Food Additives Permitted for Direct Addition to Food for Human Consumption; Advantame, 29078-29085 [2014-11584]
Download as PDF
29078
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
PANTPA are, accordingly, beyond the
scope of this rulemaking which deals
with implementing the preferential tariff
treatment and other customs-related
provisions of the Act. Accordingly, it
would be inappropriate for CBP to
address the comment.
Conclusion
After further review of the matter, and
in light of the one comment, CBP has
determined to adopt as final, with no
changes, the interim rule published in
the Federal Register (78 FR 63052) on
October 23, 2013.
Executive Order 12866
This document is not a regulation
subject to the provisions of Executive
Order 12866 of September 30, 1993 (58
FR 51735, October 1993), because it
pertains to a foreign affairs function of
the United States and implements an
international agreement, as described
above, and therefore is specifically
exempted by section 3(d)(2) of
Executive Order 12866.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Regulatory Flexibility Act
CBP Dec. 13–17 was issued as an
interim rule rather than a notice of
proposed rulemaking because CBP had
determined that the interim regulations
involve a foreign affairs function of the
United States pursuant to § 553(a)(1) of
the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA). Because no notice of proposed
rulemaking was required, the provisions
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as
amended (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), do not
apply. Accordingly, this final rule is not
subject to the regulatory analysis
requirements or other requirements of 5
U.S.C. 603 and 604.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The collections of information
contained in these regulations have
previously been reviewed and approved
by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) in accordance with the
requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3507) under
control number 1651–0117, which
covers many of the free trade agreement
requirements that CBP administers, and
1651–0076, which covers general
recordkeeping requirements. The
collections of information in these
regulations are in §§ 10.2003, 10.2004,
and 10.2007 of title 19 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (19 CFR 10.2003,
10.2004, and 10.2007). This information
is required in connection with general
recordkeeping requirements (§ 10.2007),
as well as claims for preferential tariff
treatment under the PANTPA and the
Act and will be used by CBP to
determine eligibility for tariff preference
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
under the PANTPA and the Act. The
likely respondents are business
organizations including importers,
exporters and manufacturers.
The estimated average annual burden
associated with the collection of
information in this final rule is 500
hours. Comments concerning the
accuracy of this burden estimate and
suggestions for reducing this burden
should be directed to the Office of
Management and Budget, Attention:
Desk Officer for the Department of the
Treasury, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC
20503. A copy should also be sent to the
Trade and Commercial Regulations
Branch, Regulations and Rulings, Office
of International Trade, U.S. Customs
and Border Protection, 90 K Street NE.,
10th Floor, Washington, DC 20229–
1177. Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act, an agency may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information,
unless it displays a valid OMB control
number.
Signing Authority
This document is being issued in
accordance with § 0.1(a)(1) of the CBP
regulations (19 CFR 0.1(a)(1)) pertaining
to the authority of the Secretary of the
Treasury (or his/her delegate) to
approve regulations related to certain
CBP revenue functions.
List of Subjects
19 CFR Part 10
Alterations, Bonds, Customs duties
and inspection, Exports, Imports,
Preference programs, Repairs, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Trade
agreements.
19 CFR Part 24
Accounting, Customs duties and
inspection, Financial and accounting
procedures, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Trade
agreements, User fees.
19 CFR Part 162
Administrative practice and
procedure, Customs duties and
inspection, Penalties, Trade agreements.
19 CFR Part 163
Amendments to the CBP Regulations
Accordingly, the interim rule
amending parts 10, 24, 162, 163, and
178 of the CBP regulations (19 CFR parts
10, 24, 162, 163, and 178), which was
published at 78 FR 63052 on October
23, 2013, is adopted as a final rule.
R. Gil Kerlikowske,
Commissioner.
Approved: May 14, 2014.
Timothy E. Skud,
Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
[FR Doc. 2014–11576 Filed 5–20–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–14–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 172
[Docket No. FDA–2009–F–0303]
Food Additives Permitted for Direct
Addition to Food for Human
Consumption; Advantame
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Final rule.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or we) is
amending the food additive regulations
to provide for the safe use of advantame
as a non-nutritive sweetener and flavor
enhancer in foods generally, except
meat and poultry. This action is in
response to a petition filed by
Ajinomoto Co., Inc.
DATES: This rule is effective May 21,
2014. See section IX for further
information on the filing of objections.
Submit either electronic or written
objections and requests for a hearing by
June 20, 2014. The Director of the Office
of the Federal Register approves the
incorporation by reference of certain
publications listed in the rule as of May
21, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit either
electronic or written objections and
requests for a hearing identified by
Docket No. FDA–2009–F–0303, by any
of the following methods:
SUMMARY:
19 CFR Part 178
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic objections in the
following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Administrative practice and
procedure, Exports, Imports, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Written Submissions
Submit written objections in the
following way:
Administrative practice and
procedure, Customs duties and
inspection, Exports, Imports, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Trade
agreements.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for
paper submissions): Division of Dockets
Management (HFA–305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Agency name and
Docket No. FDA–2009–F–0303 for this
rulemaking. All objections received will
be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on submitting
objections, see the ‘‘Objections’’ heading
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
objections received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the
heading of this document, into the
‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts
and/or go to the Division of Dockets
Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Felicia M. Ellison, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS–
265), Food and Drug Administration,
5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park,
MD 20740–3835, 240–402–1264.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Evaluation of Safety of Advantame
A. Chemistry and Intake Considerations of
Advantame
B. Overview of Advantame Safety Studies
C. Toxicology/Safety Assessment of
Advantame
D. Estimating an Acceptable Daily Intake of
Advantame
III. Comments
IV. Conclusion
V. Public Disclosure
VI. Environmental Impact
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
VIII. Section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act
IX. Objections
X. References
I. Background
In a notice published in the Federal
Register of July 21, 2009 (74 FR 35871),
we announced that Ajinomoto Co., Inc.,
c/o Ajinomoto Corporate Services LLC,
1120 Connecticut Ave. NW., Suite 1010,
Washington DC, 20036, had filed a food
additive petition (FAP 9A4778). The
petition proposed to amend the food
additive regulations in part 172 Food
Additives Permitted for Direct Addition
to Food for Human Consumption (21
CFR part 172), to provide for the safe
use of advantame as a non-nutritive
sweetener in tabletop applications and
powdered beverage mixes.
