TY - JOUR
T1 - Re-evaluation of neohesperidine dihydrochalcone (E 959) as a food additive
AU - EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF)
AU - Younes, Maged
AU - Aquilina, Gabriele
AU - Castle, Laurence
AU - Degen, Gisela
AU - Engel, Karl Heinz
AU - Fowler, Paul J.
AU - Frutos Fernandez, Maria José
AU - Fürst, Peter
AU - Gundert-Remy, Ursula
AU - Gürtler, Rainer
AU - Husøy, Trine
AU - Manco, Melania
AU - Mennes, Wim
AU - Moldeus, Peter
AU - Passamonti, Sabina
AU - Shah, Romina
AU - Waalkens-Berendsen, Ine
AU - Wright, Matthew
AU - Batke, Monika
AU - Boon, Polly
AU - Bruzell, Ellen
AU - Chipman, James
AU - Crebelli, Riccardo
AU - FitzGerald, Rex
AU - Fortes, Cristina
AU - Halldorsson, Thorhallur
AU - LeBlanc, Jean Charles
AU - Lindtner, Oliver
AU - Mortensen, Alicja
AU - Ntzani, Evangelia
AU - Wallace, Heather
AU - Cascio, Claudia
AU - Civitella, Consuelo
AU - Horvath, Zsuzsanna
AU - Lodi, Federica
AU - Mech, Agnieszka
AU - Tard, Alexandra
AU - Vianello, Giorgia
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority.
PY - 2022/11
Y1 - 2022/11
N2 - The present opinion deals with the re-evaluation of neohesperidine dihydrochalcone (E 959) when used as a food additive. It is obtained by catalytic hydrogenation of a flavanone – neohesperidine – which is naturally occurring and thus isolated by alcohol extraction in bitter oranges (Citrus aurantium). Based on in vivo data in rat, neohesperidine dihydrochalcone is likely to be absorbed, also in humans, and to become systemically available. It does not raise a concern regarding genotoxicity. The toxicity data set consisted of studies on subchronic and prenatal developmental toxicity. No human studies were available. The data set was considered sufficient to derive a new acceptable daily intake (ADI). Based on the weight of evidence (WoE) analysis, the Panel considered unlikely that neohesperidine dihydrochalcone would lead to adverse effects on health in animals in the dose ranges tested. The Panel also considered that a carcinogenicity study was not warranted and that the lack of human data did not affect the overall confidence in the body of evidence. The Panel derived an ADI of 20 mg/kg bodyweight (bw) per day based on a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 4,000 mg/kg bw per day from a 13-week study in rat, applying the standard default factors of 100 for inter- and intraspecies differences and of 2 for extrapolation from subchronic to chronic exposure. For the refined brand-loyal exposure assessment scenario, considered to be the most appropriate for the risk assessment, the exposure estimates at the mean ranged from < 0.01 to 0.09 mg/kg bw per day and at the 95th percentile (P95) from 0.01 to 0.24 mg/kg bw per day. Considering the derived ADI of 20 mg/kg bw per day, the exposure estimates were below the reference value in all age groups. Therefore, the Panel concluded that dietary exposure to the food additive neohesperidine dihydrochalcone (E 959) at the reported uses and use levels would not raise a safety concern.
AB - The present opinion deals with the re-evaluation of neohesperidine dihydrochalcone (E 959) when used as a food additive. It is obtained by catalytic hydrogenation of a flavanone – neohesperidine – which is naturally occurring and thus isolated by alcohol extraction in bitter oranges (Citrus aurantium). Based on in vivo data in rat, neohesperidine dihydrochalcone is likely to be absorbed, also in humans, and to become systemically available. It does not raise a concern regarding genotoxicity. The toxicity data set consisted of studies on subchronic and prenatal developmental toxicity. No human studies were available. The data set was considered sufficient to derive a new acceptable daily intake (ADI). Based on the weight of evidence (WoE) analysis, the Panel considered unlikely that neohesperidine dihydrochalcone would lead to adverse effects on health in animals in the dose ranges tested. The Panel also considered that a carcinogenicity study was not warranted and that the lack of human data did not affect the overall confidence in the body of evidence. The Panel derived an ADI of 20 mg/kg bodyweight (bw) per day based on a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) of 4,000 mg/kg bw per day from a 13-week study in rat, applying the standard default factors of 100 for inter- and intraspecies differences and of 2 for extrapolation from subchronic to chronic exposure. For the refined brand-loyal exposure assessment scenario, considered to be the most appropriate for the risk assessment, the exposure estimates at the mean ranged from < 0.01 to 0.09 mg/kg bw per day and at the 95th percentile (P95) from 0.01 to 0.24 mg/kg bw per day. Considering the derived ADI of 20 mg/kg bw per day, the exposure estimates were below the reference value in all age groups. Therefore, the Panel concluded that dietary exposure to the food additive neohesperidine dihydrochalcone (E 959) at the reported uses and use levels would not raise a safety concern.
KW - E 959
KW - food additive
KW - neohesperidine dihydrochalcone
KW - sweetener
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85146562740&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7595
DO - 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7595
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85146562740
SN - 1831-4732
VL - 20
JO - EFSA Journal
JF - EFSA Journal
IS - 11
M1 - e07595
ER -