食品和饲料行业新方法(NAM)资格认证体系建议:纳米材料风险评估实施范例

Andrea Haase, João Barroso, Alessia Bogni, Susanne Bremer-Hoffmann, Valerie Fessard, Arno C. Gutleb, Jan Mast, Emily McVey, Birgit Mertens, Agnes G. Oomen, Vera Ritz, Tommaso Serchi, Katherina Siewert, Deborah Stanco, Shirin M. Usmani, Eveline Verleysen, Olimpia Vincentini, Meike van der Zande, Francesco Cubadda
{"title":"食品和饲料行业新方法(NAM)资格认证体系建议:纳米材料风险评估实施范例","authors":"Andrea Haase,&nbsp;João Barroso,&nbsp;Alessia Bogni,&nbsp;Susanne Bremer-Hoffmann,&nbsp;Valerie Fessard,&nbsp;Arno C. Gutleb,&nbsp;Jan Mast,&nbsp;Emily McVey,&nbsp;Birgit Mertens,&nbsp;Agnes G. Oomen,&nbsp;Vera Ritz,&nbsp;Tommaso Serchi,&nbsp;Katherina Siewert,&nbsp;Deborah Stanco,&nbsp;Shirin M. Usmani,&nbsp;Eveline Verleysen,&nbsp;Olimpia Vincentini,&nbsp;Meike van der Zande,&nbsp;Francesco Cubadda","doi":"10.2903/sp.efsa.2024.EN-9008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Plenty of new approach methodologies (NAMs) for risk assessment have been developed but only some are included in OECD Test Guidelines (TGs) for regulatory implementation. Nevertheless, NAMs are increasingly applied, e.g. for nanomaterial (NM) risk assessments. The EFSA Guidance on NM risk assessment suggests that NAM-derived data concerning degradation/dissolution (in relevant biofluids), intestinal uptake/crossing, genotoxicity, cytotoxicity, oxidative stress, (pro-)inflammatory potential and barrier integrity, for many of which no OECD TGs exist, have to be evaluated first. Consequently, NM risk assessments involve data from non-guideline studies, requiring time-consuming and challenging case-by-case evaluations. Establishing an OECD TG is a formal process aiming for international use according to the Mutual Acceptance of Data (MAD). However, not every promising NAM can be prioritised for OECD TGs. A qualification, based on an expert opinion, may enable an efficient use of adequate NAMs for a specific context-of-use. Furthermore, it supports the optimisation of promising NAMs for regulatory applications. Existing qualification systems operate in the context of e.g., drug development tools (FDA) and research and development into pharmaceuticals (EMA). The NAMS4NANO consortium was tasked to propose a generic framework for a qualification system for chemical risk assessment in the food and feed sector to speed up the regulatory use of NAMs. Here we describe our proposal including the process and evaluation criteria. A detailed test method description, preferably as standard operating procedures (SOPs), describing the set-up of the NAM including its application and evaluation phase is crucial. Furthermore, the scientific validity, i.e. its reliability and relevance for the context-of-use, needs to be demonstrated, for which we suggest a less rigorous process compared to OECD TGs. We propose to initially establish a qualification system for NM risk assessment, aligned with the EFSA framework. This document is an interim version to stipulate a broader discussion among experts and stakeholders.</p>","PeriodicalId":100395,"journal":{"name":"EFSA Supporting Publications","volume":"21 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/sp.efsa.2024.EN-9008","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Proposal for a qualification system for New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) in the food and feed sector: example of implementation for nanomaterial risk assessment\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Haase,&nbsp;João Barroso,&nbsp;Alessia Bogni,&nbsp;Susanne Bremer-Hoffmann,&nbsp;Valerie Fessard,&nbsp;Arno C. Gutleb,&nbsp;Jan Mast,&nbsp;Emily McVey,&nbsp;Birgit Mertens,&nbsp;Agnes G. Oomen,&nbsp;Vera Ritz,&nbsp;Tommaso Serchi,&nbsp;Katherina Siewert,&nbsp;Deborah Stanco,&nbsp;Shirin M. Usmani,&nbsp;Eveline Verleysen,&nbsp;Olimpia Vincentini,&nbsp;Meike van der Zande,&nbsp;Francesco Cubadda\",\"doi\":\"10.2903/sp.efsa.2024.EN-9008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Plenty of new approach methodologies (NAMs) for risk assessment have been developed but only some are included in OECD Test Guidelines (TGs) for regulatory implementation. Nevertheless, NAMs are increasingly applied, e.g. for nanomaterial (NM) risk assessments. The EFSA Guidance on NM risk assessment suggests that NAM-derived data concerning degradation/dissolution (in relevant biofluids), intestinal uptake/crossing, genotoxicity, cytotoxicity, oxidative stress, (pro-)inflammatory potential and barrier integrity, for many of which no OECD TGs exist, have to be evaluated first. Consequently, NM risk assessments involve data from non-guideline studies, requiring time-consuming and challenging case-by-case evaluations. Establishing an OECD TG is a formal process aiming for international use according to the Mutual Acceptance of Data (MAD). However, not every promising NAM can be prioritised for