Anna Christodoulidou
European Food Safety Authority
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Anna Christodoulidou.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Leon Brimer; Oliver Lindtner; Pasquale Mosesso; Anna Christodoulidou; Zsuzsanna Horvath; Federica Lodi; Birgit Dusemund
Abstract The present opinion deals with the re‐evaluation of alginic acid and its sodium, potassium, ammonium and calcium salts (E 400–E 404) when used as food additives. Alginic acid and its salts (E 400–E 404) are authorised food additives in the EU in accordance with Annex II and Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel concluded that there was no need for a numerical Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) for alginic acid and its salts (E 400, E 401, E 402, E 403 and E 404), and that there was no safety concern at the level of the refined exposure assessment for the reported uses of alginic acid and its salts (E 400, E 401, E 402, E 403 and E 404) as food additives. The Panel further concluded that exposure of infants and young children to alginic acid and its salts (E 400, E 401, E 402, E 403 and E 404) by the use of these food additives should stay below therapeutic dosages for these population groups at which side‐effects could occur. Concerning the use of alginic acid and its salts (E 400, E 401, E 402, E 403 and E 404) in ‘dietary foods for special medical purposes and special formulae for infants’ (Food category 13.1.5.1) and ‘in dietary foods for babies and young children for special medical purposes as defined in Directive 1999/21/EC’ (Food category 13.1.5.2), the Panel further concluded that the available data did not allow an adequate assessment of the safety of alginic acid and its salts (E 400, E 401, E 402, E 403 and E 404) in infants and young children consuming the food belonging to the categories 13.1.5.1 and 13.1.5.2.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Oliver Lindtner; Peter Moldeus; Pasquale Mosesso; Agneta Oskarsson; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; Leon Brimer; Paul Peters; Jacqueline Wiesner; Anna Christodoulidou; Federica Lodi; Alexandra Tard; Birgit Dusemund
Abstract The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive. In the EU, guar gum was evaluated by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) in 1970, 1974 and 1975, who allocated an acceptable daily intake (ADI) ‘not specified’. Guar gum has been also evaluated by the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF) in 1977 who endorsed the ADI ‘not specified’ allocated by JECFA. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that adequate exposure and toxicity data were available. Guar gum is practically undigested, not absorbed intact, but significantly fermented by enteric bacteria in humans. No adverse effects were reported in subchronic and carcinogenicity studies at the highest dose tested; no concern with respect to the genotoxicity. Oral intake of guar gum was well tolerated in adults. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for guar gum (E 412), and there is no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment of guar gum (E 412) as a food additive. The Panel considered that for uses of guar gum in foods intended for infants and young children the occurrence of abdominal discomfort should be monitored and if this effect is observed doses should be identified as a basis for further risk assessment. The Panel considered that no adequate specific studies addressing the safety of use of guar gum (E 412) in food categories 13.1.5.1 and 13.1.5.2 were available. Therefore, the Panel concluded that the available data do not allow an adequate assessment of the safety of guar gum (E 412) in infants and young children consuming these foods for special medical purposes.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Oliver Lindtner; Peter Moldeus; Pasquale Mosesso; Agneta Oskarsson; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; Leon Brimer; Anna Christodoulidou; Federica Lodi; Alexandra Tard; Birgit Dusemund
