NanoRelease Food Additive Task Group 3 White Paper
-
Upload
lance-weiss -
Category
Documents
-
view
36 -
download
0
description
Transcript of NanoRelease Food Additive Task Group 3 White Paper
NanoRelease Food AdditiveTask Group 3 White Paper
Current Findings and ConclusionsApril 16, 2013
- Alimentary Canal Models-
11www.riskscience.org
The statements made in this presentation reflect the personal scientific opinion of the co-chairs and co-authors, and do not necessarily reflect the official position of any of the employers or organizations affiliated with the co-chairs and co-authors.
The recommendations do not supersede applicable national legal risk assessment requirements. They will not necessarily be used as a basis for guidelines and/or recommendations issued by regulatory authorities.
2
Disclaimer
2www.riskscience.org
Task Group 3 - Aim
We aimed to prepare a review of alimentary canal models applicable for the assessment of the stability, kinetics, bioavailability and excretion of engineered nanomaterials following release from food.
3www.riskscience.org
TG3: Alimentary Canal ModelsMEMBERS
4www.riskscience.org
Vicki Stone (COCHAIR) Heriot-Watt Univ. Jayadev Raju Health Canada
Rekha Mehta (COCHAIR) Health Canada Koen Venema TNO Netherlands
Eva-Maria Collnot (COCHAIR) Saarland Univ. Lourdes Gombau Leitat Tech Center
Alastair Watson Univ. of East Anglia Luis Valerio US Food and Drug Admin.
Amy Clippinger PETA Paul Singh Univ. of California Davis
David Lefebvre (presenting) Health Canada Jonathan Powell
(advisor)MRC Human
Nutrition Research
Genevieve Bondy Health Canada Susann Bellman (advisor) TNO Netherlands
Hans Bouwmeester RIKILT Inst. of Food Safety
Table of ContentsChapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Applicability of models of the healthy alimentary canal
Chapter 3: Applicability of models for physiological and disease states of the alimentary canal
Chapter 4: Specific examples of nanomaterial quantification in models of the alimentary canal
Chapter 5: Discussion and Conclusions
(100 pages)
5www.riskscience.org
Model Categories
• In vivo
• Ex vivo
• In vitro
• In silico
6www.riskscience.org
The 3 categories can be studied in these systems• soft/lipid-based nanomaterials• solid non-lipid non metal nanomaterials• solid metalloid / metal-based nanomaterials
• Several examples of each are available in the literature. No clear tendencies are yet apparent. Stability, kinetics, bioavailability and excretion rates can vary depending on specific nanomaterial surface chemistry, size, charge, etc.
• Controls: ions, nanomaterials, bulk material
Discussion of Findings
7www.riskscience.org
Recommendations on models of the alimentary canal for assessment of
the stability, behaviour, bioavailability and excretion of nanomaterials
following release from food
88www.riskscience.org
TIER 1Screen the nanomaterial in the following systems to quantify stability, solubility, agglomeration, and dynamics such as absorption and movement along the alimentary canal towards fecal excretion.
• In silico computational models built on analytical data with similar nanomaterials – if such data is available for comparison
• In vitro non-cellular digestive fluids to model conditions in the mouth, stomach, small intestine and/or large intestine
99www.riskscience.org
TIER 2Reconstruct healthy intestine using cells In Vitro:• Epithelial cells of the buccal cavity (mouth)• Intestinal Caco-2 enterocyte-like cells• Co-culture to generate intestinal M-cells• Co-culture with mucus-producing cells
Some in vitro models can be adapted to reflect disease states. If a subpopulation of humans has a physiological state which modifies their ability to absorb nutrients or toxins, bioavailability could also be studied in these disease models. An alternative would be the use of inter-individual uncertainty factors.
1010www.riskscience.org
TIER 3In Vivo studies in wild-type rodents and/or rodent models of human diseases. Use OECD oral exposure and toxicokinetic protocols.
This tier could be important for engineered nanomaterials which will have high human exposure levels.
An interspecies uncertainty factor is sometimes used to relate data in animals to human risk assessment.
1111www.riskscience.org
Notes on the Recommendations
•Relevant models exist. However, the alternative models require standardization and validation before being acceptable for all stakeholders.
•There likely won’t be a single method that addresses all of the necessary questions.
1212www.riskscience.org
Methods Development Needs
• Development of analytical tools to quantify nanomaterial stability in complex media, saliva, chyme, feces and biological tissues; for assessment of the kinetics of food-borne nanomaterials
• Validation of existing absorption and excretion models for use in risk assessment of nanomaterials (particularly confirmation that alternative ex vivo, in vitro and in silico models are reflective of animals and humans).
1313www.riskscience.org
Factors to consider in the selection of alimentary canal models for
further development
• reproducibility• ease of use• time required• easy access to required instrumentation,
reagents and expertise• cost-effectiveness
1414www.riskscience.org
Task Group 3 White Paper Status
• We are in the final stages of drafting
• We are open to input from stakeholders on our suggested tiered approach to the selection of models of the alimentary canal
15www.riskscience.org
Thank you for your attention!
1616www.riskscience.org