ArticleToxics2023
Interlaboratory Study to Evaluate a Testing Protocol for the Safety of Food Packaging Coatings.
Article in Toxics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating the chemical safety of bio-based and biodegradable food packaging materials through non-targeted LC-HRMS analysis and in vitro bioassays.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
According to European regulations, migration from food packaging must be safe. However, currently, there is no consensus on how to evaluate its safety, especially for non-intentionally added substances (NIAS). The intensive and laborious approach, involving identification and then quantification of all migrating substances followed by a toxicological evaluation, is not practical or feasible. In alignment with the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) and the European Union (EU) guidelines on packaging materials, efforts are focused on combining data from analytics, bioassays and in silico toxicology approaches for the risk assessment of packaging materials. Advancement of non-targeted screening approaches using both analytical methods and in vitro bioassays is key. A protocol was developed for the chemical and biological screening of migrants from coated metal packaging materials. This protocol includes guidance on sample preparation, migrant simulation, chemical analysis using liquid chromatography (LC-MS) and validated bioassays covering endocrine activity, genotoxicity and metabolism-related targets. An inter-laboratory study was set-up to evaluate the consistency in biological activity and analytical results generated between three independent laboratories applying the developed protocol and guidance. Coated packaging metal panels were used in this case study. In general, the inter-laboratory chemical analysis and bioassay results displayed acceptable consistency between laboratories, but technical differences led to different data interpretations (e.g., cytotoxicity, cell passages, chemical analysis). The study observations with the greatest impact on the quality of the data and ultimately resulting in discrepancies in the results are given and suggestions for improvement of the protocol are made (e.g., sample preparation, chemical analysis approaches). Finally, there was agreement on the need for an aligned protocol to be utilized by qualified laboratories for chemical and biological analyses, following best practices and guidance for packaging safety assessment of intentionally added substances (IAS) and NIAS to avoid inconsistency in data and the final interpretation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.