Guidance on the use of the benchmark dose approach in risk assessment

Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 55th Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR)

The European Commission asked EFSA to provide support in the framework of Article 43 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 for the preparation of the EU position for 55th Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR). In the current report, EFSA provided comments and recommendations on the Codex maximum residue level (MRL) proposals derived by the Joint Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) that will be discussed in the upcoming CCPR meeting. The current report should serve as the basis for deriving the EU position for the CCPR meeting.

Scientific Committee guidance on appraising and integrating evidence from epidemiological studies for use in EFSA's scientific assessments

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.

Update of the scientific opinion on tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) and its derivatives in food

The European Commission asked EFSA to update its 2011 risk assessment on tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) and five derivatives in food. Neurotoxicity and carcinogenicity were considered as the critical effects of TBBPA in rodent studies. The available evidence indicates that the carcinogenicity of TBBPA occurs via non-genotoxic mechanisms. Taking into account the new data, the CONTAM Panel considered it appropriate to set a tolerable daily intake (TDI). Based on decreased interest in social interaction in male mice, a lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) of 0.2 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day was identified and selected as the reference point for the risk characterisation. Applying the default uncertainty factor of 100 for inter- and intraspecies variability, and a factor of 3 to extrapolate from the LOAEL to NOAEL, a TDI for TBBPA of 0.7 μg/kg bw per day was established. Around 2100 analytical results for TBBPA in food were used to estimate dietary exposure for the European population. The most important contributors to the chronic dietary LB exposure to TBBPA were fish and seafood, meat and meat products and milk and dairy products. The exposure estimates to TBBPA were all below the TDI, including those estimated for breastfed and formula-fed infants. Accounting for the uncertainties affecting the assessment, the CONTAM Panel concluded with 90%-95% certainty that the current dietary exposure to TBBPA does not raise a health concern for any of the population groups considered. There were insufficient data on the toxicity of any of the TBBPA derivatives to derive reference points, or to allow a comparison with TBBPA that would support assignment to an assessment group for the purposes of combined risk assessment.

Risk assessment of small organoarsenic species in food

The European Commission asked EFSA for a risk assessment on small organoarsenic species in food. For monomethylarsonic acid MMA(V), decreased body weight resulting from diarrhoea in rats was identified as the critical endpoint and a BMDL10 of 18.2 mg MMA(V)/kg body weight (bw) per day (equivalent to 9.7 mg As/kg bw per day) was calculated as a reference point (RP). For dimethylarsinic acid DMA(V), increased incidence in urinary bladder tumours in rats was identified as the critical endpoint. A BMDL10 of 1.1 mg DMA(V)/kg bw per day (equivalent to 0.6 mg As/kg bw per day) was calculated as an RP. For other small organoarsenic species, the toxicological data are insufficient to identify critical effects and RPs, and they could not be included in the risk assessment. For both MMA(V) and DMA(V), the toxicological database is incomplete and a margin of exposure (MOE) approach was applied for risk characterisation. The highest chronic dietary exposure to DMA(V) was estimated in 'Toddlers', with rice and fish meat as the main contributors across population groups. For MMA(V), the highest chronic dietary exposures were estimated for high consumers of fish meat and processed/preserved fish in 'Infants' and 'Elderly' age class, respectively. For MMA(V), an MOE of ≥ 500 was identified not to raise a health concern. For MMA(V), all MOEs were well above 500 for average and high consumers and thus do not raise a health concern. For DMA(V), an MOE of 10,000 was identified as of low health concern as it is genotoxic and carcinogenic, although the mechanisms of genotoxicity and its role in carcinogenicity of DMA(V) are not fully elucidated. For DMA(V), MOEs were below 10,000 in many cases across dietary surveys and age groups, in particular for some 95th percentile exposures. The Panel considers that this would raise a health concern.

