Literature DB >> 32625652

Re-evaluation of celluloses E 460(i), E 460(ii), E 461, E 462, E 463, E 464, E 465, E 466, E 468 and E 469 as food additives.

Maged Younes, Peter Aggett, Fernando Aguilar, Riccardo Crebelli, Alessandro Di Domenico, Birgit Dusemund, Metka Filipič, Maria Jose Frutos, Pierre Galtier, David Gott, Ursula Gundert-Remy, Gunter Georg Kuhnle, Claude Lambré, Jean-Charles Leblanc, Inger Therese Lillegaard, Peter Moldeus, Alicja Mortensen, Agneta Oskarsson, Ivan Stankovic, Paul Tobback, Ine Waalkens-Berendsen, Matthew Wright, Alexandra Tard, Stavroula Tasiopoulou, Rudolf Antonius Woutersen.   

Abstract

Following a request frclass="Gene">om the Europeclass="Gene">an Cclass="Gene">an class="Gene">ommission, the EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion re-evaluating the safety of microcrystalline cellulose (E 460(i)), powdered cellulose (E 460(ii)), methyl cellulose (E 461), ethyl cellulose (E 462), hydroxypropyl cellulose (E 463), hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose (E 464), ethyl methyl cellulose (E 465), sodium carboxy methyl cellulose (E 466), enzymatically hydrolysed carboxy methyl cellulose (E 469) and cross-linked carboxy methyl cellulose (E 468) as food additives. The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) established an acceptable daily intake (ADI) 'not specified' for unmodified and modified celluloses. Celluloses are not absorbed and are excreted intact in the faeces; in addition, microcrystalline cellulose, powdered and modified celluloses could be fermented by the intestinal flora in animals and humans. Specific toxicity data were not always available for all the celluloses evaluated in the present opinion and for all endpoints. Given their structural, physicochemical and biological similarities, the Panel considered it possible to read-across between all the celluloses. The acute toxicity of celluloses was low and there was no genotoxic concern. Short-term and subchronic dietary toxicity studies performed with E 460(i), E 461, E 462, E 463, E 464, E 466 and E 469 at levels up to 10% did not indicate specific treatment related adverse effects. In chronic toxicity studies performed with E 460(i), E 461, E 463, E 464, E 465 and E 466, the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) values reported ranged up to 9,000 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day. No carcinogenic properties were detected for microcrystalline cellulose and modified celluloses. Adverse effects on reproductive performance or developmental effects were not observed with celluloses at doses greater than 1,000 mg/kg bw by gavage (often the highest dose tested). The combined exposure to celluloses (E 460-466, E 468 and E 469) at 95th percentile of the refined (brand-loyal) exposure assessment for the general population was up to 506 mg/kg bw per day. The Panel concluded that there was no need for a numerical ADI and that there would be no safety concern at the reported uses and use levels for the unmodified and modified celluloses (E 460(i); E 460(ii); E 461-466; E 468 and E 469). The Panel considered an indicative total exposure of around 660-900 mg/kg bw per day for microcrystalline, powdered and modified celluloses.
© 2018 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Microcrystalline cellulose (E 460(i)); cross‐linked carboxy methyl cellulose (E 468); enzymatically hydrolysed carboxy methyl cellulose (E 469); ethyl cellulose (E 462); ethyl methyl cellulose (E 465); hydroxypropyl cellulose (E 463); hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose (E 464); methyl cellulose (E 461); powdered cellulose (E 460(ii)); sodium carboxy methyl cellulose (E 466)

Year:  2018        PMID: 32625652      PMCID: PMC7009359          DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5047

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  EFSA J        ISSN: 1831-4732


  5 in total

1.  Oligomers of Carboxymethyl Cellulose for Postharvest Treatment of Fresh Produce: The Effect on Fresh-Cut Strawberry in Combination with Natural Active Agents.

Authors:  Yevgenia Shebis; Elazar Fallik; Victor Rodov; Sai Sateesh Sagiri; Elena Poverenov
Journal:  Foods       Date:  2022-04-13

2.  Genotoxicity of Three Micro/Nanocelluloses with Different Physicochemical Characteristics in MG-63 and V79 Cells.

Authors:  Célia Ventura; Catarina Marques; João Cadete; Madalena Vilar; Jorge F S Pedrosa; Fátima Pinto; Susete Nogueira Fernandes; Rafaela Raupp da Rosa; Maria Helena Godinho; Paulo J T Ferreira; Henriqueta Louro; Maria João Silva
Journal:  J Xenobiot       Date:  2022-04-21

3.  Tracking Bacterial Nanocellulose in Animal Tissues by Fluorescence Microscopy.

Authors:  Renato Mota; Ana Cristina Rodrigues; Ricardo Silva-Carvalho; Lígia Costa; Daniela Martins; Paula Sampaio; Fernando Dourado; Miguel Gama
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-28       Impact factor: 5.719

Review 4.  Food Emulsifiers and Metabolic Syndrome: The Role of the Gut Microbiota.

Authors:  Martina De Siena; Pauline Raoul; Lara Costantini; Emidio Scarpellini; Marco Cintoni; Antonio Gasbarrini; Emanuele Rinninella; Maria Cristina Mele
Journal:  Foods       Date:  2022-07-25

Review 5.  Toxicological Assessment of Cellulose Nanomaterials: Oral Exposure.

Authors:  Nádia Vital; Célia Ventura; Michel Kranendonk; Maria João Silva; Henriqueta Louro
Journal:  Nanomaterials (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-27       Impact factor: 5.719

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.