Abstract The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of tara gum (E 417) as a food additive. Tara gum (E 417) has been evaluated by the EU Scientific Committee for Food (SCF, 1992) and by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA, 1987), who both allocated an acceptable daily intake (ADI) ‘not specified’ for this gum. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives, re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that adequate exposure and toxicity data were available for tara gum (E 417). Tara gum (E 417) is unlikely to be absorbed intact and is expected to be fermented by intestinal microbiota. No adverse effects were reported at the highest doses tested in subchronic, chronic and carcinogenicity studies and there is no concern with respect to the genotoxicity. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for tara gum (E 417) and that there is no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment of tara gum (E 417) as a food additive at the reported uses and use levels.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Oliver Lindtner; Peter Moldeus; Pasquale Mosesso; Agneta Oskarsson; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; Leon Brimer; Anna Christodoulidou; Federica Lodi; Alexandra Tard; Birgit Dusemund
Abstract The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive. In the EU, acacia gum has not been formally evaluated by the Scientific Committee for Food (SCF), and therefore, no ADI has been allocated. However, it was accepted for use in weaning food (SCF, 1991). In 1999, the SCF considered ‘that the use of acacia gum/gum arabic in coatings for nutrient preparations containing trace elements is acceptable provided carry‐over levels in infant formulae, follow‐on formulae or FSMP do not exceed 10 mg/kg’. Acacia gum was evaluated by JECFA in 1982 and 1990 and the specifications were amended in 1998. Based on the lack of adverse effects in the available toxicity studies, an ADI ‘not specified’ was allocated. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that adequate exposure and toxicity data were available. Acacia gum is unlikely to be absorbed intact and is slightly fermented by intestinal microbiota. No adverse effects were reported in subchronic and carcinogenicity studies at the highest dose tested and there is no concern with respect to the genotoxicity. Oral daily intake of a large amount of acacia gum up to 30,000 mg acacia gum/person per day (approximately equivalent 430 mg acacia gum/kg bw per day) for up to 18 days was well tolerated in adults but some individuals experienced flatulence which was considered by the Panel as undesirable but not adverse effect. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for acacia gum (E 414), and there is no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment of acacia gum (E 414) as a food additive.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert-Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Leon Brimer; Pasquale Mosesso; Anna Christodoulidou; Zsuzsanna Horvath; Federica Lodi; Alexandra Tard; Birgit Dusemund
Abstract The present opinion deals with the re‐evaluation of propane‐1,2‐diol alginate (E 405) when used as a food additive. The Panel noted that absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion (ADME) data on propane‐1,2‐diol alginate gave evidence for the hydrolysis of this additive into propane‐1,2‐diol and alginic acid. These two compounds have been recently re‐evaluated for their safety of use as food additives (EFSA ANS Panel, 2017, 2018). Consequently, the Panel considered in this opinion the major toxicokinetic and toxicological data of these two hydrolytic derivatives. No adverse effects were reported in subacute and subchronic dietary studies with propane‐1,2‐diol alginate. The available data did not indicate a genotoxic concern for propane‐1,2‐diol alginate (E 405) when used as a food additive. Propane‐1,2‐diol alginate, alginic acid and propane‐1,2‐diol were not of concern with respect to carcinogenicity. The Panel considered that any adverse effect of propane‐1,2‐diol alginate would be due to propane‐1,2‐diol. Therefore, the acceptable daily intake (ADI) of the food additive E 405 is determined by the amount of free propane‐1,2‐diol and the propane‐1,2‐diol released from the food additive after hydrolysis. According to the EU specification, the concentration of free and bound propane‐1,2‐diol amounts to a maximum of 45% on a weight basis. On the worst‐case assumption that 100% of propane‐1,2‐diol would be systemically available and considering the ADI for propane‐1,2‐diol of 25 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day, the Panel allocated an ADI of 55 mg/kg bw per day for propane‐1,2‐diol alginate. The Panel concluded that exposure estimates did not exceed the ADI in any of the population groups from the use of propane‐1,2‐diol alginate (E 405) as a food additive. Therefore, the Panel concluded that there is no safety concern at the authorised use levels.
