What is a food and what is a medicinal product in the European Union? Use of the benchmark dose (BMD) methodology to define a threshold for "pharmacological action"

Traversing through half a century research timeline on Ginkgo biloba, in transforming a botanical rarity into an active functional food ingredient

Neurodegenerative diseases and various other chronic ailments have gradually transformed into public-health issues. Neurodegenerative disorders are a range of progressive neural abnormalities characterized by cellular dysfunctions, neuronal structure, and function loss. Among many chronic disorders, oxidative stress, inflammation, mitochondrial dysregulation, and cellular alterations in the human body are considered the most prevalent diagnostic symptoms. They have a profound impact on patients' health and wellbeing. The disease's poor curability, high healthcare costs, and lethality are the principal reasons for approaching and exploring the conventional treatment's phytotherapeutic alternatives. Ginkgo biloba (Maidenhair tree) is a well-known and widely used herbal plant in the Ginkgoaceae family. Its phytochemical constituents, Flavonoids, and terpenes, have been identified as the primary ingredients of Ginkgo biloba leaf extracts. It has been widely used due to its therapeutic properties, including its neuroprotective, anti-dementia, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, vasoactive, anti-psychotic, anti-neoplastic, and anti-platelet activity. In recent decades, plenty of Ginkgo-derived substances has been researched and elucidated to have significant therapeutic effects in numerous disease models. This review aims to provide a thorough understanding of the botanical basis for Ginkgo biloba, its usage as herbal medicine, and its pivotal role in functional foods. Additionally, the clinical significance of Ginkgo biloba, as observed in various research works and clinical investigations, is also emphasized, facilitating a better understanding of their molecular basis and application in many chronic diseases.

Determination of benchmark doses for linear furanocoumarin consumption associated with inhibition of cytochrome P450 1A2 isoenzyme activity in healthy human adults

Millions of individuals globally consume traditional herbal medicines (THMs), which contain abundant amounts of linear furanocoumarins. Linear furanocoumarins (i.e., 8-methoxypsoralen, 5-methoxypsoralen, and isopimpinellin) are inhibitors of cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes including 1A2, a major enzyme involved in drug metabolism and carcinogen bioactivation. Despite the high consumption of furanocoumarin-containing THMs, no studies have measured the furanocoumarin consumption level that triggers an inhibition to CYP1A2 activity in humans. The first objective was to verify if the potencies of the three furanocoumarins are additive towards the inhibition of CYP1A2 activity in vitro using concentration-addition and whole-mixture chemical-mixture-assessment models. A second objective was to determine the benchmark dose (BMD) with the mixtures of furanocoumarin oral doses, expressed as 8-MOP equivalents, and to assess the in vivo CYP1A2 activity, expressed as inhibition percentages. The in vitro results indicated that the three furanocoumarin inhibitory potencies were additive in the THM extracts, validating the use of the concentration-addition model in total furanocoumarin dose-equivalent calculations. Using the USEPA BMD software, the BMD was 18.9 μg 8-MOP equivalent/kg body weight. This information is crucial for furanocoumarin-related health-assessment studies and the regulation of THMs. Further studies should be performed for the remaining major metabolic enzymes to complete the safety profile of furanocoumarin-containing THMs and to provide accurate warning labelling.

Medicinal plants and their preparations in the European market: Why has the harmonization failed? The cases of St. John's wort, valerian, ginkgo, ginseng, and green tea

BACKGROUND

Botanical ingredients based on plants, algae, fungi or lichens have become widely available on the European Union market offering numerous preparations with considerable differences in classification. They are under the categories of food supplements, herbal medicinal products, cosmetics or medical devices.

PURPOSE

The aim of the present work is to highlight how the European regulations concerning the different categories of botanicals can lead to different commercial choices such as time/cost for product development, application for a marketing authorisation, permitted indication (medical or health claim), and as a consequence, the same botanical products are sold in European Union as herbal medicinal products, food supplements, cosmetics or medical devices. Five different widely used botanicals, namely St. John's wort, valerian, ginkgo, ginseng, and green tea were selected to better explain the failure of harmonization through European Union.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, ScienceDirect, European Medicines Agency and European commission web sites for medical devices and cosmetics, and European Food Safety Authority websites were conducted and the available information on regulation of herbal medicinal products, food supplements, medical devices and cosmetics in the European Union was collected. In addition, a market survey of all the sold botanical products in Europe was analysed by consultation of the medicines, medical devices, cosmetic and food agencies websites of the European countries.

