Polyamines are essential for the growth and function of normal cells. They interact with various macromolecules, both electrostatically and covalently and, as a consequence, have a variety of cellular effects. The complexity of polyamine metabolism and the multitude of compensatory mechanisms that are invoked to maintain polyamine homoeostasis argue that these amines are critical to cell survival. The regulation of polyamine content within cells occurs at several levels, including transcription and translation. In addition, novel features such as the +1 frameshift required for antizyme production and the rapid turnover of several of the enzymes involved in the pathway make the regulation of polyamine metabolism a fascinating subject. The link between polyamine content and human disease is unequivocal, and significant success has been obtained in the treatment of a number of parasitic infections. Targeting the polyamine pathway as a means of treating cancer has met with limited success, although the development of drugs such as DFMO (alpha-difluoromethylornithine), a rationally designed anticancer agent, has revolutionized our understanding of polyamine function in cell growth and provided 'proof of concept' that influencing polyamine metabolism and content within tumour cells will prevent tumour growth. The more recent development of the polyamine analogues has been pivotal in advancing our understanding of the necessity to deplete all three polyamines to induce apoptosis in tumour cells. The current thinking is that the polyamine inhibitors/analogues may also be useful agents in the chemoprevention of cancer and, in this area, we may yet see a revival of DFMO. The future will be in adopting a functional genomics approach to identifying polyamine-regulated genes linked to either carcinogenesis or apoptosis.

The European Commission asked EFSA for a scientific evaluation on the risks to human health related to the presence of perfluoroalkyl substances ( PFAS s) in food. Based on several similar effects in animals, toxicokinetics and observed concentrations in human blood, the CONTAM Panel decided to perform the assessment for the sum of four PFAS s: PFOA , PFNA , PFH xS and PFOS . These made up half of the lower bound ( LB ) exposure to those PFAS s with available occurrence data, the remaining contribution being primarily from PFAS s with short half‐lives. Equal potencies were assumed for the four PFAS s included in the assessment. The mean LB exposure in adolescents and adult age groups ranged from 3 to 22, the 95th percentile from 9 to 70 ng/kg body weight (bw) per week. Toddlers and ‘other children’ showed a twofold higher exposure. Upper bound exposure was 4‐ to 49‐fold higher than LB levels, but the latter were considered more reliable. ‘Fish meat’, ‘Fruit and fruit products’ and ‘Eggs and egg products’ contributed most to the exposure. Based on available studies in animals and humans, effects on the immune system were considered the most critical for the risk assessment. From a human study, a lowest BMDL 10 of 17.5 ng/ mL for the sum of the four PFAS s in serum was identified for 1‐year‐old children. Using PBPK modelling, this serum level of 17.5 ng/ mL in children was estimated to correspond to long‐term maternal exposure of 0.63 ng/kg bw per day. Since accumulation over time is important, a tolerable weekly intake ( TWI ) of 4.4 ng/kg bw per week was established. This TWI also protects against other potential adverse effects observed in humans. Based on the estimated LB exposure, but also reported serum levels, the CONTAM Panel concluded that parts of the European population exceed this TWI , which is of concern.

The European Commission asked EFSA for a scientific evaluation on the risks to human health related to the presence of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in food. Regarding PFOS and PFOA occurrence, the final data set available for dietary exposure assessment contained a total of 20,019 analytical results (PFOS n = 10,191 and PFOA n = 9,828). There were large differences between upper and lower bound exposure due to analytical methods with insufficient sensitivity. The CONTAM Panel considered the lower bound estimates to be closer to true exposure levels. Important contributors to the lower bound mean chronic exposure were 'Fish and other seafood', 'Meat and meat products' and 'Eggs and egg products', for PFOS, and 'Milk and dairy products', 'Drinking water' and 'Fish and other seafood' for PFOA. PFOS and PFOA are readily absorbed in the gastrointestinal tract, excreted in urine and faeces, and do not undergo metabolism. Estimated human half-lives for PFOS and PFOA are about 5 years and 2-4 years, respectively. The derivation of a health-based guidance value was based on human epidemiological studies. For PFOS, the increase in serum total cholesterol in adults, and the decrease in antibody response at vaccination in children were identified as the critical effects. For PFOA, the increase in serum total cholesterol was the critical effect. Also reduced birth weight (for both compounds) and increased prevalence of high serum levels of the liver enzyme alanine aminotransferase (ALT) (for PFOA) were considered. After benchmark modelling of serum levels of PFOS and PFOA, and estimating the corresponding daily intakes, the CONTAM Panel established a tolerable weekly intake (TWI) of 13 ng/kg body weight (bw) per week for PFOS and 6 ng/kg bw per week for PFOA. For both compounds, exposure of a considerable proportion of the population exceeds the proposed TWIs.

