Regulatory risk assessments: Is there a need to reduce uncertainty and enhance robustness? Update on propylparaben in relation to its EU regulatory status

2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (10) ◽  
pp. 1007-1014 ◽  
Author(s):  
D Snodin
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Food Additives ◽  
Test Material ◽  
Weight Of Evidence ◽  
European Medicines Agency ◽  
Juvenile Rats ◽  
Screening Study ◽  
Adverse Effect Level ◽  
Effect Level ◽  
The Eu

Over 10 years ago, propylparaben (propyl– p–hydroxybenzoate; PP) was withdrawn as a permitted food preservative in the EU based entirely on findings reported in a single dietary study in juvenile rats claiming to show adverse effects on male reproductive parameters [Oishi S. Effects of propyl paraben on the male reproductive system. Food Chem Toxicol 2002; 40(12): 1807 -1813]. Subsequent data reviews have cast serious doubt on the validity of the Oishi results, mainly in relation to aberrant concurrent-control values, and in two further comprehensive studies using neonatal and juvenile rats there were no adverse effects in males at oral doses up to 1000 mg/kg/day. By contrast, juvenile animal toxicity data on the two paraben preservatives currently permitted in the EU as food additives (methylparaben and ethylparaben) are non-robust and rudimentary. Although PP is a permitted preservative in cosmetics its use pattern is highly restricted based mainly on the results of a screening study in the rat using butylparaben as test material, and not taking into account the more recent data on PP. The European Medicines Agency has determined a permitted daily exposure of 2 mg/kg for PP, which applies to both adult and paediatric patients, based on an oral no-observed-adverse-effect level of 100 mg/kg/day in females, treatment-related changes suggestive of an estrogenic effect being noted at 1000 mg/kg/day. The weight of evidence strongly supports a toxicological re-evaluation of PP regarding its use in foodstuffs and cosmetics in the EU, with a view to reinstatement as a food additive, consistent with its status in other major jurisdictions.

1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134) (2018)

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 196-203
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effect ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Toxicity Study ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Exposure Level ◽  
Inhalation Toxicity ◽  
Hfc 134A ◽  
Adverse Effect Level ◽  
Effect Level ◽  
Whole Body Inhalation

1,1,2,2-Tetrafluoroethane (HFC-134) is a colorless gas used as a foam expansion agent and heat transfer fluid. HFC-134 has a low acute inhalation toxicity with an LC50 of >244,000 ppm. The no-observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) and lowest-observed adverse effect level for cardiac sensitization (in epinephrine-challenged beagle dogs) were 75,000 and 100,000 ppm, respectively. A subacute 4-week GLP inhalation toxicity study exposed male and female Crl: CD®BR rats (10/sex) to 0, 2000, 10,000, or 50,000 ppm via whole-body inhalation. Transient and non-dose-response–related body weight changes were observed throughout the exposure period, but no statistically significant, test substance-related adverse effects were observed in any clinical observations, chemistry, hematology, or pathology. This study identified a NOAEL for HFC-134 of 50,000 ppm, the highest exposure level tested. HFC-134 is not genotoxic in in vitro studies; however, no in vivo studies are available. No developmental or maternal toxicity was found in female rats exposed to HFC-134 up to 50,000 ppm via whole-body inhalation in two different studies. Based on data for a similar material (HFC-134a), HFC-134 is not expected to be extensively metabolized or to cause genetic toxicity or carcinogenicity. The HFC-134 workplace environmental exposure level (WEEL) is based primarily on the subacute 4-week inhalation toxicity study in rats with the NOAEL of 50,000 ppm selected as the point of departure for the derivation of the 8-h TWA, health-based WEEL value. The developmental toxicity study also had a NOAEL of 50,000 ppm and was the highest exposure level tested. The subacute inhalation NOAEL was adjusted to account for interindividual variability, subacute to chronic duration, animal to human extrapolation, daily duration of exposure, and residual uncertainty. In addition, the lack of adverse effects noted in the toxicology studies for HFC-134a was considered. The resulting 8-h TWA WEEL value of 1000 ppm is expected to provide a significant margin of safety against the production of any potential adverse health effects in workers following long-term inhalation exposure to HFC-134.

scholarly journals Safety Assessment of Food Additives: Case Example With Myrcene, a Synthetic Flavoring Agent

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (8) ◽  
pp. 1035-1037 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven R. Mog ◽  
Yu Janet Zang
Keyword(s):  
Food Additives ◽  
Daily Intake ◽  
The United States ◽  
Pathological Effect ◽  
Food Ingredients ◽  
Toxicological Effect ◽  
Other Information ◽  
Adverse Effect Level ◽  
Effect Level ◽  
Flavoring Agent

