Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32626195›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2019

Update of the risk assessment of di-butylphthalate (DBP), butyl-benzyl-phthalate (BBP), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), di-isononylphthalate (DINP) and di-isodecylphthalate (DIDP) for use in food contact materials.

EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP), Vittorio Silano, José Manuel Barat Baviera, Claudia Bolognesi, Andrew Chesson, Pier Sandro Cocconcelli, Riccardo Crebelli, David Michael Gott, Konrad Grob, Evgenia Lampi and 17 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 110 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
110citing papers in PubMed
13.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

110 citing papers in PubMed, 302 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Rapid Detection of Plasticizer Migration From UV-Aged PVC Films by DART-HRMS.Rapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

50 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

27 authors.

EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP)
Vittorio Silano
José Manuel Barat Baviera
Claudia Bolognesi
Andrew Chesson
Pier Sandro Cocconcelli
Riccardo Crebelli
David Michael Gott
Konrad Grob
Evgenia Lampi
Alicja Mortensen
Gilles Rivière
Inger-Lise Steffensen
Christina Tlustos
Henk Van Loveren
Laurence Vernis
Holger Zorn
Jean-Pierre Cravedi
Cristina Fortes
Maria de Fatima Tavares Poças
Ine Waalkens-Berendsen
Detlef Wölfle
Davide Arcella
Claudia Cascio
Anna F Castoldi
Katharina Volk
Laurence Castle

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The EFSA Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP Panel) was asked by the European Commission to update its 2005 risk assessments of di-butylphthalate (DBP), butyl-benzyl-phthalate (BBP), bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP), di-isononylphthalate (DINP) and di-isodecylphthalate (DIDP), which are authorised for use in plastic food contact material (FCM). Dietary exposure estimates (mean and high (P95)) were obtained by combining literature occurrence data with consumption data from the EFSA Comprehensive Database. The highest exposure was found for DINP, ranging from 0.2 to 4.3 and from 0.4 to 7.0 μg/kg body weight (bw) per day for mean and high consumers, respectively. There was not enough information to draw conclusions on how much migration from plastic FCM contributes to dietary exposure to phthalates. The review of the toxicological data focused mainly on reproductive effects. The CEP Panel derived the same critical effects and individual tolerable daily intakes (TDIs) (mg/kg bw per day) as in 2005 for all the phthalates, i.e. reproductive effects for DBP (0.01), BBP (0.5), DEHP (0.05), and liver effects for DINP and DIDP (0.15 each). Based on a plausible common mechanism (i.e. reduction in fetal testosterone) underlying the reproductive effects of DEHP, DBP and BBP, the Panel considered it appropriate to establish a group-TDI for these phthalates, taking DEHP as index compound as a basis for introducing relative potency factors. The Panel noted that DINP also affected fetal testosterone levels at doses around threefold higher than liver effects and therefore considered it conservative to include it within the group-TDI which was established to be 50 μg/kg bw per day, expressed as DEHP equivalents. The aggregated dietary exposure for DBP, BBP, DEHP and DINP was estimated to be 0.9-7.2 and 1.6-11.7 μg/kg bw per day for mean and high consumers, respectively, thus contributing up to 23% of the group-TDI in the worst-case scenario. For DIDP, not included in the group-TDI, dietary exposure was estimated to be always below 0.1 μg/kg bw per day and therefore far below the TDI of 150 μg/kg bw per day. This assessment covers European consumers of any age, including the most sensitive groups. Based on the limited scope of the mandate and the uncertainties identified, the Panel considered that the current assessment of the five phthalates, individually and collectively, should be on a temporary basis.

Indexed as

BBPDBPDEHPDIDPDINPfood contact materialsphthalatessafety assessment

Identifiers

PMID32626195
PMCPMC7008866
OpenAlexW2995793542

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.