A new case of t(1;11)(q21;q23) in a child with M1 ANLL

Case report of a translocation : A new case of t(1;11)(q21;q23) in a child with M1 ANLL

Statement complementing the EFSA Scientific Opinion on application (EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2009‐75) for placing on the market of genetically modified oilseed rape Ms8 × Rf3 × GT73 and subcombinations, which have not been authorised previously (i.e. Ms8 × GT73 and Rf3 × GT73) independently of their origin, for food and feed uses, import and processing, with the exception of isolated seed protein for food, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003), taking into consideration additional information

The EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) previously assessed oilseed rape Ms8 × Rf3 × GT73 and its subcombinations Ms8 × GT73 and Rf3 × GT73 according to the scope as defined in the application EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2009‐75, and was not in the position to complete the safety assessment of products rich in protein, such as rapeseed protein isolates or products of this nature in animal feeding. Following a mandate from the European Commission, the GMO Panel assessed a 28‐day toxicity study in mice with the glyphosate oxidoreductase (GOXv247) protein, provided to complement information related to application EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2009‐75 for the placing on the market of oilseed rape Ms8 × Rf3 × GT73 and its subcombinations Ms8 × GT73 and Rf3 × GT73, for food and feed uses, import and processing, with the exception of isolated seed protein for food. The 28‐day toxicity study on Escherichia coli‐ produced GOXv247 protein did not show adverse effects in mice, at the gavage doses up to 1000 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day. Taking into account its previous assessment on EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2009‐75 and the outcome of the 28‐day toxicity study in mice with the GOXv247 protein provided in this mandate, the GMO Panel, based on a weight of evidence approach, concludes that food and feed containing, consisting and produced from genetically modified oilseed rape Ms8 × Rf3 × GT73 and its sub combinations Ms8 × GT73 and Rf3 × GT73, are as safe as its conventional counterpart, according to the scope as defined in the application EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2009‐75

Assessment of genetically modified oilseed rape GT73 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐002)

Following the submission of application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐002 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto Company, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of EFSA (GMO) 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 oilseed rape GT73. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post‐market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, updated bioinformatic analyses and additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. 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 oilseed rape GT73 considered for renewal of authorisation is identical to the sequence of the originally assessed event, the GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐002 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on oilseed rape GT73

Safety, Humoral and Cell Mediated Immune Responses to Two Formulations of an Inactivated, Split-Virion Influenza A/H5N1 Vaccine in Children

BACKGROUND:Highly pathogenic influenza A/H5N1 has caused outbreaks in wild birds and poultry in Asia, Africa and Europe. It has also infected people, especially children, causing severe illness and death. Although the virus shows limited ability to transmit between humans, A/H5N1 represents a potential source of the next influenza pandemic. This study assesses the safety and immunogenicity of aluminium hydroxide adjuvanted (Al) and non adjuvanted influenza A/Vietnam/1194/2004 NIBRG-14 (H5N1) vaccine in children. METHODS AND FINDINGS:In a Phase II, open, randomised, multicentre trial 180 children aged 6 months to 17 years received two injections, 21 days apart, of vaccine containing either: 30 microg haemagglutinin (HA) with adjuvant (30 microg+Al) or 7.5 microg HA without adjuvant. An additional 60 children aged 6-35 months received two "half dose" injections (ie 15 microg+Al or 3.8 microg). Safety was followed for 21 days after vaccination. Antibody responses were assessed 21 days after each injection and cellular immune responses were explored. Vaccination appeared well tolerated in all age groups. The 30 microg+Al formulation was more immunogenic than 7.5 microg in all age groups: in these two groups 79% and 46% had haemagglutinination inhibition antibody titres > or =32 (1/dil). Among 6-35 month-olds, the full doses were more immunogenic than their half dose equivalents. Vaccination induced a predominantly Th2 response against H5 HA. CONCLUSIONS:This influenza A(H5N1) vaccine was well tolerated and immunogenic in children and infants, with Al adjuvant providing a clear immunogenic advantage. These results demonstrate that an H5N1 Al-adjuvanted vaccine, previously shown to be immunogenic and safe in adults, can also be used in children, the group most at risk for pandemic influenza

A fixed carbohydrate: protein ratio <= 1.8 on an energy basis consumed in the context of an energy-restricted diet and reduction of body weight: evaluation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006.

