Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40546298›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2025

Assessment of genetically modified maize NK603 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (dossier GMFF-2023-21250).

EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), Josep Casacuberta, Francisco Barro, Albert Braeuning, Ruud de Maagd, Michelle M Epstein, Thomas Frenzel, Jean-Luc Gallois, Frits Koning, Antoine Messéan and 10 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

20 authors.

EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)
Josep Casacuberta
Francisco Barro
Albert Braeuning
Ruud de Maagd
Michelle M Epstein
Thomas Frenzel
Jean-Luc Gallois
Frits Koning
Antoine Messéan
F Javier Moreno
Fabien Nogué
Giovanni Savoini
Alan H Schulman
Christoph Tebbe
Eve Veromann
Paolo Lenzi
Ana M Camargo
Pietro Piffanelli
Tommasso Raffaelo

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following the submission of dossier GMFF-2023-21250 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Bayer CropScience LP, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the herbicide-tolerant genetically modified maize NK603, for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation within the European Union. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, an evaluation of the literature retrieved by a scoping review, a search for additional studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant and updated bioinformatics analyses. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. Under the assumption that the DNA sequence of the event in maize NK603 considered for renewal is identical to the sequence of the originally assessed event, the GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal application GMFF-2023-21250 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on maize NK603.

Indexed as

Articles 11 and 23maizeNK603Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003renewal

Identifiers

PMID40546298
PMCPMC12179548

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.