Search

Titanium dioxide is a ubiquitous white material found in a diverse range of products from foods to sunscreens, as a pigment and thickener, amongst other uses. Titanium dioxide has been considered no longer safe for use in foods (nano and microparticles of E171) by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) due to concerns over genotoxicity. There are however, conflicting opinions regarding the safety of Titanium dioxide. In an attempt to clarify the situation, a comprehensive weight of evidence (WoE) assessment of the genotoxicity of titanium dioxide based on the available data was performed. A total of 192 datasets for endpoints and test systems considered the most relevant for identifying mutagenic and carcinogenic potential were reviewed and discussed for both reliability and relevance (by weight of evidence) and in the context of whether the physico-chemical properties of the particles had been characterised. The view of an independent panel of experts was that, of the 192 datasets identified, only 34 met the reliability and quality criteria for being most relevant in the evaluation of genotoxicity. Of these, 10 were positive (i.e. reported evidence that titanium dioxide was genotoxic), all of which were from studies of DNA strand breakage (comet assay) or chromosome damage (micronucleus or chromosome aberration assays). All the positive findings were associated with high cytotoxicity, oxidative stress, inflammation, apoptosis, necrosis, or combinations of these. Considering that DNA and chromosome breakage can be secondary to physiological stress, it is highly likely that the observed genotoxic effects of titanium dioxide, including those with nanoparticles, are secondary to physiological stress. Consistent with this finding, there were no positive results from the in vitro and in vivo gene mutation studies evaluated, although it should be noted that to definitively conclude a lack of mutagenicity, more robust in vitro and in vivo gene mutation studies would be useful. Existing evidence does not therefore support a direct DNA damaging mechanism for titanium dioxide (nano and other forms). • EFSA have recently banned titanium dioxide in foods due to concerns over genotoxicity. • A tiered weight of evidence analysis was performed on genotoxicity data for TiO 2 , according to relevance and reliability. • TiO 2 was positive for chromosome damage mainly at levels where reactive oxygen or other cellular toxicity were prevalent. • TiO 2 was negative for point mutations in vivo , the panel noted more data would be required to make definitive conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Dextromethorphan (DMP) is an effective and widely used antitussive drug. While DMP has over a 50 year safe-marketing history, the only available genotoxicity data was an unpublished, negative Ames assay (Roche). Lack of a complete genotoxicity profile on DMP, specifically covering the chromosomal damage endpoint, prompted a regulatory request for an in vitro chromosome aberration assay. In accordance with EC and CPMP Guidance, we evaluated data for a number of chemicals with a structural relationship to DMP. DMP contains no structural alerts for genotoxicity or carcinogenicity using the Deductive Estimation of Risk from Existing Knowledge (DEREK) software tool, confirming the negative results obtained in the existing Ames assay. This is also consistent with the mostly negative genotoxicity and carcinogenicity data available on structurally related chemicals including morphine, codeine, nalbuphine, buprenorphine, naloxone, hydromorphone, levorphanol, and oxycodone. A state-of-the-science, in vitro chromosome aberration assay was also conducted, which demonstrated a lack of genotoxicity for DMP. The overall weight of evidence for DMP and its structural analogues, supports the conclusion that this class of phenanthrene-based chemicals, and DMP, in particular, are not genotoxic in vitro or in vivo, and do not represent a carcinogenic risk to patients. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: For the assessment of genotoxic effects of cosmetic ingredients, a number of well-established and regulatory accepted in vitro assays are in place. A caveat to the use of these assays is their relatively low specificity and high rate of false or misleading positive results. Due to the 7th amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive ban on in vivo genotoxicity testing for cosmetics that was enacted March 2009, it is no longer possible to conduct follow-up in vivo genotoxicity tests for cosmetic ingredients positive in in vitro genotoxicity tests to further assess the relevance of the in vitro findings. COLIPA, the European Cosmetics Association, has initiated a research programme to improve existing and develop new in vitro methods. A COLIPA workshop was held in Brussels in April 2008 to analyse the best possible use of available methods and approaches to enable a sound assessment of the genotoxic hazard of cosmetic ingredients. Common approaches of cosmetic companies are described, with recommendations for evaluating in vitro genotoxins using non-animal approaches. A weight of evidence approach was employed to set up a decision-tree for the integration of alternative methods into tiered testing strategies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]