RESULTS

The current European legislation needs implementation and follow up because in the different countries the legal positions of the botanical products varied and it is possible to find the same product classified in the different categories, namely registered medicinal product including prescription only medicine, traditional herbal medicinal product, well established herbal medicinal products or food supplement, or medical device, or homoeopathic/anthroposophical medical product, cosmetic.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an urgent need of harmonization, together with the implementation of interoperable vigilance databases, to avoid borderline options.

Evidence for side effects of cannabidiol (CBD) products and their non-conformity on the European food market - response to the European Industrial Hemp Association

An interesting and valuable discussion has arisen from our recent article (Lachenmeier et al., 2020) and we are pleased to have the opportunity to expand on the various points we made. Equally important, we wish to correct several important misunderstandings that were made by Kruse and Beitzke (2020) on behalf of the European Industrial Hemp Association (EIHA) that possibly contributed to their concerns about the validity of our data, toxicological assessment and conclusions regarding regulatory status of cannabidiol (CBD) products. First and foremost, our study did only assess the risk of psychotropic Δ 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) without inclusion of non-psychotropic Δ 9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA). Secondly, as this article will discuss in more detail, there is ample evidence for side effects of CBD products, not only in paediatric patients, but also in adult users of over-the-counter CBD products (including inadvertent "high" effects). Thirdly, the exposure and risk assessment was conducted using up-to-date guidelines according to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR). And finally, the current legal situation in the European Union, without approval of any hemp extract-containing product according to the Novel Food regulation, actually allows blanket statements that all such products are illegal on the market, and this indeed would imply a general ban on the use and marketing of such products as food or food ingredients until such an approval has been granted. We hope that this reassures the F1000Research readership regarding the validity of our results and conclusions. We are pleased, though, that the EIHA has acknowledged the fact that there are non-compliant CBD products available, but according to our data these are a substantial fraction of the market.

Evidence for adverse effects of cannabidiol (CBD) products and their non-conformity on the European food market - response to the European Industrial Hemp Association

An interesting and valuable discussion has arisen from our recent article (Lachenmeier et al., 2020) and we are pleased to have the opportunity to expand on the various points we made. Equally important, we wish to correct several important misunderstandings that were made by Kruse and Beitzke (2020) on behalf of the European Industrial Hemp Association (EIHA) that possibly contributed to their concerns about the validity of our data, toxicological assessment and conclusions regarding regulatory status of cannabidiol (CBD) products. First and foremost, our study did only assess the risk of psychotropic Δ 9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) without inclusion of non-psychotropic Δ 9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA). Secondly, as this article will discuss in more detail, there is ample evidence for adverse effects of CBD products, not only in paediatric patients, but also in adult users of over-the-counter CBD products (including inadvertent "high" effects). Thirdly, the exposure and risk assessment was conducted using up-to-date guidelines according to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR). And finally, the current legal situation in the European Union, without approval of any hemp extract-containing product according to the Novel Food regulation, actually allows blanket statements that all such products are illegal on the market, and this indeed would imply a general ban on the use and marketing of such products as food or food ingredients until such an approval has been granted. We hope that this reassures the F1000Research readership regarding the validity of our results and conclusions. We are pleased, though, that the EIHA has acknowledged the fact that there are non-compliant CBD products available, but according to our data these are a substantial fraction of the market.

Regulatory Policies for Alcohol, other Psychoactive Substances and Addictive Behaviours: The Role of Level of Use and Potency. A Systematic Review

The object of this contribution based on a systematic review of the literature is to examine to what degree the level of use and potency play a role in regulatory policies for alcohol, other psychoactive substances and gambling, and whether there is an evidence base for this role. Level of use is usually defined around a behavioural pattern of the user (for example, cigarettes smoked per day, or average ethanol use in grams per day), while potency is defined as a property or characteristic of the substance. For all substances examined (alcohol, tobacco, opioids, cannabis) and gambling, both dimensions were taken into consideration in the formulation of most regulatory policies. However, the associations between both dimensions and regulatory policies were not systematic, and not always based on evidence. Future improvements are suggested.