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert-Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Leon Briemer; Mosesso Pasquale; Anna Christodoulidou; Zsuzsanna Horvath; Federica Lodi; Alexandra Tard; Birgit Dusemund
Abstract The present opinion deals with the re‐evaluation of glycerol esters of wood rosin (GEWR, E 445) when used as a food additive. Regarding GEWR originating from Pinus palustris (longleaf pine) and Pinus elliottii (slash pine), based on the overall toxicity database, and given the absence of reproductive and developmental toxicity data, the Panel concluded that the current acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 12.5 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day for GEWR (E 445) as established by the Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) in 1994 should be temporary pending the provision of such data. This assessment is restricted to GEWR derived from P. palustris (longleaf pine) and P. elliottii (slash pine) and with a chemical composition in compliance with GEWR used in the toxicological testing. The Panel concluded that the mean and the high exposure levels (P95) of the brand‐loyal refined exposure scenario did not exceed the temporary ADI in any of the population groups from the use of GEWR (E 445) as a food additive at the reported use levels. For GEWR originating from Pinus halepensis and Pinus brutia, the Panel noted that concentrations of the fractions of ‘glycerol monoesters’, ‘free resin acids’ and ‘neutrals’, which are considered to be of particular toxicological relevance, are not known; therefore, the evaluation of chemical equivalence with GEWR originating from P. palustris (longleaf pine) and P. elliottii (slash pine) is not possible; no data on stability were available; no toxicological data were available. Therefore, the Panel concluded that a safety assessment of GEWR originating from P. halepensis and P. brutia could not be performed. The Panel recommended the European Commission to consider an update of the definition of GEWR (E 445) in the EU specifications. It should be indicated that GEWR (E 445) (i) contain, besides the mentioned glycerol di‐ and triesters, a residual fraction of glycerol monoesters, and (ii) contain residual free resin acids and neutrals (non‐acidic other saponifiable and unsaponifiable substances).
EFSA Journal | 2018
Maged Younes; Peter Aggett; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Metka Filipič; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert-Remy; Gunter Georg Kuhnle; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Inger Therese Lillegaard; Peter Moldeus; Alicja Mortensen; Agneta Oskarsson; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Leon Brimer; Pasquale Mosesso; Anna Christodoulidou; Claudia Cascio; Alexandra Tard; Federica Lodi; Birgit Dusemund
Abstract The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of gellan gum (E 418) as a food additive. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that adequate exposure and toxicity data were available. Based on the reported use levels, a refined exposure of up to 72.4 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day in toddlers at the 95th percentile was estimated. Gellan gum is unlikely to be absorbed intact and would not be fermented by human intestinal microbiota. There is no concern with respect to carcinogenicity and genotoxicity. No adverse effects were reported in chronic studies at the highest doses tested in mice and rats (3,627 and 1,460 mg gellan gum/kg bw per day, respectively). Repeated oral intake up to 200 mg/kg bw per day for 3 weeks had no adverse effects in humans. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical acceptable daily intake (ADI) for gellan gum (E 418), and that there is no safety concern at the refined exposure assessment for the reported uses and use levels of gellan gum (E 418) as a food additive. The Panel recommended to better define the specifications of gellan gum including the absence of viable cells of the microbial source and the presence of polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB), protein and residual bacterial enzymatic activities.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Oliver Lindtner; Peter Moldeus; Pasquale Mosesso; Agneta Oskarsson; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; Leon Brimer; Andrea Altieri; Anna Christodoulidou; Federica Lodi; Birgit Dusemund
Abstract The present opinion deals with the re‐evaluation of lecithins (E 322) when used as a food additive. Lecithins (E 322) is an authorised food additive in the EU according to Annex II and Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 on food additives, and have been previously evaluated by JECFA in 1973 and by the SCF in 1982. Among lecithins, phosphatidylcholine is hydrolysed in choline in the cytidine‐5‐diphosphate‐choline pathway in all cells of the body. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel concluded that there was no need for a numerical ADI for lecithins (E 322) and that there was no safety concern for the general population from more than 1 year of age at the refined exposure assessment for the reported uses of lecithins (E 322) as a food additive. The Panel further concluded that there is no safety concern for the exposure to the choline from lecithins (E 322) as a food additive at use and use levels reported by industry. For infants (from 12 weeks up to 11 months of age), the Panel concluded that there was no safety concern at the refined exposure assessment for the reported uses of lecithins (E 322) as a food additive and for the choline from lecithins (E 322) as a food additive at use and use levels reported by industry. For infants and young children consuming foods for special medical purposes, the Panel concluded that there was no safety concern with respect to the refined exposure assessment for the reported uses of lecithins (E 322) as a food additive and for exposure to choline resulting from these uses of lecithins (E 322).