OECD TGs. A qualification, based on an expert opinion, may enable an efficient use of adequate NAMs for a specific context-of-use. Furthermore, it supports the optimisation of promising NAMs for regulatory applications. Existing qualification systems operate in the context of e.g., drug development tools (FDA) and research and development into pharmaceuticals (EMA). The NAMS4NANO consortium was tasked to propose a generic framework for a qualification system for chemical risk assessment in the food and feed sector to speed up the regulatory use of NAMs. Here we describe our proposal including the process and evaluation criteria. A detailed test method description, preferably as standard operating procedures (SOPs), describing the set-up of the NAM including its application and evaluation phase is crucial. Furthermore, the scientific validity, i.e. its reliability and relevance for the context-of-use, needs to be demonstrated, for which we suggest a less rigorous process compared to OECD TGs. We propose to initially establish a qualification system for NM risk assessment, aligned with the EFSA framework. This document is an interim version to stipulate a broader discussion among experts and stakeholders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100395,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EFSA Supporting Publications\",\"volume\":\"21 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/sp.efsa.2024.EN-9008\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EFSA Supporting Publications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2024.EN-9008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EFSA Supporting Publications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/sp.efsa.2024.EN-9008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目前已开发出大量用于风险评估的新方法 (NAM),但只有部分方法被纳入经合组织测试指南 (TG),用于监管实施。不过,NAM 的应用越来越广泛,例如用于纳米材料 (NM) 风险评估。欧洲食品安全局《纳米材料风险评估指南》建议,必须首先评估有关降解/溶解(在相关生物流体中)、肠道吸收/穿越、遗传毒性、细胞毒性、氧化应激、(促)炎症潜能和屏障完整性的纳米材料衍生数据,其中许多数据没有经合组织测试指南。因此,非甲烷风险评估涉及来自非准则研究的数据,需要进行耗时且具有挑战性的个案评估。建立经合组织技术指南是一个正式的过程,目的是根据数据互认(MAD)进行国际使用。然而,并非所有有前途的非杀伤人员地雷都能优先用于经合组织技术指导小组。以专家意见为基础的资格认证可确保在特定使用环境中有效使用适当的非测量材料。此外,它还有助于优化有前景的非杀伤人员地雷的监管应用。现有的鉴定系统适用于药物开发工具(FDA)和药品研发(EMA)等领域。NAMS4NANO 联盟的任务是为食品和饲料行业的化学风险评估资格认证系统提出一个通用框架,以加快纳美材料的监管使用。我们在此介绍我们的建议,包括流程和评估标准。详细的测试方法说明(最好是标准操作程序 (SOP)),包括其应用和评估阶段在内的 NAM 设置说明至关重要。此外,还需要证明其科学性,即其可靠性和与使用环境的相关性,为此,我们建议采用与经合组织技术指导文件相比不那么严格的程序。我们建议初步建立一个与欧洲食品安全局框架相一致的非食用物质风险评估资格认证体系。本文件为临时版本,供专家和利益相关者进行更广泛的讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Proposal for a qualification system for New Approach Methodologies (NAMs) in the food and feed sector: example of implementation for nanomaterial risk assessment

Plenty of new approach methodologies (NAMs) for risk assessment have been developed but only some are included in OECD Test Guidelines (TGs) for regulatory implementation. Nevertheless, NAMs are increasingly applied, e.g. for nanomaterial (NM) risk assessments. The EFSA Guidance on NM risk assessment suggests that NAM-derived data concerning degradation/dissolution (in relevant biofluids), intestinal uptake/crossing, genotoxicity, cytotoxicity, oxidative stress, (pro-)inflammatory potential and barrier integrity, for many of which no OECD TGs exist, have to be evaluated first. Consequently, NM risk assessments involve data from non-guideline studies, requiring time-consuming and challenging case-by-case evaluations. Establishing an OECD TG is a formal process aiming for international use according to the Mutual Acceptance of Data (MAD). However, not every promising NAM can be prioritised for OECD TGs. A qualification, based on an expert opinion, may enable an efficient use of adequate NAMs for a specific context-of-use. Furthermore, it supports the optimisation of promising NAMs for regulatory applications. Existing qualification systems operate in the context of e.g., drug development tools (FDA) and research and development into pharmaceuticals (EMA). The NAMS4NANO consortium was tasked to propose a generic framework for a qualification system for chemical risk assessment in the food and feed sector to speed up the regulatory use of NAMs. Here we describe our proposal including the process and evaluation criteria. A detailed test method description, preferably as standard operating procedures (SOPs), describing the set-up of the NAM including its application and evaluation phase is crucial. Furthermore, the scientific validity, i.e. its reliability and relevance for the context-of-use, needs to be demonstrated, for which we suggest a less rigorous process compared to OECD TGs. We propose to initially establish a qualification system for NM risk assessment, aligned with the EFSA framework. This document is an interim version to stipulate a broader discussion among experts and stakeholders.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信