International Perspectives on Substantiating the Efficacy of Herbal Dietary Supplements and Herbal Medicines Through Evidence on Traditional Use

The efficacy of botanicals in medicines can be substantiated with evidence on traditional use, whereas in foodstuffs, this is often not possible. In Europe, for example, the evaluation and subsequent authorization of health claims on herbal dietary supplements (HDS) have been put on hold by the European Commission. This study aims to analyze the role of evidence on traditional use in international legal frameworks of foods and pharmaceuticals. Both legal sources as well as scientific studies offering insights into these regulatory frameworks were included into the analysis. The international approach toward evidence on traditional use for substantiating efficacy of botanicals varies highly. For herbal medicines, substantiating efficacy with evidence on traditional use is possible in all studied jurisdictions, except for Japan and the United States. HDS efficacy can only be substantiated with evidence on traditional use in India and New Zealand, although the enforcing authorities do not describe which data are required. Australia and Canada regulate botanicals in a separate "borderline" category from foods and pharmaceuticals. Both jurisdictions allow for substantiating efficacy with evidence on traditional use. This study's second objective was to assess the applicability of the international approaches in the European legal framework, in light of the ongoing political debate regarding the use of traditional evidence. Implementation of the analyzed international approaches would require major revisions of the current European legal framework. This review of international approaches might, however, aid in deciding upon future approaches for substantiating health claims with evidence on traditional use.

Dietary supplements: International legal framework and adulteration profiles, and characteristics of products on the Brazilian clandestine market

The objectives of this work were to evaluate current legislation on dietary supplements in the United States, the European Union and Brazil, and the profile of adulterated and/or irregular products on these markets. Due to a less restrictive legal framework, a supplement product that is freely available in the US may be considered a drug or even be proscribed in the EU and Brazil, thus giving rise to a clandestine market based on smuggling. From 2007 to 2014, the United States Food and Drug Administration reported 572 cases of supplement adulterations in the country, mainly products for sexual enhancement (41.6%). Data from the European Union Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed showed 929 adulterations during the same period, over 40% due to unauthorized ingredients or undeclared medicines. From 2007 to 2013, the Brazilian Federal Police Department seized 5470 supplement products, 92.2% with an American-declared origin. Qualitative chemical analyses performed on 2898 products found 180 adulterations, 41.1% due to undeclared drugs, mainly anabolic steroids, anorectics and products for erectile dysfunction, all considered medicines in Brazil. Educating the public regarding the potential risks they are taking when consuming adulterated or irregular products is necessary to protect the health of consumers.

A comprehensive review of the effects of mixing caffeinated energy drinks with alcohol

BACKGROUND

In response to concern about whether mixing caffeinated energy drinks with alcohol (AED) increases alcohol consumption and related harm, and the role of industry in this debate, we conducted a comprehensive review of the research evidence on the effects of AED and documented industry involvement in this research.

METHOD

A systematic review of 6 databases. Studies must have examined the effect of consuming alcohol with energy drinks (ED) or caffeine on alcohol-related outcomes.

RESULTS

62 studies were identified; 29 were experiments, 9 had industry ties (8 with Red Bull GmbH). Young adults who consumed AED drank more alcohol and experienced more alcohol-related harm than other drinkers. There was insufficient evidence to conclude that AED led to increased alcohol consumption or altered the nature of alcohol-related harm. However, AED consumers reported that AED increased stimulation and alertness, offset fatigue from drinking, and facilitated drinking. Experimental research also found that combining ED or caffeine with alcohol increased stimulation and alertness, offset alcohol-related fatigue and increased the desire to keep drinking. It did not change BAC, perceived intoxication, perceived impairment and it did not reverse alcohol-induced impairment on simple psychomotor tasks. Combining ED/caffeine with alcohol reduced alcohol-induced impairment on some but not all aspects of complex tasks. Although few in number, studies with industry ties presented contrary evidence.

CONCLUSION

A growing body of evidence suggests that AED may facilitate drinking and related harms via its effects on intoxication but a causal link needs to be confirmed. The influence of industry involvement in this area of research needs to be monitored.

Electronic cigarettes: overview of chemical composition and exposure estimation

Background

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are advertised to tobacco users as a tool to decrease cigarette consumption and to reduce toxic exposure associated with conventional tobacco smoking. Little is known about the compounds contained in such products, their exposure and long-term health effects.

Methods

NMR spectroscopy was used to ascertain the content of several constituents of e-cigarette liquids including nicotine, solvents and some bioactive flavour compounds. Risk assessment was based on probabilistic exposure estimation and comparison with toxicological thresholds using the margin of exposure (MOE) approach.

Results

In 54 samples of e-cigarette liquids, the average nicotine content was 11 mg/ml. Only 18 from 23 samples were confirmed as nicotine-free samples and in one e-cigarette liquid nicotine was not detected while being declared on the labelling. Major compounds of e-cigarette liquids include glycerol (average 37 g/100 g), propylene glycol (average 57 g/100 g) and ethylene glycol (average 10 g/100 g). Furthermore, 1,3-propanediol, thujone and ethyl vanillin were detected in some samples. The average exposure for daily users was estimated as 0.38 mg/kg bw/day for nicotine, 8.9 mg/kg bw/day for glycerol, 14.5 mg/kg bw/day for 1,2-propanediol, 2.1 mg/kg bw/day for ethylene glycol, and below 0.2 mg/kg bw/day for the other compounds. The MOE was below 0.1 for nicotine, but all other compounds did not reach MOE values below 100 except ethylene glycol and 1,2-propanediol.