EFSA Journal | 2017
Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Oliver Lindtner; Peter Moldeus; Pasquale Mosesso; Agneta Oskarsson; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; Leon Brimer; Anna Christodoulidou; Federica Lodi; Alexandra Tard; Birgit Dusemund
Abstract The present opinion deals with the re‐evaluation of konjac (E 425), comprising konjac gum (E 425 i) and konjac glucomannan (E 425 ii) when used as food additives. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that current use of konjac (E 425) was limited in all food categories to maximum permitted level (MPL) of 10 g/kg, and that the calculated indicative refined exposure assessment for all population groups was below 0.1 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day for the general population (mean and high level). Konjac gum and konjac glucomannan were unlikely to be absorbed intact and were significantly fermented by intestinal microbiota. The available database on toxicological studies was considered limited, however, no relevant adverse effects were seen in rats and dogs in 90‐day feeding studies according to the SCF, the no‐observed‐effect level (NOEL) in rats being 1,250 mg konjac glucomannan/kg bw per day. Konjac gum and konjac glucomannan were of no concern with respect to the genotoxicity. After a daily dosage of 3,000 mg in adults for 12 weeks, several individuals experienced abdominal discomfort including diarrhoea or constipation. The Panel concluded that there was no need for a numerical acceptable daily intake (ADI) and that there was no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment for the reported uses of konjac gum (E 425 i) and konjac glucomannan (E 425 ii) as food additives under the current conditions of use of 10 g/kg. The Panel agreed with the conclusions of the SCF (1997) that the uses of konjac (E 425) as an additive at the levels up to 10 g/kg in food are acceptable, provided that the total intake from all sources stays below 3 g/day.
EFSA Journal | 2017
Alicja Mortensen; Fernando Aguilar; Riccardo Crebelli; Alessandro Di Domenico; Maria Jose Frutos; Pierre Galtier; David Gott; Ursula Gundert‐Remy; Claude Lambré; Jean-Charles Leblanc; Oliver Lindtner; Peter Moldeus; Pasquale Mosesso; Agneta Oskarsson; Dominique Parent‐Massin; Ivan Stankovic; Ine Waalkens‐Berendsen; Rudolf Antonius Woutersen; Matthew Wright; Maged Younes; Leon Brimer; Anna Christodoulidou; Federica Lodi; Petra Gelgelova; Birgit Dusemund
Abstract The Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion re‐evaluating the safety of xanthan gum (E 415) as food additive. Following the conceptual framework for the risk assessment of certain food additives re‐evaluated under Commission Regulation (EU) No 257/2010, the Panel considered that adequate exposure and toxicity data were available. Based on the reported use levels, a refined exposure of up to 64 mg/kg bw per day in children for the general population, 38 mg/kg bw per day for children consumers only of food supplements at the high level exposure and 115 mg/kg bw per day for infants consuming foods for special medical purposes and special formulae (FSMPs), were estimated. Xanthan gum (E 415) is unlikely to be absorbed intact and is expected to be fermented by intestinal microbiota. No adverse effects were reported at the highest doses tested in chronic and carcinogenicity studies and there is no concern with respect to the genotoxicity. Repeated oral intake by adults of xanthan gum up to 214 mg/kg bw per day for ten days was well tolerated, but some individuals experienced abdominal discomfort, an undesirable but not adverse effect. The Panel concluded that there is no need for a numerical ADI for xanthan gum (E 415), and that there is no safety concern for the general population at the refined exposure assessment of xanthan gum (E 415) as food additive. Considering the outcome of clinical studies and post‐marketing surveillance, the Panel concluded that there is no safety concern from the use of xanthan gum (E 415) in FSMPs for infants and young children at concentrations reported by the food industry. The current re‐evaluation of xanthan gum (E 415) as a food additive is not considered to be applicable for infants under the age of 12 weeks.