In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates the safe use of food ingredients, including food additives. Food additives are subject to FDA premarket review and approval, a process conducted by FDA scientists to evaluate the additive’s safety for the intended conditions of use. Typically, an acceptable daily intake level is established by toxicologists based on the highest no observable adverse effect level for the most sensitive noncancer toxicity end point determined from a pivotal nonclinical study with application of an appropriate safety factor. Utilizing other information, including the additive’s use and exposure levels, a safety determination (reasonable certainty of no harm) is made. During ongoing safety assessments, pathologists are often consulted by toxicologists for case-specific reasons, which may include verifying that an observed pathological effect is treatment related and adverse, confirming the determination of the pivotal study, endorsing a mode of action, or evaluating the human relevance of a toxicological effect found in experimental animals. Last year, the FDA took regulatory action to no longer allow the use of the food additive myrcene, a synthetic flavoring agent, based on results from National Toxicology Program carcinogenicity studies. The cancer and noncancer end points from the rat studies are discussed.

Developmental Toxicity of Clarified Slurry Oil Applied Dermally to Rats

1989 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 587-599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maureen H. Feuston ◽  
Stacy L. Kerstetter ◽  
Edward J. Singer ◽  
Myron A. Mehlman
Keyword(s):  
Body Weight Gain ◽  
Developmental Toxicity ◽  
Test Material ◽  
Residual Fraction ◽  
Pregnant Rats ◽  
Viable Offspring ◽  
Adverse Effect Level ◽  
Effect Level ◽  
Dose Levels ◽  
External Development

Clarified Slurry Oil (CSO), the heavy residual fraction from the fluidized catalytic cracker, was applied to the shaven backs of groups of 10 pregnant rats at doses of 0, 4, 8, 30, 125, and 250 mg/kg I day. All groups received the test material on gestation days 0–19. CSO was applied undiluted and left uncovered on the skin; collars were placed on the rats to minimize ingestion of the test material. Signs of maternal toxicity, some of which were seen at dose levels as low as 8 mg/kg/day, included vaginal bleeding, decreased body weight gain, reduced food consumption, death, increased relative liver weights, atrophy of the thymus, and aberrant serum chemistry. The number of fetal resorptions / deaths was markedly increased and the number of viable offspring decreased by CSO at dosages of 30 mg/kg/day and above. The group receiving 250 mg/kg/day carried no viable offspring. Fetuses from pregnant females exposed to CSO at dose levels in excess of 8 mg/kg/day were smaller than those from control and 4 mg/kg/day groups, and their skeletons showed decreased ossification. Abnormal external development and visceral development were observed in living and dead fetuses exposed in utero to CSO at dose levels as low as 8 mg/kg/day. Based on these data, 4 mg/kg/day represents the No-Observed-Adverse-Effect-Level for both maternal and developmental toxicity.

Toxicology Paradise: Sorting Out Adverse and Non-adverse Findings in Animal Toxicity Studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 365-378 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Baldrick ◽  
Mary Ellen Cosenza ◽  
Tessie Alapatt ◽  
Brad Bolon ◽  
Melissa Rhodes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Weight Of Evidence ◽  
Drug Marketing ◽  
Toxicity Studies ◽  
Final Study ◽  
The Us ◽  
Adverse Effect Level ◽  
Effect Level ◽  
Animal Toxicity ◽  
The Many ◽  
Threshold Setting

A challenge for all toxicologists is defining what study findings are actually adverse versus non-adverse in animal toxicity studies, and which ones are relevant for generating a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) to assess human risk. This article presents views on this challenge presented by toxicologists, toxicologic pathologists, and regulatory reviewers at the 2019 annual meeting of the American College of Toxicology during a workshop entitled “Toxicology Paradise: Sorting Out Adverse and Non-adverse Findings.” The speakers noted that setting a NOAEL is not always straightforward, not only for small molecules but also for biopharmaceuticals, and that a “weight of evidence” approach often is more useful than a rigid threshold-setting algorithm. Regulators from the US Food and Drug Administration and European Union told how assessment of adverse nonclinical findings is undertaken to allow clinical studies to commence and drug marketing approvals to succeed, along with the process that allows successful dialogs with regulators. Nonclinical case studies of findings judged to be adverse versus non-adverse were presented in relation to the many factors that might halt or delay clinical development. The process of defining adverse findings and the NOAEL in final study reports was discussed, as well as who should be involved in the process.

scholarly journals Biodistribution, Toxicology, and Radiation Dosimetry of 5-HT1A-Receptor Agonist Positron Emission Tomography Ligand [11C]CUMI-101

2011 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 611-618 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dileep J. S. Kumar ◽  
Bing Bai ◽  
Hanna H. Ng ◽  
Jon C. Mirsalis ◽  
Kjell Erlandsson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Radiation Dosimetry ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Sprague Dawley ◽  
Dose Administration ◽  
Positron Emission ◽  
Adverse Effect Level ◽  
Effect Level ◽  
Medical Internal Radiation Dose