Guidance on risk-benefit assessment of foods

The EFSA Scientific Committee has updated its 2010 Guidance on risk-benefit assessment (RBA) of foods. The update addresses methodological developments and regulatory needs. While it retains the stepwise RBA approach, it provides additional methods for complex assessments, such as multiple chemical hazards and all relevant health effects impacting different population subgroups. The updated guidance includes approaches for systematic identification, prioritisation and selection of hazardous and beneficial food components. It also offers updates relevant to characterising adverse and beneficial effects, such as measures of effect size and dose-response modelling. The guidance expands options for characterising risks and benefits, incorporating variability, uncertainty, severity categorisation and ranking of different (beneficial or adverse) effects. The impact of different types of health effects is assessed qualitatively or quantitatively, depending on the problem formulation, scope of the RBA question and data availability. The integration of risks and benefits often involves value-based judgements and should ideally be performed with the risk-benefit manager. Metrics such as Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) can be used. Additional approaches are presented, such as probability of all relevant effects and/or effects of given severities and their integration using severity weight functions. The update includes practical guidance on reporting results, interpreting outcomes and communicating the outcome of an RBA, considering consumer perspectives and responses to advice.

Non-linear association and benchmark dose of blood pressure on carotid artery intima-media thickening in a general population of southern China

Background and aims

This study aimed to evaluate whether there is a J-curve association between blood pressure (BP) and carotid artery intima-media thickening (CAIT) and estimate the effect of the turning point of BP on CAIT.

Methods and results

Data from 111,494 regular physical examinations conducted on workers and retirees (aged 18 years or older) between January 2011 and December 2016, exported from the hospital information system, were analyzed. Restricted cubic splines (RCS) logistic regression was employed to access the association of BP with CAIT, and Bayesian benchmark dose methods were used to estimate the benchmark dose as the departure point of BP measurements. All the pnon-linear values of BP measurements were less than 0.05 in the RCS logistic regression models. Both systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) had J-curve associations with the risk of CAIT at a turning point around 120/70 mmHg in the RCS. The benchmark dose for a 1% change in CAIT risk was estimated to be 120.64 mmHg for SBP and 72.46 mmHg for DBP.

Conclusion

The J-curve associations between SBP and DBP and the risk of CAIT were observed in the general population in southern China, and the turning point of blood pressure for significantly reducing the risk of CAIT was estimated to be 120.64/72.46 mmHg for SBP/DBP.

Statement on the assessment of quality of data available to EFSA to derive the health-based guidance values for carbendazim

Carbendazim (CBZ) is an active substance in plant protection products that is no longer authorised within the European Union. CBZ is classified according to Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 as mutagenic, category 1B and toxic for reproduction, category 1B. In 2010, EFSA established consumers' health-based guidance values (HBGVs) for CBZ (ADI and ARfD). In compliance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, the European Commission asked EFSA on 1 March 2024 to carry out a follow-up qualitative assessment of the data gaps that were identified in the studies used in the framework of the assessment of the HBGVs for CBZ, in order to confirm the reliability of the existing toxicological studies and their impact for the setting of the HBGVs. By considering missing information in the extensive database and the reliability of the available toxicological studies, EFSA concluded that missing information does not prevent setting of HBGVs and that the critical effects of CBZ were investigated in studies of sufficient reliability and acceptability. Therefore, the HBGVs derived in 2010 are protective for the consumers.

A novel method to derive a human safety limit for PFOA by gene expression profiling and modelling

Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is a persistent environmental contaminant that can accumulate in the human body due to its long half-life. This substance has been associated with liver, pancreatic, testicular and breast cancers, liver steatosis and endocrine disruption. PFOA is a member of a large group of substances also known as "forever chemicals" and the vast majority of substances of this group lack toxicological data that would enable their effective risk assessment in terms of human health hazards. This study aimed to derive a health-based guidance value for PFOA intake (ng/kg BW/day) from in vitro transcriptomics data. To this end, we developed an in silico workflow comprising five components: (i) sourcing in vitro hepatic transcriptomics concentration-response data; (ii) deriving molecular points of departure using BMDExpress3 and performing pathway analysis using gene set enrichment analysis (GSEA) to identify the most sensitive molecular pathways to PFOA exposure; (iii) estimating freely-dissolved PFOA concentrations in vitro using a mass balance model; (iv) estimating in vivo doses by reverse dosimetry using a PBK model for PFOA as part of a quantitative in vitro to in vivo extrapolation (QIVIVE) algorithm; and (v) calculating a tolerable daily intake (TDI) for PFOA. Fourteen percent of interrogated genes exhibited in vitro concentration-response relationships. GSEA pathway enrichment analysis revealed that "fatty acid metabolism" was the most sensitive pathway to PFOA exposure. In vitro free PFOA concentrations were calculated to be 2.9% of the nominal applied concentrations, and these free concentrations were input into the QIVIVE workflow. Exposure doses for a virtual population of 3,000 individuals were estimated, from which a TDI of 0.15 ng/kg BW/day for PFOA was calculated using the benchmark dose modelling software, PROAST. This TDI is comparable to previously published values of 1.16, 0.69, and 0.86 ng/kg BW/day by the European Food Safety Authority. In conclusion, this study demonstrates the combined utility of an "omics"-derived molecular point of departure and in silico QIVIVE workflow for setting health-based guidance values in anticipation of the acceptance of in vitro concentration-response molecular measurements in chemical risk assessment.

