Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Direct food additives are tested for genotoxicity, acute and subchronic toxicity, carcinogenicity and teratogenicity. International guidelines differ in the types of tests required, the duration of the tests, the species of animals to be used, the number of animals recommended and the method of housing experimental animals. This lack of harmonisation is wasteful in terms of animal use and creates additional and, perhaps, unnecessary work for the food industry. In addition, unlike other chemicals, food additives pose a special problem for toxicity testing due to repeated low-dose, life-time human exposure, which is difficult to model in animal studies. In an assessment of the extent to which the Three Rs (reduction, refinement and replacement) can be applied to food additive toxicity testing, it was concluded that differences in regulatory requirements and testing protocols can be improved in both the short term and longer term. Suggestions for improvements to existing alternative approaches for food toxicity testing are made.

Keywords

food additives toxicity testing harmonisation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Broadhead

C.L.

(1995). Issues in regulatory food toxicity testing, 57 pp. FRAME

Nottingham, UK.

Broadhead

C.L.

, Combes

R.D.

, and Balls

(1996). Risk assessment: alternatives to animal testing. In Food Chemical Risk Analysis (ed. Fisher

, Tennant

), in press.

Walum

, Balls

, Bianchi

, Blaauboer

, Bolcsfoldi

, Guillouzo

, Moore

G.A.

, Odland

, Reinhardt

, and Spielmann

(1992). ECITTS: an integrated approach to the application of in vitro test systems to the hazard assessment of chemicals. ATLA 20, 406–428.

Barrett

M.D.

, Castell

J.V.

, Chamberlain

, Combes

R.D.

, Dearden

J.C.

, Fentem

J.H.

, Gerner

, Giuliani

, Gray

T.J.G.

, Livingstone

D.J.

, Provan

W.M.

, Rutten

F.A.J.J.L.

, Verhaar

H.J.M.

, and Zbinden

(1995). The integrated use of alternative approaches for predicting toxic hazard. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 8. ATLA 23, 410–429.

Blaauboer

B.J.

, Bayliss

M.K.

, Castell

J.V.

, Evelo

C.T.A.

, Frazier

J.M.

, Groen

, Gulden

, Guillouzo

, Hissink

A.M.

, Houston

J.B.

, Johanson

, de Jongh

, Kedderis

G.L.

, Reinhardt

C.A.

, van de Sandt

J.J.M.

, and Semino

(1996). The use of biokinetics and in vitro methods in toxicological risk evaluation. The report and recommendations of ECVAM workshop 15. ATLA, 24, 473–497.

Anon. (1993). Toxicological Principles for the Safety Assessment of Direct Food Additives and Color Additives Used in Food, 235 pp. Washington, DC, USA: US Food and Drug Administration Centre for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition.

Anon. (1994). Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals. Paris: OECD.

Seibert

, Gulden

, & Voss

J-U.

(1994). An in vitro toxicity testing strategy for the classification and labelling of chemicals according to their potential acute lethal potency. Toxicology in Vitro 8, 847–850.

Newall

D.R.

, and Beedles

K.E.

(1994). The stem-cell test: a novel in vitro assay for teratogenic potential. Toxicology in Vitro 8, 697–701.

10.

Ashby

(1996). Alternatives to the 2-species bioassay for the identification of potential human carcinogens. Human and Experimental Toxicology 15, 183–202.

11.

Provost

G.S.

, Kretz

P.L.

, Hamner

R.T.

, Matthews

C.D.

, Rogers

B.J.

, Lundberg

K.S.

, Dycaico

M.J.

, and Short

J.M.

(1994). Transgenic systems for in vivo mutation analysis. Mutation Research 288, 133–149.

12.

Phillips

J.C.

, Gibson

W.B.

, Yam

, Alden

C.L.

, and Hard

G.C.

(1990). Survey of the QSAR and in vitro approaches for developing non-animal methods to supersede the in vivo LD50 test. Food and Chemical Toxicology 28, 375–394.

13.

Sanderson

D.M.

, and Earnshaw

C.G.

(1991). Computer prediction of possible toxic action from chemical structure: the DEREK system. Human and Experimental Toxicology 10, 261–273.

14.

Smithing

M.P.

, and Darvas

(1992). Hazardexpert: an expert system for predicting chemical toxicity. In Food Safety Assessment (ed. Fin-lay

J.W.

, Robinson

S.F.

, Armstrong

D.J.

), pp. 191–200. Washington, DC, USA: American Chemical Society.

15.

Enslein

, Gombar

V.K.

, and Blake

B.W.

(1994). Use of SAR in computer-assisted prediction of carcinogenicity and mutagenicity of chemicals by the TOPKAT program. Mutation Research 305, 47–62.

16.

Klopman

, and Rosenkranz

H.S.

(1994). Approaches to SAR in carcinogenesis and mutagenesis. Prediction of carcinogenicity/mutagenicity using MULTI-CASE. Mutation Research 305, 33–46.

17.

Lewis

D.V.F.

, Moereels

, Lake

B.G.

, Ioannides

, and Parke

D.V.

(1994). Molecular modelling of enzymes and receptors involved in carcinogenesis: QSAPs and COMPACT-3D. Drug Metabolism Reviews 26, 261–285.

18.

Long

, and Combes

R.D.

(1995). Using DEREK to predict the activity of some carcinogens/mutagens found in foods. Toxicology in Vitro 9, 563–569.

FRAME Recommendations for the Application of the Three Rs to the Regulatory Toxicity Testing of Food Additives

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References