Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32626248›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2019

Re-evaluation of Quillaia extract (E 999) as a food additive and safety of the proposed extension of use.

EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF), Maged Younes, Gabriele Aquilina, Laurence Castle, Karl-Heinz Engel, Paul Fowler, Maria Jose Frutos Fernandez, Peter Fürst, Rainer Gürtler, Ursula Gundert-Remy and 14 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 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting of aEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024
    Article
  6. Safety and efficacy of a feed additive consisting ofEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Safety of a feed additive consisting of a tincture derived fromEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2021
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Surfactant addition in diesel oil degradation - how can it help the microbes?Journal of environmental health science & engineering · 2020
    Article
  13. 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

24 authors.

EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF)
Maged Younes
Gabriele Aquilina
Laurence Castle
Karl-Heinz Engel
Paul Fowler
Maria Jose Frutos Fernandez
Peter Fürst
Rainer Gürtler
Ursula Gundert-Remy
Trine Husøy
Wim Mennes
Agneta Oskarsson
Romina Shah
Ine Waalkens-Berendsen
Detlef Wölfle
Polly Boon
Claude Lambré
Paul Tobback
Matthew Wright
Ana Maria Rincon
Camilla Smeraldi
Alexandra Tard
Peter Moldeus

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS) provides a scientific opinion on Quillaia extract (E 999) when used as a food additive and the evaluation of the safety of its proposed extension of use as a food additive in flavourings. The Scientific Committee for Food (SCF) in 1978 established an acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 0-5 mg spray-dried extract/kg body weight (bw) per day for E 999. The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) established in its latest evaluation a group ADI of 0-1 mg/kg bw per day, expressed as quillaia saponins, for Quillaia extract for Type 1 and Type 2. The Panel considered it likely that intact Quillaia extract saponins are absorbed to a low extent, are hydrolysed in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract and that the aglycone is absorbed only to a limited extent. The Panel considered that the genotoxicity data available did not indicate a concern for genotoxicity. Taking into account the available toxicological database, various no observed adverse effect levels (NOAELs) relevant for the derivation of an ADI were identified. The Panel considered that the 2-year study in rats was the most robust and that the NOAEL of 1,500 mg Quillaia extract/kg bw per day could be used to derive the ADI for E 999. Considering that the adverse effects reported were due to the presence of saponins in the extract, that saponins were present in Quillaia extract Type 1 (around 20%) and using an uncertainty factor of 100, the Panel derived a ADI of 3 mg saponins/kg bw per day for E 999. None of the exposure estimates for the different population groups of the refined brand-loyal scenario exceeded the ADI of 3 mg saponins/kg bw per day. The proposed extension of use also would not result in an exceedance of this ADI for the refined scenario. The Panel proposed some recommendations for the European Commission to consider, in particular revising the EU specifications for E 999 in order to differentiate the extracts of Quillaia according to the saponins content and to include other parameters to better characterise the food additive.

Indexed as

CAS No 68990‐67‐0E 999food additiveQuillaia extractQuillaja extract

Identifiers

PMID32626248
PMCPMC7009130
OpenAlexW2920772455

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.