Risks for animal and human health related to the presence of polychlorinated naphthalenes (PCNs) in feed and food

EFSA was asked for a scientific opinion on the risks for animal and human health related to the presence of polychlorinated naphthalenes (PCNs) in feed and food. The assessment focused on hexaCNs due to very limited data on other PCN congeners. For hexaCNs in feed, 217 analytical results were used to estimate dietary exposures for food-producing and non-food-producing animals; however, a risk characterisation could not be performed because none of the toxicological studies allowed identification of reference points. The oral repeated dose toxicity studies performed in rats with a hexaCN mixture containing all 10 hexaCNs indicated that the critical target was the haematological system. A BMDL20 of 0.05 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day was identified for a considerable decrease in the platelet count. For hexaCNs in food, 2317 analytical results were used to estimate dietary exposures across dietary surveys and age groups. The highest exposure ranged from 0.91 to 29.8 pg/kg bw per day in general population and from 220 to 559 pg/kg bw per day for breast-fed infants with the highest consumption of breast milk. Applying a margin of exposure (MOE) approach, the estimated MOEs for the high dietary exposures ranged from 1,700,000 to 55,000,000 for the general population and from 90,000 to 230,000 for breast-fed infants with the highest consumption of breast milk. These MOEs are far above the minimum MOE of 2000 that does not raise a health concern. Taking account of the uncertainties affecting the assessment, the Panel concluded with at least 99% certainty that dietary exposure to hexaCNs does not raise a health concern for any of the population groups considered. Due to major limitations in the available data, no assessment was possible for genotoxic effects or for health risks of PCNs other than hexaCNs.

Specific effects on the thyroid relevant for performing a dietary cumulative risk assessment of pesticide residues: 2024 update

EFSA updated its previous work on the establishment of specific effects that are considered relevant for grouping pesticide residues targeting the thyroid and for performing the retrospective assessment of dietary cumulative risk (CRA). The two specific effects already selected in 2019 leading to the two cumulative assessment groups (CAGs) 'hypothyroidism' and 'C-cell hypertrophy, hyperplasia and neoplasia' were reconfirmed. Compared to 2019, the list of indicators that can be used to identify these specific effects was refined to only include histopathological changes. In a second phase of the work, data will be extracted on indicators of the specific effects from the dossiers on active substances (a.s.) used as plant protection products. The criteria for including a.s. into CAGs were also updated, together with the hazard characterisation methodology and the lines of evidence for assessing CAG-membership probabilities. The tasks related to the data extraction and the establishment of the CAGs on hypothyroidism and on C-cell hypertrophy, hyperplasia and neoplasia are beyond the scope of this report. This part of the CRA process has been outsourced and will be the subject of a separate report.

