The session revolved around the recently published European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Scientific Opinions on ochratoxin A (OTA) and aflatoxins (AF) and the challenges that a representative sampling entails.
Regarding OTA, EFSA Scientific Officer Dr. Hans Steinkellner explained the exposure re-assessment for which a total of 71,769 analytical results (75% left censored) were used coming from 29 EU Member States (more than 50% from Germany and the Netherlands). They found that the occurrence levels are similar to those of 2006 and concluded that the most important contributors were ‘Preserved meat’, ‘Cheese’, and ‘Grains and grain-based products’. Dried and fresh fruit, such as grapes, figs and dates, as well as fruit juices and nectars were also contributing to the exposure. EFSA recommended more studies elucidating the sequence of critical events at the carcinogenic target site in the kidney and more studies on toxicokinetics of OTA. In addition, more data on occurrence and toxicity are needed.
In the case of AF, after 209,802 analyses from 69,199 samples, the highest mean concentrations were found in ‘Legumes, nuts and oilseeds’ (particularly in pistachios, peanuts and other seeds), contributing up to 29% of the dietary exposure to aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) in adults. The Panel considered that the impact of the uncertainties is moderate and that the assessment is likely to be conservative. EFSA recommended more studies on genotoxic potential and dietary exposure, as well as more data on occurrence.
The presentations were followed by a discussion on the uncertainty of the assessments, the difficulty of extrapolating toxicokinetic data from animals to humans, and the lack of evidence to support either direct or indirect DNA damage in OTA carcinogenesis, among other challenges.
Lastly, Dr. Thomas Whitaker, Professor Emeritus, Biological and Agricultural Engineering Department of North Carolina State University, gave a presentation about how to interpret mycotoxin sample test results and reduce the risk of misclassifying lots. Dr. Whitaker emphasized the high variability associated to replicated samples due to the heterogeneous distribution of aflatoxin concentration. The variability may lead to a misclassification of lots: a ‘good’ lot can be rejected (seller’s risk) or a ‘bad’ lot can be accepted (buyer’s risk). He concluded that there is always a risk present at some level, even when the protocols are used correctly.
Regarding OTA, EFSA Scientific Officer Dr. Hans Steinkellner explained the exposure re-assessment for which a total of 71,769 analytical results (75% left censored) were used coming from 29 EU Member States (more than 50% from Germany and the Netherlands). They found that the occurrence levels are similar to those of 2006 and concluded that the most important contributors were ‘Preserved meat’, ‘Cheese’, and ‘Grains and grain-based products’. Dried and fresh fruit, such as grapes, figs and dates, as well as fruit juices and nectars were also contributing to the exposure. EFSA recommended more studies elucidating the sequence of critical events at the carcinogenic target site in the kidney and more studies on toxicokinetics of OTA. In addition, more data on occurrence and toxicity are needed.
In the case of AF, after 209,802 analyses from 69,199 samples, the highest mean concentrations were found in ‘Legumes, nuts and oilseeds’ (particularly in pistachios, peanuts and other seeds), contributing up to 29% of the dietary exposure to aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) in adults. The Panel considered that the impact of the uncertainties is moderate and that the assessment is likely to be conservative. EFSA recommended more studies on genotoxic potential and dietary exposure, as well as more data on occurrence.
The presentations were followed by a discussion on the uncertainty of the assessments, the difficulty of extrapolating toxicokinetic data from animals to humans, and the lack of evidence to support either direct or indirect DNA damage in OTA carcinogenesis, among other challenges.
Lastly, Dr. Thomas Whitaker, Professor Emeritus, Biological and Agricultural Engineering Department of North Carolina State University, gave a presentation about how to interpret mycotoxin sample test results and reduce the risk of misclassifying lots. Dr. Whitaker emphasized the high variability associated to replicated samples due to the heterogeneous distribution of aflatoxin concentration. The variability may lead to a misclassification of lots: a ‘good’ lot can be rejected (seller’s risk) or a ‘bad’ lot can be accepted (buyer’s risk). He concluded that there is always a risk present at some level, even when the protocols are used correctly.