Following an application from Marks and Spencer PLC, submitted for authorisation of a health claim pursuant to Article 13(5) of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of the United Kingdom, the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to a CHO:P ratio &lt;= 1.8 on an energy basis in the context of an energy-restricted diet and body weight. The Panel considers that the food/constituent that is the subject of the health claim is sufficiently characterised. The Panel also considers that reduction of body weight in the context of an energy-restricted diet is a beneficial physiological effect. The target population proposed by the applicant is 'adults between the ages of 18 and 70 years with excess body weight'. No conclusions could be drawn from two unpublished studies investigating the effect of ready-to-eat meals with a CHO: P ratio &lt;= 1.8 on body weight. The remaining 14 human intervention studies investigated the effect of diets targeting a CHO: P ratio &lt;= 1.8 as compared to diets targeting a CHO: P ratio &gt;= 3.0 on overweight and obese adults in the context of energy restriction. Four out of seven studies lasting &lt; 12 weeks reported an effect of a CHO: P ratio &lt;= 1.8 on body weight in overweight/obese subjects, whereas no significant effect was observed in six out of the seven studies lasting 12 weeks or more. The Panel considers that these studies do not provide evidence for a sustained effect of the food/constituent on body weight. The Panel concludes that a cause and effect relationship has not been established between the consumption of a fixed CHO: P ratio &lt;= 1.8 on an energy basis consumed in the context of an energy-restricted diet and reduction of body weight. (C) 2017 European Food Safety Authority

Safety of Ecklonia cava phlorotannins as a novel food pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 258/97

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panelon Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the safety of Ecklonia cava phlorotannins (marketed as SeaPolynol) as a novel food submitted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No258/97. The novel food is a phlorotannin-rich alcohol extract of Ecklonia cava, which is an edible marine brown alga species. The information provided on the composition, the specifications, the production process and the batch-to-batch variability of the novel food is sufficient and does not raise safety concerns. The intention is to market the novel food as a food supplement for healthy individuals over the age of 12years. A subchronic repeated dose oral toxicity study in rodents tested the novel food at daily doses of 0, 375, 750 and 1,500mg/kg body weight (bw). The Panelconsiders the mid-dose as the no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) of the study. Taking into account this NOAEL of 750mg/kg bw per day and by applying an uncertainty factor of 200, the Panelconsiders an intake level of 3.75mg/kg bw per day as safe. The Panelconcludes that the novel food, Ecklonia cava phlorotannins, is safe for the use in food supplements at a maximum daily intake level of 163mg/day for adolescents from 12 to 14years of age, 230mg/day for adolescents above 14years of age and 263mg/day for adults. (C) 2017 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority

Safety of 1-methylnicotinamide chloride (1-MNA) as a novel food pursuant to Regulation (EC) No258/97

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA Panelon Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver an opinion on 1-methylnicotinamide chloride (1-MNA) as a novel food (NF) ingredient submitted pursuant to Regulation (EC) No258/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council, taking into account the comments and objections of a scientific nature raised by Member States. 1-MNA is a substance present naturally in the human body as a normal downstream product of niacin metabolism. The Panelconsiders that the information provided on the composition, the specification and the batch-to-batch variability of the NF is sufficient. The applicant intends to use 1-MNA in food supplements and proposes a maximum intake of 58mg/day. 1-MNA is not genotoxic. In a subchronic rat study, epithelium degeneration of the non-glandular stomach was observed at all dose levels with increasing frequency. The Panelnotes that the human stomach does not have non-glandular epithelium and considers this finding is toxicologically not relevant for humans. At doses of 500 and 1,000mg/kg body weight (bw), changes of the urine pH, that did not reverse in the recovery period, were reported. As adversity of this finding cannot be ruled out, the Panelselected 250mg/kg bw in this rat study as the reference point. The Margin of Exposure to humans weighing 70kg and consuming 58mg would be about 300. The Panelnotes the upper level for nicotinamide, i.e. 900mg/day for adults. Taking into account that 1-MNA is a main metabolite from nicotinamide, the Panelconsiders that it is unlikely that an intake of 58mg 1-MNA from food supplements would result in adverse health outcomes in humans. The Panelconcludes that the NF, 1-MNA, is safe under the proposed uses and use levels. (C) 2017 European Food Safety Authority. EFSA Journal published by John Wiley and Sons Ltd on behalf of European Food Safety Authority