Update of the risk assessment of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in food

The European Commission asked EFSA to update its 2011 risk assessment on polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in food, focusing on 10 congeners: BDE-28, -47, -49, -99, -100, -138, -153, -154, -183 and ‑209. The CONTAM Panel concluded that the neurodevelopmental effects on behaviour and reproductive/developmental effects are the critical effects in rodent studies. For four congeners (BDE-47, -99, -153, -209) the Panel derived Reference Points, i.e. benchmark doses and corresponding lower 95% confidence limits (BMDLs), for endpoint-specific benchmark responses. Since repeated exposure to PBDEs results in accumulation of these chemicals in the body, the Panel estimated the body burden at the BMDL in rodents, and the chronic intake that would lead to the same body burden in humans. For the remaining six congeners no studies were available to identify Reference Points. The Panel concluded that there is scientific basis for inclusion of all 10 congeners in a common assessment group and performed a combined risk assessment. The Panel concluded that the combined margin of exposure (MOET) approach was the most appropriate risk metric and applied a tiered approach to the risk characterisation. Over 84,000 analytical results for the 10 congeners in food were used to estimate the exposure across dietary surveys and age groups of the European population. The most important contributors to the chronic dietary Lower Bound exposure to PBDEs were meat and meat products and fish and seafood. Taking into account the uncertainties affecting the assessment, the Panel concluded that it is likely that current dietary exposure to PBDEs in the European population raises a health concern.

Update of the risk assessment of inorganic arsenic in food

The European Commission asked EFSA to update its 2009 risk assessment on arsenic in food carrying out a hazard assessment of inorganic arsenic (iAs) and using the revised exposure assessment issued by EFSA in 2021. Epidemiological studies show that the chronic intake of iAs via diet and/or drinking water is associated with increased risk of several adverse outcomes including cancers of the skin, bladder and lung. The CONTAM Panel used the benchmark dose lower confidence limit based on a benchmark response (BMR) of 5% (relative increase of the background incidence after adjustment for confounders, BMDL05) of 0.06 μg iAs/kg bw per day obtained from a study on skin cancer as a Reference Point (RP). Inorganic As is a genotoxic carcinogen with additional epigenetic effects and the CONTAM Panel applied a margin of exposure (MOE) approach for the risk characterisation. In adults, the MOEs are low (range between 2 and 0.4 for mean consumers and between 0.9 and 0.2 at the 95th percentile exposure, respectively) and as such raise a health concern despite the uncertainties.

Interpretation of in vitro concentration-response data for risk assessment and regulatory decision-making: Report from the 2022 IWGT quantitative analysis expert working group meeting

Quantitative risk assessments of chemicals are routinely performed using in vivo data from rodents; however, there is growing recognition that non-animal approaches can be human-relevant alternatives. There is an urgent need to build confidence in non-animal alternatives given the international support to reduce the use of animals in toxicity testing where possible. In order for scientists and risk assessors to prepare for this paradigm shift in toxicity assessment, standardization and consensus on in vitro testing strategies and data interpretation will need to be established. To address this issue, an Expert Working Group (EWG) of the 8th International Workshop on Genotoxicity Testing (IWGT) evaluated the utility of quantitative in vitro genotoxicity concentration-response data for risk assessment. The EWG first evaluated available in vitro methodologies and then examined the variability and maximal response of in vitro tests to estimate biologically relevant values for the critical effect sizes considered adverse or unacceptable. Next, the EWG reviewed the approaches and computational models employed to provide human-relevant dose context to in vitro data. Lastly, the EWG evaluated risk assessment applications for which in vitro data are ready for use and applications where further work is required. The EWG concluded that in vitro genotoxicity concentration-response data can be interpreted in a risk assessment context. However, prior to routine use in regulatory settings, further research will be required to address the remaining uncertainties and limitations.

Investigation of potential migratables from paper and board food contact materials

Since the ban on single-use plastic articles in Europe, the food contact material (FCM) industry has been forced to move to more sustainable alternatives. Paper and board FCM are convenient alternatives but must be safe for consumers. This study aims to investigate potential migrations of various substances (e.g., plasticizers, photoinitiators, primary aromatic amines, mineral oil, and bisphenols) from straws and takeaway articles made of paper and board. Twenty straws and fifty-eight takeaway articles were carefully selected and investigated using liquid and gas chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry or flame ionization detector. Fourteen substances of all the targeted categories were found in takeaway articles, including seven plasticizers, two photoinitiators, one primary aromatic amine, two bisphenols, and the saturated and aromatic fraction of mineral oil (MOSH and MOAH, respectively). In straws, fewer substances were detected, i.e., six substances, including three plasticizers, one photoinitiator, MOSH, and MOAH. At least one of the target substances was detected in 88% of the samples, demonstrating the importance of further evaluation of these materials. Finally, the associated risks were assessed, highlighting the potential risks for several types of articles regarding bisphenol A, one primary aromatic amine (3.3-DMB), and MOSH and MOAH.

