efsa-opinion-chromium-food-drinking-water

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chromium in food and bottled water a) b) Log-Logistic Model, with BMR of 10% Extra Risk for the BMD and 0.95 Lower Confidence Limit for the BMDL 1 Log-Logistic BMD Lower Bound Log-Logistic Model, with BMR of 10% Extra Risk for the BMD and 0.95 Lower Confidence Limit for the BMDL 1 Log-Logistic BMD Lower Bound 0.8 0.8 Fraction Affected 0.6 0.4 Fraction Affected 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0 BMDLBMD 0 BMDL BMD 11:36 01/21 2014 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 dose dose 11:34 01/21 2014 c) d) Weibull Model, with BMR of 10% Extra Risk for the BMD and 0.95 Lower Confidence Limit for the BMDL Weibull Model, with BMR of 10% Extra Risk for the BMD and 0.95 Lower Confidence Limit for the BMDL 1 Weibull BMD Lower Bound 1 Weibull BMD Lower Bound 0.8 0.8 Fraction Affected 0.6 0.4 Fraction Affected 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0 BMDLBMD 0 BMDL BMD 11:41 01/21 2014 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 dose 11:42 01/21 2014 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 dose Figure J17: Fits of the unrestricted log-logistic model (a), restricted log-logistic model (b), unrestricted Weibull model (c) and restricted Weibull model (d) to the dose-response data on hystiocytic cellular infiltration in the mesenteric lymph node in female mice. J 2.6. Hystiocytic cellular infiltration in liver in female mice. For the dose-response analysis of the incidence of hystiocytic cellular infiltration in liver in female mice all non-restricted models, except the probit and logistic model showed an acceptable fit (p > 0.05) which resulted in BMDL 10 values ranging between 0.058 and 0.011 mg/kg b.w. per day. The graphs in Figure J18 show the fit of the Gamma model, both for unrestricted and restricted modeling. The fit of the restricted model showed as expected higher BMDL 10 values, for the Gamma and the Weibull model the BMDL 10 values were 0.29 and 0.35 mg/kg b.w. per day, respectivele with acceptable fits (p = 0.07 and 0.08, respectively. A BMDL 10 = 0.011 mg/kg b.w. per day was used to characterize these data. Using a different modelling approach not following EFSA (2009) ATSDR reported a BMDL 10 of 0.12 mg/kg b.w. per day (ATSDR, 2012). EFSA Journal 2014;12(3):3595 250
Chromium in food and bottled water Table J18: Incidence of liver histiocytic cellular infiltration in B6C3D1 female mice exposed to sodium dichromate dihydrate in drinking water for 2 years. Data: Dose 0 0.38 1.4 3.1 8.7 Response 2/49 15/50 23/50 32/50 45/50 Models Restriction N of parameters Minus Loglikelihood P- value Accepted BMD 10 (mg/kg b.w. per day) BMDL 10 (mg/kg b.w. per day) Full model na 5 122.3 – – – – Null (reduced) model na 1 172.1 - - - - Probit na 2 132.3 0.0002 no 0.88 0.75 LogProbit none 3 123.5 0.30 yes 0.16 0.058 Logistic na 2 131.8 0.0003 no 0.85 0.70 LogLogistic none 3 123.6 0.27 yes 0.15 0.050 Quantal-Linear (QL) na 2 125.7 0.08 yes 0.35 0.28 Multistage Cancer na same as QL Multistage none 3 124.3 0.14 yes 0.25 0.19 Weibull none 3 122.7 0.70 yes 0.095 0.026 Gamma none 0.81 yes 0.067 0.011 b.w.: body weight; na: not applicable; QL: Quantal linear. a) b) Gamma Multi-Hit Model, with BMR of 10% Extra Risk for the BMD and 0.95 Lower Confidence Limit for the BMDL Gamma Multi-Hit 1 BMD Lower Bound Gamma Multi-Hit Model, with BMR of 10% Extra Risk for the BMD and 0.95 Lower Confidence Limit for the BMDL Gamma Multi-Hit 1 BMD Lower Bound 0.8 0.8 Fraction Affected 0.6 0.4 Fraction Affected 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0 BMDL BMD 0 BMDL BMD 12:02 01/21 2014 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 dose dose 12:10 01/21 2014 c) d) Weibull Model, with BMR of 10% Extra Risk for the BMD and 0.95 Lower Confidence Limit for the BMDL Weibull Model, with BMR of 10% Extra Risk for the BMD and 0.95 Lower Confidence Limit for the BMDL 1 Weibull BMD Lower Bound 1 Weibull BMD Lower Bound 0.8 0.8 Fraction Affected 0.6 0.4 Fraction Affected 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.2 0 BMDL BMD 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 dose 12:12 01/21 2014 0 BMDL BMD 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 dose 12:13 01/21 2014 Figure J18: Fits of the unrestricted gamma model (a), restricted gamma model (b), unrestricted Weibull model (c) and restricted Weibull model (d) to the dose-response data on hystiocytic cellular infiltration in the liver in female mice. EFSA Journal 2014;12(3):3595 251
Page 1 and 2:
EFSA Journal 2014;12(3):3595 SCIENT
Page 3 and 4:
Chromium in food and drinking water
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
4.2.2.1. Data collection on food (e
Page 39 and 40:
Sampling year Number of samples Chr
Page 41 and 42:
Number of analtycal results Samplin
Page 43 and 44:
4.2.4. Occurrence data by food cate
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
7.2.1.4. Genotoxicity Chromium in f
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
7.2.2.3. Developmental and reproduc
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
7.5. Dose-response assessment Chrom
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Human observations Chromium in food
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Chromium in food and bottled water
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200: Chromium in food and bottled water
Page 235 and 236: J.1.2. mice Chromium in food and bo
Page 249: Chromium in food and bottled water
Page 261: Chromium in food and bottled water
show all

efsa-opinion-chromium-food-drinking-water

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?