensus reached by a group of world-leading scientists that can serve as the basis for the development of ED criteria in relevant EU legislation. Twenty-three international scientists from different disciplines discussed principles and open questions on ED identification as outlined in a draft consensus paper at an expert meeting hosted by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) in Berlin, Germany on 11-12 April 2016. Participants reached a consensus regarding scientific principles for the identification of EDs. The paper discusses the consensus reached on background, definition of an ED and related concepts, sources of uncertainty, scientific principles important for ED identification, and research needs. It highlights the difficulty in retrospectively reconstructing ED exposure, insufficient range of validated test systems for EDs, and some issues impacting on the evaluation of the risk from EDs, such as non-monotonic dose-response and thresholds, modes of action, and exposure assessment. This report provides the consensus statement on EDs agreed among all participating scientists. The meeting facilitated a productive debate and reduced a number of differences in views. It is expected that the consensus reached will serve as an important basis for the development of regulatory ED criteria.
|
|