Sprague Dawley rats (10/sex/group) were given a single intravenous (iv) dose of CUMI-101 to determine acute toxicity of CUMI-101 and radiation dosimetry estimations were conducted in baboons with [11C]CUMI-101. Intravenous administration of CUMI-101 did not produce overt biologically or toxicologically significant adverse effects except transient hypoactivity immediately after dose in the mid- and high-dose groups, which is not considered to be a dose-limiting toxic effect. No adverse effects were observed in the low-dose group. The no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) is considered to be 44.05 µg/kg for a single iv dose administration in rats. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was estimated to be 881 µg/kg for a single iv dose administration. The Medical Internal Radiation Dose (MIRDOSE) estimates indicate the maximum permissible single-study dosage of [11C]CUMI-101 in humans is 52 mCi with testes and urinary bladder as the critical organ for males and females, respectively.

Safety Assessment of ProBiora3, a Probiotic Mouthwash: Subchronic Toxicity Study in Rats

2009 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 357-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey D. Hillman ◽  
Emily McDonell ◽  
Charles H. Hillman ◽  
Robert T. Zahradnik ◽  
Madhu G. Soni
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Tissue Samples ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Streptococcus Uberis ◽  
Colony Forming Units ◽  
Adverse Effect Level ◽  
Susceptibility Study ◽  
Effect Level ◽  
Streptococcus Rattus

Streptococcus viridans are commensal bacteria that constitute a significant portion of the resident oral microflora. The objective of the present study is to investigate adverse effects, if any, of a blend of 3 natural strains, Streptococcus uberis KJ2, Streptococcus oralis KJ3, and Streptococcus rattus JH145 (probiotic mouthwash, ProBiora3). The blend is administered to rats orally once daily (5 days per week) at doses of 0, 106, or 109 colony-forming units of each strain for 14 weeks. No treatment-related adverse effects are observed in the physiological parameters during the study or in the evaluation of blood and tissue samples taken from the animals at the end. Results of an in vitro antibiotic susceptibility study demonstrate that all 3 ProBiora3 strains are susceptible to commonly used therapeutic antibiotics. The results of these investigations reveal that the no-observed-adverse-effect level of the probiotic mouthwash is 2.16 × 109 colony-forming units per strain per kilogram of body weight per day, the highest dose used.

scholarly journals Are adverse effects of cannabidiol (CBD) products caused by tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contamination?

F1000Research ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 1394
Author(s):  
Dirk W. Lachenmeier ◽  
Stephanie Habel ◽  
Berit Fischer ◽  
Frauke Herbi ◽  
Yvonne Zerbe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effect ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Mass Spectrometric ◽  
Dose Effect ◽  
German Market ◽  
Food Ingredients ◽  
Adverse Effect Level ◽  
Effect Level ◽  
Tandem Mass Spectrometric ◽  
Liquid Chromatographic

Cannabidiol (CBD)-containing products are widely marketed as over the counter products, mostly as food supplements. Adverse effects reported in anecdotal consumer reports or during clinical studies were first assumed to be due to hydrolytic conversion of CBD to psychotropic Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) in the stomach after oral consumption. However, research of pure CBD solutions stored in simulated gastric juice or subjected to various storage conditions such as heat and light with specific liquid chromatographic/tandem mass spectrometric (LC/MS/MS) and ultra-high pressure liquid chromatographic/quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometric (UPLC-QTOF) analyses was unable to confirm THC formation. Another hypothesis for the  adverse effects of CBD products may be residual Δ9-THC concentrations in the products as contamination, because most of them are based on hemp extracts containing the full spectrum of cannabinoids besides CBD. Analyses of 181 food products of the German market (mostly CBD oils) confirmed this hypothesis: 21 products (12%) contained Δ9-THC above the lowest observed adverse effect level (2.5 mg/day). Inversely, CBD was present in the products below the no observed adverse effect level. Hence, it may be assumed that the adverse effects of some commercial CBD products are based on a low-dose effect of Δ9-THC and not due to effects of CBD itself. The safety, efficacy and purity of commercial CBD products is highly questionable, and all of the products in our sample collection showed various non-conformities to European food law such as unsafe Δ9-THC levels, hemp extracts or CBD isolates as non-approved novel food ingredients, non-approved health claims, and deficits in mandatory food labelling requirements. In view of the growing market for such lifestyle products, the effectiveness of the instrument of food business operators' own responsibility for product safety and regulatory compliance must obviously be challenged, and a strong regulatory framework for hemp products needs to be devised.