Targeted review of maximum residue levels (MRLs) for diazinon

In accordance with Article 43 of Regulation (EC) 396/2005, EFSA received a request from the European Commission to review the existing maximum residue levels (MRLs) for the non-approved active substance diazinon in view of the possible lowering of the MRL. EFSA investigated the origin of the current EU MRLs. For existing EU MRLs that reflect previously authorised uses in the EU, or that are based on obsolete Codex MRLs, or import tolerances that are not required any longer, EFSA proposed the lowering to the limit of quantification. EFSA performed an indicative chronic and acute dietary risk assessment for the revised list of MRLs to allow risk managers to take the appropriate decisions. For some commodities, further risk management discussions are required to decide which of the risk management options proposed by EFSA should be implemented in the EU MRL legislation.

Basic concepts of mixture toxicity and relevance for risk evaluation and regulation

Exposure to multiple substances is a challenge for risk evaluation. Currently, there is an ongoing debate if generic "mixture assessment/allocation factors" (MAF) should be introduced to increase public health protection. Here, we explore concepts of mixture toxicity and the potential influence of mixture regulation concepts for human health protection. Based on this analysis, we provide recommendations for research and risk assessment. One of the concepts of mixture toxicity is additivity. Substances may act additively by affecting the same molecular mechanism within a common target cell, for example, dioxin-like substances. In a second concept, an "enhancer substance" may act by increasing the target site concentration and aggravating the adverse effect of a "driver substance". For both concepts, adequate risk management of individual substances can reliably prevent adverse effects to humans. Furthermore, we discuss the hypothesis that the large number of substances to which humans are exposed at very low and individually safe doses may interact to cause adverse effects. This commentary identifies knowledge gaps, such as the lack of a comprehensive overview of substances regulated under different silos, including food, environmentally and occupationally relevant substances, the absence of reliable human exposure data and the missing accessibility of ratios of current human exposure to threshold values, which are considered safe for individual substances. Moreover, a comprehensive overview of the molecular mechanisms and most susceptible target cells is required. We conclude that, currently, there is no scientific evidence supporting the need for a generic MAF. Rather, we recommend taking more specific measures, which focus on compounds with relatively small ratios between human exposure and doses, at which adverse effects can be expected.

Guidance for statistical design and analysis of toxicological dose-response experiments, based on a comprehensive literature review

The analysis of dose-response, concentration-response, and time-response relationships is a central component of toxicological research. A major decision with respect to the statistical analysis is whether to consider only the actually measured concentrations or to assume an underlying (parametric) model that allows extrapolation. Recent research suggests the application of modelling approaches for various types of toxicological assays. However, there is a discrepancy between the state of the art in statistical methodological research and published analyses in the toxicological literature. The extent of this gap is quantified in this work using an extensive literature review that considered all dose-response analyses published in three major toxicological journals in 2021. The aspects of the review include biological considerations (type of assay and of exposure), statistical design considerations (number of measured conditions, design, and sample sizes), and statistical analysis considerations (display, analysis goal, statistical testing or modelling method, and alert concentration). Based on the results of this review and the critical assessment of three selected issues in the context of statistical research, concrete guidance for planning, execution, and analysis of dose-response studies from a statistical viewpoint is proposed.

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.

The Effect of Historical Data-Based Informative Prior on Benchmark Dose Estimation of Toxicogenomics

High-throughput toxicogenomics as an advanced toolbox of Tox21 plays an increasingly important role in facilitating the toxicity assessment of environmental chemicals. However, toxicogenomic dose-response analyses are typically challenged by limited data, which may result in significant uncertainties in parameter and benchmark dose (BMD) estimation. Integrating historical data via prior distribution using a Bayesian method is a useful but not-well-studied strategy. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of informative priors in genomic dose-response modeling and BMD estimation. Specifically, we aim to identify plausible informative priors and evaluate their effects on BMD estimates at both gene and pathway levels. A general informative prior and eight time-specific (from 3 h to 29 d) informative priors for seven commonly used continuous dose-response models were derived. Results suggest that the derived informative priors are sensitive to the specific data sets used for elicitation. Real data-based simulations indicate that BMD estimation with the time-specific informative priors can achieve increased or equivalent accuracy, significantly decreased uncertainty, and a slightly enhanced correlation with the points of departure estimated from apical end points than the counterparts with noninformative priors. Overall, our study systematically examined the effects of historical data-based informative priors on BMD estimates, highlighting the benefits of plausible information priors in advancing the practice of toxicogenomics.

