Retrospective cumulative dietary risk assessment of craniofacial alterations by residues of pesticides

Abstract

EFSA established cumulative assessment groups and conducted retrospective cumulative risk assessments for two types of craniofacial alterations (alterations due to abnormal skeletal development, head soft tissue alterations and brain neural tube defects) for 14 European populations of women in childbearing age. Cumulative acute exposure calculations were performed by probabilistic modelling using monitoring data collected by Member States in 2017, 2018 and 2019. A rigorous uncertainty analysis was performed using expert knowledge elicitation. Considering all sources of uncertainty, their dependencies and differences between populations, it was concluded with varying degrees of certainty that the MOET resulting from cumulative exposure is above 100 for the two types of craniofacial alterations. The threshold for regulatory consideration established by risk managers is therefore not exceeded. Considering the severity of the effects under consideration, it was also assessed whether the MOET is above 500. This was the case with varying levels of certainty for the head soft tissue alterations and brain neural tube defects. However, for the alterations due to abnormal skeletal development, it was found about as likely as not that the MOET is above 500 in most populations. For two populations, it was even found more likely that the MOET is below 500. These results were discussed in the light of the conservatism of the methodological approach.

Prioritisation of pesticides and target organ systems for dietary cumulative risk assessment based on the 2019–2021 monitoring cycle

“…The grouping of the prioritised substances described in Section 2.2.1 constitutes the first step for the combined exposure assessment, executed for each target organ independently, both chronic and acute. The methodology adopted for the combined exposure assessment at organ level is primarily based on the one followed for the retrospective cumulative risk assessments (EFSA, 2020a , 2020b , 2021 , 2022 ), the main difference being that, in the present work, substances were grouped at the level of the target organ systems instead of a toxicological effect (see also Section 2.2.1 ). Furthermore, risk metrics were expressed as the hazard index (HI), as opposed to the total margin of exposure (MOET) used in the retrospective cumulative risk assessment.…”

The 2022 European Union report on pesticide residues in food

“…Samples obtained through suspect sampling (ST30A), were considered not representative for this assessment and as such excluded. Sensitivity analysis undergone by EFSA testing the impact of pooling selective sampling (ST10A) and objective sampling (ST20A), showed that the exposure calculation did not significantly affect the outcome (EFSA, 2022a ). Thus, both types of sampling plans were pooled for the acute exposure assessment.…”

The 2021 European Union report on pesticide residues in food

“…Samples obtained through suspect sampling (ST30A), were considered not representative for this assessment and as such excluded. Sensitivity analysis undergone by EFSA testing the impact of selective sampling (ST10A) vs objective sampling (ST20A) showed that the exposure calculation did not significantly affect the outcome (EFSA, 2022e ). Thus, both type of sampling plans can be pooled together.…”