Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32625328›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2017

Assessment of genetically modified maize 1507 × 59122 × MON810 × NK603 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2011-92).

EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Hanspeter Naegeli, Andrew Nicholas Birch, Josep Casacuberta, Adinda De Schrijver, Mikołaj Antoni Gralak, Philippe Guerche, Huw Jones, Barbara Manachini, Antoine Messéan and 11 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

21 authors.

EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)
Hanspeter Naegeli
Andrew Nicholas Birch
Josep Casacuberta
Adinda De Schrijver
Mikołaj Antoni Gralak
Philippe Guerche
Huw Jones
Barbara Manachini
Antoine Messéan
Elsa Ebbesen Nielsen
Fabien Nogué
Christophe Robaglia
Nils Rostoks
Jeremy Sweet
Christoph Tebbe
Francesco Visioli
Jean-Michel Wal
Andrea Gennaro
Anna Lanzoni
Irina Olaru

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this opinion, the GMO Panel assessed the four-event stack maize 1507 × 59122 ×  MON810 ×  NK603 and its ten subcombinations, independently of their origin. The GMO Panel previously assessed the four single events combined in this four-event stack maize and five of their combinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single events or their previously assessed combinations leading to modification of the original conclusions were identified. Based on the molecular, agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics, the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins in the four-event stack maize did not give rise to food and feed safety or nutritional issues. The GMO Panel concludes that the four-event stack maize is as safe and as nutritious as its non-GM comparator. In the case of accidental release of viable grains of maize 1507 × 59122 × MON810 × NK603 into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. For four of the subcombinations not previously assessed, protein expression data were provided and did not indicate an interaction affecting the levels of the newly expressed proteins in these subcombinations. The five subcombinations not previously assessed are expected to be as safe as the single maize events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the four-event stack maize. The GMO Panel considers that post-market monitoring of maize 1507 × 59122 ×MON810 × NK603 and its subcombinations is not necessary. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize 1507 × 59122 × MON810 ×NK603 and its subcombinations.

Indexed as

1507 × 59122 ×  MON810 ×  NK603GMOinsect resistant and herbicide tolerantmaize (Zea mays)Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003

Identifiers

PMID32625328
PMCPMC7010060

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.