Marin-Kuan Maricel, Pagnotti Vincent, Patin Amaury, Moulin Julie, Latado Helia, Varela Jesús, Hammel Yves-Alexis, Gude Thomas, Moor Heidi, Billinton Nick, Tate Matthew, Behnisch Peter Alexander, Besselink Harrie, Burleigh-Flayer Heather, Koster Sander, Szabo David T
Société des Produits Nestlé SA-Nestlé Research, 1000 Lausanne, Switzerland.
PPG, Pittsburgh, PA 15275, USA.
Toxics. 2023 Feb 7;11(2):156. doi: 10.3390/toxics11020156.
According to European regulations, migration from food packaging must be safe. However, currently, there is no consensus on how to evaluate its safety, especially for non-intentionally added substances (NIAS). The intensive and laborious approach, involving identification and then quantification of all migrating substances followed by a toxicological evaluation, is not practical or feasible. In alignment with the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) and the European Union (EU) guidelines on packaging materials, efforts are focused on combining data from analytics, bioassays and in silico toxicology approaches for the risk assessment of packaging materials. Advancement of non-targeted screening approaches using both analytical methods and in vitro bioassays is key. A protocol was developed for the chemical and biological screening of migrants from coated metal packaging materials. This protocol includes guidance on sample preparation, migrant simulation, chemical analysis using liquid chromatography (LC-MS) and validated bioassays covering endocrine activity, genotoxicity and metabolism-related targets. An inter-laboratory study was set-up to evaluate the consistency in biological activity and analytical results generated between three independent laboratories applying the developed protocol and guidance. Coated packaging metal panels were used in this case study. In general, the inter-laboratory chemical analysis and bioassay results displayed acceptable consistency between laboratories, but technical differences led to different data interpretations (e.g., cytotoxicity, cell passages, chemical analysis). The study observations with the greatest impact on the quality of the data and ultimately resulting in discrepancies in the results are given and suggestions for improvement of the protocol are made (e.g., sample preparation, chemical analysis approaches). Finally, there was agreement on the need for an aligned protocol to be utilized by qualified laboratories for chemical and biological analyses, following best practices and guidance for packaging safety assessment of intentionally added substances (IAS) and NIAS to avoid inconsistency in data and the final interpretation.
根据欧洲法规,食品包装中的迁移物质必须是安全的。然而,目前对于如何评估其安全性尚无共识,尤其是对于非有意添加物质(NIAS)。采用先识别所有迁移物质,再进行定量,然后进行毒理学评估的这种繁琐费力的方法并不实际或可行。与国际生命科学研究所(ILSI)和欧盟(EU)关于包装材料的指南一致,目前的工作重点是将分析、生物测定和计算机毒理学方法的数据结合起来,用于包装材料的风险评估。使用分析方法和体外生物测定推进非靶向筛选方法是关键。已制定了一项用于涂层金属包装材料迁移物化学和生物筛选的方案。该方案包括样品制备、迁移物模拟、使用液相色谱(LC-MS)进行化学分析以及涵盖内分泌活性、遗传毒性和代谢相关靶点的经过验证的生物测定的指导。开展了一项实验室间研究,以评估应用所制定的方案和指南的三个独立实验室之间产生的生物活性和分析结果的一致性。本案例研究使用了涂层包装金属板。总体而言,实验室间的化学分析和生物测定结果在各实验室之间显示出可接受的一致性,但技术差异导致了不同的数据解读(例如细胞毒性、传代次数、化学分析)。给出了对数据质量影响最大并最终导致结果出现差异的研究观察结果,并提出了改进方案的建议(例如样品制备、化学分析方法)。最后,大家一致认为需要一个统一的方案,供合格实验室按照有意添加物质(IAS)和NIAS包装安全评估的最佳实践和指南进行化学和生物分析,以避免数据和最终解读出现不一致。