» Articles » PMID: 32625443

Scientific Motivations and Criteria to Consider Updating EFSA Scientific Assessments

Abstract

EFSA is committed to assess and communicate the risks occurring in the food and feed chain from farm to fork and to provide other forms of scientific advice. This work, carried out by EFSA since its inception, has resulted in the adoption of thousands of scientific assessments. EFSA is obliged to re-assess past assessments in specific regulatory contexts such as those on food and feed additives, active substances in plant protection products and genetically modified food and feed. In other sectors, the consideration for updating past EFSA scientific assessments is taken on an ad hoc basis mainly depending on specific requests by risk managers or on EFSA self-tasking. If safety is potentially at stake in any area within EFSA's remit, the readiness to update past scientific assessments is important to keep EFSA at the forefront of science and to promote an effective risk assessment. Although this task might be very complex and resource demanding, it is fundamental to EFSA's mission. The present EFSA Scientific Committee opinion deals with scientific motivations and criteria to contribute to the timely updating of EFSA scientific assessments. It is recognised that the decision for updating should be agreed following careful consideration of all the relevant elements by the EFSA management, in collaboration with risk managers and stakeholders. The present opinion addresses the scientific approaches through which it would be possible for EFSA to increase the speed and effectiveness of the acquisition of new data, as well as, to improve the consequent evaluations to assess the relevance and reliability of new data in the context of contributing to the better definition of whether to update past scientific assessments.

Citing Articles

Guidance on risk assessment of nanomaterials to be applied in the food and feed chain: human and animal health.

More S, Bampidis V, Benford D, Bragard C, Halldorsson T, Hernandez-Jerez A EFSA J. 2021; 19(8):e06768.

PMID: 34377190 PMC: 8331059. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6768.


Evaluation of four new studies on the potential toxicity of titanium dioxide used as a food additive (E 171).

Younes M, Aggett P, Aguilar F, Crebelli R, Dusemund B, Filipic M EFSA J. 2020; 16(7):e05366.

PMID: 32625996 PMC: 7009373. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5366.


Guidance on risk assessment of the application of nanoscience and nanotechnologies in the food and feed chain: Part 1, human and animal health.

Hardy A, Benford D, Halldorsson T, Jeger M, Knutsen H, More S EFSA J. 2020; 16(7):e05327.

PMID: 32625968 PMC: 7009542. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5327.


Scientific motivations and criteria to consider updating EFSA scientific assessments.

Hardy A, Benford D, Halldorsson T, Jeger M, Knutsen K, More S EFSA J. 2020; 15(3):e04737.

PMID: 32625443 PMC: 7010104. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4737.


Combining In Vitro Data and Physiologically Based Kinetic Modeling Facilitates Reverse Dosimetry to Define In Vivo Dose-Response Curves for Bixin- and Crocetin-Induced Activation of PPARγ in Humans.

Suparmi S, de Haan L, Spenkelink A, Louisse J, Beekmann K, Rietjens I Mol Nutr Food Res. 2019; 64(2):e1900880.

PMID: 31846197 PMC: 7003908. DOI: 10.1002/mnfr.201900880.

References
1.
Vermeire T, Aldenberg T, Buist H, Escher S, Mangelsdorf I, Paune E . OSIRIS, a quest for proof of principle for integrated testing strategies of chemicals for four human health endpoints. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2013; 67(2):136-45. DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2013.01.007. View

2.
Ruden C, Adams J, Agerstrand M, Brock T, Poulsen V, Schlekat C . Assessing the relevance of ecotoxicological studies for regulatory decision making. Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2016; 13(4):652-663. DOI: 10.1002/ieam.1846. View

3.
Hardy A, Benford D, Halldorsson T, Jeger M, Knutsen K, More S . Update: use of the benchmark dose approach in risk assessment. EFSA J. 2020; 15(1):e04658. PMC: 7009819. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4658. View

4.
Hardy A, Benford D, Halldorsson T, Jeger M, Knutsen K, More S . Scientific motivations and criteria to consider updating EFSA scientific assessments. EFSA J. 2020; 15(3):e04737. PMC: 7010104. DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4737. View