6:2 Chlorinated Polyfluoroalkyl Ether Sulfonates Exert Stronger Thyroid Homeostasis Disruptive Effects in Newborns than Perfluorooctanesulfonate: Evidence Based on Bayesian Benchmark Dose Values from a Population Study

Growing toxicologic evidence suggests that emerging perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs), like chlorinated polyfluoroalkyl ether sulfonate (Cl-PFESA), may be as toxic or more toxic than perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). However, further investigations are needed in terms of the human health risk assessment. This study examined the effects of emerging and legacy PFAS exposure on newborn thyroid homeostasis and compared the thyroid disruption caused by 6:2 Cl-PFESA and PFOS using a benchmark dose approach. The health effects of mixture and individual exposure were estimated using the partial least-squares (PLS) model and linear regression, respectively. A Bayesian benchmark dose (BMD) analysis determined the BMD value for adverse effect comparison between 6:2 Cl-PFESA and PFOS. The median (interquartile range) concentrations of 6:2 Cl-PFESA (0.573 [0.351-0.872] ng/mL), PFOS (0.674 [0.462-1.007] ng/mL), and PFOA (1.457 [1.034, 2.405] ng/mL) were found to be similar. The PLS model ranked the PFAS variables' importance in projection (VIP) scores as follows: 6:2 Cl-PFESA > PFOS > PFOA. Linear regression showed that 6:2 Cl-PFESA had a positive association with free triiodothyronine (FT3, P = 0.006) and triiodothyronine (T3, P = 0.014), while PFOS had a marginally significant positive association with FT3 alone (P = 0.042). The BMD analysis indicated that the estimated BMD10 for 6:2 Cl-PFESA (1.01 ng/mL) was lower than that for PFOS (1.66 ng/mL) in relation to a 10% increase in FT3. These findings suggest that 6:2 Cl-PFESA, an alternative to PFOS, has a more pronounced impact on newborns' thyroid homeostasis compared to PFOS and other legacy PFASs.

Benchmark dose calculations for PFAS exposure based on two data sets on immunotoxic effects

BACKGROUND

Exposure to perfluorinated alkylate substances (PFAS) is associated with harmful effects on human health, including developmental immunotoxicity. This outcome was chosen as the critical effect by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which calculated a new joint reference dose for four PFAS using a Benchmark Dose (BMD) analysis of a study of 1-year old children. However, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently proposed much lower exposure limits.

METHODS

We explored the BMD methodology for summary and individual data and compared the results with and without grouping for two data sets available. We compared the performance of different dose-response models including a hockey-stick model and a piecewise linear model. We considered different ways of testing the assumption of equal weight-based toxicity of the four PFAS and evaluated more flexible models with exposure indices allowing for differences in toxicity.

RESULTS

Results relying on full and decile-based data were in good accordance. However, BMD results for the larger study were lower than observed by EFSA for the smaller study. EFSA derived a lower confidence limit for the BMD of 17.5 ng/mL for the sum of serum-PFAS concentration, while similar calculations in the larger cohort yielded values of about 1.5 ng/mL. As the assumption of equal weight-based toxicity of the four PFAS seems questionable, we confirmed dose-dependencies that allowed potency differences between PFAS. We also found that models linear in the parameters for the BMD analysis showed superior coverage probabilities. In particular, we found the piecewise linear model to be useful for Benchmark analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Both data sets considered could be analyzed on a decile basis without important bias or loss of power. The larger study showed substantially lower BMD results, both for individual PFAS and for joint exposures. Overall, EFSA's proposed tolerable exposure limit appears too high, while the EPA proposal is in better accordance with the results.

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.