Abdullah Rozaini, Diaz Leolean Nyle, Wesseling Sebastiaan, Rietjens Ivonne M C M
a Division of Toxicology , Wageningen University , Wageningen , the Netherlands.
b Department of Environmental & Occupational Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences , Universiti Putra Malaysia UPM , Serdang , Selangor , Malaysia.
Food Addit Contam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess. 2017 Feb;34(2):135-144. doi: 10.1080/19440049.2016.1266098. Epub 2016 Dec 16.
After the incidences of induction of aristolochic acid nephropathy after consumption of herbal weight loss preparations that accidentally contained aristolochic acids (AAs), several countries defined national restrictions on the presence of AAs in food, including plant food supplements (PFS) and herbal products. This study investigates whether the risks associated with exposure to AAs via PFS and herbal products are at present indeed negligible. Data reported in literature on AA levels in PFS and other herbal products and also obtained from a new series of PFS in the present study were used to calculate the estimated daily intakes (EDIs) and corresponding margins of exposure (MOEs). Available literature data revealed that 206 out of 573 samples were found to contain aristolochic acid I (AAI) and/or aristolochic acid II (AAII). The results obtained from recently collected PFS revealed that both AAI and AAII were detected in three out of 18 analysed PFS at levels up to 594.8 and 235.3 µg g, respectively, being in line with the levels reported in literature. The EDIs resulting from intake of these PFS resulted in MOEs that were generally below 10,000, corroborating the priority for risk management. Although these results refer to PFS collected by targeted sampling strategies, the data reveal that AA-containing PFS are still freely available. When considering that the use of these samples may be limited to shorter periods of time, the EDIs might be lower, but MOE values would still be lower than 10,000 for more than 50% of the AA-containing PFS and herbal products. In conclusion, the presence of AAs in PFS and herbal products even several years after instalment of the legal restrictions still raises concern, especially for people who frequently use the respective PFS and herbal products.
在食用了意外含有马兜铃酸(AAs)的草药减肥制剂后出现马兜铃酸肾病病例后,多个国家对食品中马兜铃酸的存在制定了国家限制规定,包括植物性食品补充剂(PFS)和草药产品。本研究调查了目前通过PFS和草药产品接触马兜铃酸所带来的风险是否确实可忽略不计。利用文献报道的PFS和其他草药产品中马兜铃酸水平的数据,以及本研究中从一系列新的PFS中获得的数据,来计算估计每日摄入量(EDIs)和相应的暴露边际(MOEs)。现有文献数据显示,573个样本中有206个被发现含有马兜铃酸I(AAI)和/或马兜铃酸II(AAII)。最近收集的PFS的结果显示,在18个分析的PFS中有3个检测到了AAI和AAII,含量分别高达594.8和235.3 μg/g,与文献报道的水平一致。摄入这些PFS所产生的EDIs导致MOEs通常低于10,000,这证实了风险管理的优先性。尽管这些结果是针对通过有针对性的抽样策略收集的PFS,但数据显示含AA的PFS仍然可以自由获取。考虑到这些样本的使用可能仅限于较短时间,EDIs可能会更低,但对于超过50%的含AA的PFS和草药产品,MOE值仍将低于10,000。总之,即使在实施法律限制数年之后,PFS和草药产品中马兜铃酸的存在仍然令人担忧,尤其是对于经常使用相应PFS和草药产品的人群。