Acute effects of exposure to vapours of dioxane in humans

2006 ◽  
Vol 25 (12) ◽  
pp. 723-729 ◽  
Author(s):  
L Ernstgård ◽  
A Iregren ◽  
B Sjögren ◽  
G Johanson
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Function ◽  
Healthy Volunteers ◽  
Inflammatory Markers ◽  
Initial Study ◽  
Acute Effects ◽  
Symptom Ratings ◽  
Screening Study ◽  
Adverse Effect Level ◽  
Effect Level ◽  
Blink Frequency

Information on the acute effects associated with the handling of 1,4-dioxane is sparse. Our aim was to evaluate the acute effects of 1,4-dioxane vapours. In a screening study, six healthy volunteers rated symptoms on a visual analogue scale (VAS), while exposed to stepwise increasing levels of 1,4-dioxane, from 1 to 20 ppm. The initial study indicated no increased ratings at any of the exposure levels; we decided to use 20 ppm (72 mg/m3) as a tentative no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL). In the main study, six female and six male healthy volunteers were exposed to 0 (control exposure) and 20 ppm 1,4-dioxane vapour, for 2 hours at rest. The volunteers rated 10 symptoms on VAS before, during, and after the exposure. Blink frequency was monitored during exposure. Pulmonary function, and nasal swelling, was measured before, and at 0 and 3 hours after exposure. Inflammatory markers in plasma (C-reactive protein, and interleukin-6) were measured before and at 3 hours after exposure. In conclusion, exposure to 20 ppm 1,4-dioxane for 2 hours did not significantly affect symptom ratings, blink frequency, pulmonary function, nasal swelling, or inflammatory markers in the plasma of the 12 volunteers in our study.

Naldemedine: Peripherally Acting Opioid Receptor Antagonist for Treating Opioid-induced Adverse Effects

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (31) ◽  
pp. 2830-2842
Author(s):  
Masanao Inagaki ◽  
Toshiyuki Kanemasa ◽  
Takaaki Yokota
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Severe Pain ◽  
Lead Compound ◽  
Inhibitory Effects ◽  
Pharmacokinetic Profiles ◽  
Structure Activity ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Relationship Study ◽  
The Eu

Opioids are widely used for pain management in moderate-to-severe pain. However, opioids are associated with adverse events, such as constipation and emesis/vomiting. To reduce these undesired effects, a structure–activity relationship study of morphinan derivatives was conducted, and a promising lead compound with inhibitory effects on opioid receptors was obtained. Further improvement in the potency and pharmacokinetic profiles of the lead compound led to the discovery of naldemedine, which showed anti-constipation and anti-emetic effects against these adverse events that were induced by morphine without influencing morphine’s analgesic effect. Naldemedine was launched in Japan and the USA in 2017 and in the EU in 2019, for treating opioid-induced constipation.

scholarly journals Palmitoylethanolamide: Prenatal Developmental Toxicity Study in Rats

2021 ◽  
pp. 109158182098607
Author(s):  
Narendra S. Deshmukh ◽  
Shailesh Gumaste ◽  
Silma Subah ◽  
Nathasha Omal Bogoda
Keyword(s):  
Body Weight ◽  
Developmental Toxicity ◽  
Reproductive Toxicity ◽  
Toxicity Study ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Pregnant Rats ◽  
Human Dose ◽  
Adverse Effect Level ◽  
Female Wistar Rats ◽  
Effect Level

Palmitoylethanolamide (PEA) is an endogenous ethanolamine playing a protective and homeodynamic role in animals and plants. Prenatal developmental toxicity of PEA was tested following oral administration to pregnant female Wistar rats, from days 0 to 19 of gestation, at dosage of 250, 500, or 1,000 mg/kg body weight, according to Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Test Guideline No. 414. On gestation day 20, cesarean sections were performed on the dams, followed by examination of their ovaries and uterine contents. The fetuses were further examined for external, visceral, and skeletal abnormalities. Palmitoylethanolamide did not cause any alterations at any of the given dosages in the measured maternal parameters of systemic toxicity (body weight, food consumption, survival, thyroid functions, organ weight, histopathology), reproductive toxicity (preimplantation and postimplantation losses, uterus weight, number of live/dead implants and early/late resorptions, litter size and weights, number of fetuses, their sex ratio), and fetal external, visceral, or skeletal observations. Any alterations that were recorded were “normal variations” or “minor anomalies,” which were unrelated to treatment with PEA. Under the condition of this prenatal study, the no-observed-adverse-effect level of PEA for maternal toxicity, embryotoxicity, fetotoxicity, and teratogenicity in rats was found to be >1,000 mg/kg body weight/d. It indicates that PEA is well tolerated by and is safe to pregnant rats even at a high dose of 1,000 mg/kg body weight/d, equivalent to a human dose of greater than 9.7 g/d. This prenatal developmental toxicity study contributes greatly in building a robust safety profile for PEA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document