Conclusions

NMR spectroscopy is a useful and rapid method to simultaneously detect several ingredients in e-cigarette liquids. From all compounds tested, only nicotine may reach exposures that fall into a high risk category with MOE <1. Therefore, e-cigarette liquid products should be subjected to regulatory control to ensure consistent nicotine delivery. Solvents with more favourable toxicological profiles should be used instead of ethylene glycol and 1,2-propanediol, which may fall into a risk category with MOE < 100.

Rapid assessment of the illegal presence of 1,3-dimethylamylamine (DMAA) in sports nutrition and dietary supplements using 1H NMR spectroscopy

1,3-Dimethylamylamine (DMAA) is a stimulant that can be found in pre-workout sports nutrition and dietary supplements. This practice is illegal because DMAA is not a safe food ingredient but rather an unapproved medicinal compound due to its pharmacological action. In order to determine the DMAA content in such products, a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopic method was developed and validated (DMAA was quantified as DMAA-HCl). For quantification, the collective integral from two of the methyl groups of the molecule in the range δ 0.92-0.84 ppm was used. The method was linear over the examined range of 1-21 g/kg (R(2) = 0.9937). The recoveries from spiked concentrations (0.1-6 g/kg) ranged between 85% and 105% (96% on average), with a relative standard deviation (RSD) of 1% for an authentic sample. The detection limit was 0.03 g/kg and the quantification limit was 0.08 g/kg (calculated for 75 mg sample weight). The actual DMAA-HCl content in the sample was quantified using calibration curves (external standardization) or 3,5-dinitrobenzoic acid as single-point internal standard. The developed NMR methodology was applied for the analysis of 16 products, from which 9 samples were found positive (the DMAA-HCl concentration varied between 3.1 g/kg and 415 g/kg). The method can be recommended for routine use in food testing, customs or doping control laboratories.

Can resveratrol in wine protect against the carcinogenicity of ethanol? A probabilistic dose-response assessment

Resveratrol, which may occur in wine, was suggested to act as a chemopreventive agent against the carcinogenic effects of ethanol. The assumption was based on data from experimental animals, which have shown that resveratrol above certain thresholds may reduce the incidence of tumours in several of the alcohol-related cancer sites (colon, liver and female breast). Using a probabilistic Monte Carlo type methodology, we estimated daily intake based on chemical analysis of resveratrol (n = 672) and ethanol (n = 867). Benchmark dose (BMD)-response modelling was conducted for resveratrol based on eight animal experiments, whereas BMD data for ethanol were taken from the literature. The margin of exposure (MOE) was calculated for both substances as an indicator if the intake may reach effective dosages. For intake of one 100-mL glass of wine, the average MOE was found to be 4.1 for ethanol and 459,937 for resveratrol. In the best-case scenario for resveratrol (e.g., very high contents and assuming a low effective dosage), the minimum MOE would be 111, which means that 111 glasses of wine need to be consumed daily to reach the BMD. The MOE ratio between resveratrol and ethanol is 166,128 on average, meaning that per glass of wine, ethanol is more than 100,000 times more potent than resveratrol. As resveratrol intake may not optimally reach the effective dosage, our study excludes a preventive effect of this substance on alcohol-related cancer. Commercial information about cancer-preventive or -protective effects of resveratrol in wine is misleading and must be prohibited.

Does EU legislation allow the use of the Benchmark Dose (BMD) approach for risk assessment?

Hazard characterisation is largely based on an approach of (statistically) comparing dose groups with the controls in order to derive points of departure such as no-observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs) or lowest-observed-adverse-effect levels (LOAELs). This approach suggests the absence of any relevant effect at the NOAEL. The NOAEL approach has been debated for decades. A recent Scientific Opinion by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) concluded that the Benchmark Dose (BMD) approach should be preferred over the NOAEL approach for deriving human (health-based) limit or guidance values. Nonetheless, the BMD approach is used infrequently within European regulatory frameworks. The reason for this may lie in legislation or guidelines requiring the use of the NOAEL approach. In this context, various EU regulatory frameworks were examined on such demands. Interestingly, no single legislation was identified containing statutory requirements in conflict with the use of the BMD approach.