Broad Clade 2 Cross-Reactive Immunity Induced by an Adjuvanted Clade 1 rH5N1 Pandemic Influenza Vaccine

The availability of H5N1 vaccines that can elicit a broad cross-protective immunity against different currently circulating clade 2 H5N1 viruses is a pre-requisite for the development of a successful pre-pandemic vaccination strategy. In this regard, it has recently been shown that adjuvantation of a recombinant clade 1 H5N1 inactivated split-virion vaccine with an oil-in-water emulsion-based adjuvant system also promoted cross-immunity against a recent clade 2 H5N1 isolate (A/Indonesia/5/2005, subclade 2.1). Here we further analyse the cross-protective potential of the vaccine against two other recent clade 2 isolates (A/turkey/Turkey/1/2005 and A/Anhui/1/2005 which are, as defined by WHO, representatives of subclades 2.2 and 2.3 respectively).Two doses of the recombinant A/Vietnam/1194/2004 (H5N1, clade 1) vaccine were administered 21 days apart to volunteers aged 18-60 years. We studied the cross-clade immunogenicity of the lowest antigen dose (3.8 microg haemagglutinin) given with (N = 20) or without adjuvant (N = 20). Immune responses were assessed at 21 days following the first and second vaccine doses and at 6 months following first vaccination. Vaccination with two doses of 3.8 microg of the adjuvanted vaccine induced four-fold neutralising seroconversion rates in 85% of subjects against A/turkey/Turkey/1/2005 (subclade 2.2) and 75% of subjects against A/Anhui/1/2005 (subclade 2.3) recombinant strains. There was no response induced against these strains in the non-adjuvanted group. At 6 months following vaccination, 70% and 60% of subjects retained neutralising antibodies against the recombinant subclade 2.2 and 2.3 strains, respectively and 40% of subjects retained antibodies against the recombinant subclade 2.1 A/Indonesia/5/2005 strain.In addition to antigen dose-sparing, adjuvantation of inactivated split H5N1 vaccine promotes broad and persistent cross-clade immunity which is a pre-requisite for a pre-pandemic vaccine.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00309634

Economic Analysis of Pandemic Influenza Vaccination Strategies in Singapore

BACKGROUND: All influenza pandemic plans advocate pandemic vaccination. However, few studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of different vaccination strategies. This paper compares the economic outcomes of vaccination compared with treatment with antiviral agents alone, in Singapore. METHODOLOGY: We analyzed the economic outcomes of pandemic vaccination (immediate vaccination and vaccine stockpiling) compared with treatment-only in Singapore using a decision-based model to perform cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses. We also explored the annual insurance premium (willingness to pay) depending on the perceived risk of the next pandemic occurring. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: The treatment-only strategy resulted in 690 deaths, 13,950 hospitalization days, and economic cost of USD$497 million. For immediate vaccination, at vaccine effectiveness of >55%, vaccination was cost-beneficial over treatment-only. Vaccine stockpiling is not cost-effective in most scenarios even with 100% vaccine effectiveness. The annual insurance premium was highest with immediate vaccination, and was lower with increased duration to the next pandemic. The premium was also higher with higher vaccine effectiveness, attack rates, and case-fatality rates. Stockpiling with case-fatality rates of 0.4-0.6% would be cost-beneficial if vaccine effectiveness was >80%; while at case-fatality of >5% stockpiling would be cost-beneficial even if vaccine effectiveness was 20%. High-risk sub-groups warrant higher premiums than low-risk sub-groups. CONCLUSIONS: The actual pandemic vaccine effectiveness and lead time is unknown. Vaccine strategy should be based on perception of severity. Immediate vaccination is most cost-effective, but requires vaccines to be available when required. Vaccine stockpiling as insurance against worst-case scenarios is also cost-effective. Research and development is therefore critical to develop and stockpile cheap, readily available effective vaccines