Deoxynivalenol (DON) is a mycotoxin primarily produced by Fusarium fungi, occurring predominantly in cereal grains. Following the request of the European Commission, the CONTAM Panel assessed the risk to animal and human health related to DON, 3-acetyl-DON (3-Ac-DON), 15-acetyl-DON (15-Ac-DON) and DON-3-glucoside in food and feed. A total of 27,537, 13,892, 7,270 and 2,266 analytical data for DON, 3-Ac-DON, 15-Ac-DON and DON-3-glucoside, respectively, in food, feed and unprocessed grains collected from 2007 to 2014 were used. For human exposure, grains and grain-based products were main sources, whereas in farm and companion animals, cereal grains, cereal by-products and forage maize contributed most. DON is rapidly absorbed, distributed, and excreted. Since 3-Ac-DON and 15-Ac-DON are largely deacetylated and DON-3-glucoside cleaved in the intestines the same toxic effects as DON can be expected. The TDI of 1 lg/kg bw per day, that was established for DON based on reduced body weight gain in mice, was therefore used as a group-TDI for the sum of DON, 3-Ac-DON, 15-Ac-DON and DON-3-glucoside. In order to assess acute human health risk, epidemiological data from mycotoxicoses were assessed and a group-ARfD of 8 lg/kg bw per eating occasion was calculated. Estimates of acute dietary exposures were below this dose and did not raise a health concern in humans. The estimated mean chronic dietary exposure was above the group-TDI in infants, toddlers and other children, and at high exposure also in adolescents and adults, indicating a potential health concern. Based on estimated mean dietary concentrations in ruminants, poultry, rabbits, dogs and cats, most farmed fish species and horses, adverse effects are not expected. At the high dietary concentrations, there is a potential risk for chronic adverse effects in pigs and fish and for acute adverse effects in cats and farmed mink.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and no modifications or adaptations are made.The EFSA Journal is a publication of the European Food Safety Authority, an agency of the European Union. Deoxynivalenol and its acetylated and modified forms in food and feed www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 2 EFSA Journal 2017;15(9):4718 Deoxynivalenol and its acetylated and modified forms in food and feed www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 3 EFSA Journal 2017;15(9):4718 Deoxynivalenol and its acetylated and modified forms in food and feed www.efsa.europa.eu/efsajournal 4 EFSA Journal 2017;15(9):471870% of ingested DON is excreted via urine, of which about 80% was in conjugated forms, mainly as DON-15-glucuronide that was about threefold more efficiently formed than DON-3-glucuronide. After a single oral exposure to DON, feed refusal appeared very quickly in mice. Previous risk assessments of DON conducted by the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) in 1999 and by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives...

EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the risks to public health related to the presence of aflatoxins in food. The risk assessment was confined to aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), AFB2, AFG1, AFG2 and AFM1. More than 200,000 analytical results on the occurrence of aflatoxins were used in the evaluation. Grains and grain‐based products made the largest contribution to the mean chronic dietary exposure to AFB1 in all age classes, while ‘liquid milk’ and ‘fermented milk products’ were the main contributors to the AFM1 mean exposure. Aflatoxins are genotoxic and AFB1 can cause hepatocellular carcinomas (HCCs) in humans. The CONTAM Panel selected a benchmark dose lower confidence limit (BMDL) for a benchmark response of 10% of 0.4 μg/kg body weight (bw) per day for the incidence of HCC in male rats following AFB1 exposure to be used in a margin of exposure (MOE) approach. The calculation of a BMDL from the human data was not appropriate; instead, the cancer potencies estimated by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives in 2016 were used. For AFM1, a potency factor of 0.1 relative to AFB1 was used. For AFG1, AFB2 and AFG2, the in vivo data are not sufficient to derive potency factors and equal potency to AFB1 was assumed as in previous assessments. MOE values for AFB1 exposure ranged from 5,000 to 29 and for AFM1 from 100,000 to 508. The calculated MOEs are below 10,000 for AFB1 and also for AFM1 where some surveys, particularly for the younger age groups, have an MOE below 10,000. This raises a health concern. The estimated cancer risks in humans following exposure to AFB1 and AFM1 are in‐line with the conclusion drawn from the MOEs. The conclusions also apply to the combined exposure to all five aflatoxins.