In a letter dated August 24, 2012, the
petitioner informed us that the care of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
FAP 9A4778 had been transferred from
Ajinomoto Corporate Services LLC to
Ajinomoto North America, Inc., One
Parker Plaza, 400 Kelby St., Fort Lee, NJ
07024.
In an amended notice published in
the Federal Register of October 26, 2012
(77 FR 65340), we announced that
Ajinomoto Co., Inc., c/o Ajinomoto
North America, Inc., One Parker Plaza,
400 Kelby St., Fort Lee, NJ 07024, had
amended its food additive petition to
also provide for the safe use of
advantame as a non-nutritive sweetener
and flavor enhancer in foods generally,
except in meat and poultry.
II. Evaluation of Safety of Advantame
Under section 409(c)(3)(A) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 348(c)(3)(A)),
a food additive cannot be approved for
a particular use unless a fair evaluation
of the data available to FDA establishes
that the additive is safe for that use.
‘‘Safe’’ or ‘‘safety’’ in the context of food
additives means that there is ‘‘a
reasonable certainty in the minds of
competent scientists that the substance
is not harmful under the intended
conditions of use’’ (21 CFR 170.3(i)). To
establish with reasonable certainty that
a food additive is not harmful under its
intended conditions of use, we consider
the projected human dietary exposure to
the additive, the additive’s toxicological
data, and other relevant information
(such as published literature) available
to us. We compare an individual’s
estimated daily intake (EDI) of the
additive from all food sources to an
acceptable intake level established by
toxicological data. The EDI is
determined by projections based on the
amount of the additive proposed for use
in particular foods and on data
regarding the amount consumed from
all food sources of the additive. We
commonly use the EDI for the 90th
percentile consumer of a food additive
as a measure of high chronic dietary
intake.
A. Chemistry and Intake Considerations
of Advantame
Advantame is the common or usual
name for the chemical N-[N-[3-(3hydroxy-4- methoxyphenyl)propyl]-aaspartyl]-L-phenylalanine 1-methyl
ester, monohydrate (CAS Reg. No.
714229–20–6). The additive is a white
to yellowish crystalline powder that is
an N-substituted derivative of the
sweetener aspartame (21 CFR 172.804),
with the amino nitrogen of aspartame
alkylated with a 3-hydroxy-4-methoxy
phenyl moiety. Advantame also is
similar to the sweetener neotame,
another N-substituted derivative of
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29079
aspartame that is approved as a
sweetener in foods generally, except
meat and poultry, in accordance with
current good manufacturing practice, in
an amount not to exceed that reasonably
required to accomplish the intended
technical effect, in foods for which
standards of identity established under
section 401 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C.
341) do not preclude such use (21 CFR
172.829). Data in the petition show that
advantame has a sweetening potency
that is approximately 20,000 times that
of sucrose, depending on its food
application (Ref. 1). The petitioner has
proposed the use of advantame in food
at levels not in excess of that reasonably
required to produce its intended
technical effect. We have reviewed
results from taste panel studies that
investigated the sweetness profile of
advantame as a function of
concentration in a variety of foods, and
these data demonstrate that advantame
can be used at self-limiting levels in
food (Refs. 1 and 2).
Based upon data from stability studies
on advantame, we concluded that
advantame is stable under normal
storage and use conditions. The stability
studies show that degradation of
advantame is pH-, time-, and
temperature-dependent and is more
likely to occur from its use in low pH
foods (i.e., acidic foods) during
extended storage conditions. Under
such extreme conditions, the principal
degradation product is N-[N-[3-(3hydroxy-4-methoxyphenyl)propyl]-aaspartyl]-L-phenylalanine (ANS-acid),
which is the de-esterified form of
advantame. As is the case with neotame,
the N-alkyl substituent effectively
prevents the common dipeptide
cyclization reaction that results in the
formation of a diketopiperazine
derivative (Refs. 1 to 3).
Further, there is no concern from
exposure to these degradation products
under either normal or extended storage
and use conditions (Refs. 2 and 4).
The petitioner determined the eatersonly EDI of advantame (i.e., the EDI for
the population of study subjects that
consumed one or more of the foods
containing the additive) from its
proposed use as a general-purpose
sweetener and flavor enhancer at the
90th percentile of consumption to be 10
milligrams per person per day (mg/p/d)
for the total U.S. population (all ages)
and 8.1 mg/p/d for children (3 to 11
years old). The corresponding mean
estimated intakes are 4.9 mg/p/d and 4.6
mg/p/d, respectively. We concur with
the petitioner’s exposure estimate for
advantame (Ref. 2).
We also estimated the eaters-only EDI
of the principal degradation product
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
29080
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
(ANS-acid), related impurities that may
be formed during the manufacture of
advantame, and related degradation
products that may be formed under
certain conditions in food. The eatersonly EDI of the principal degradation
product, related impurities, and related
degradation products at the 90th
percentile of consumption is 0.10 mg/p/
d, 0.15 mg/p/d, and 0.20 mg/p/d,
respectively, for the total U.S.
population (all ages); and 0.08 mg/p/d,
0.12 mg/p/d, and 0.16 mg/p/d,
respectively for children (3 to 11 years
old) (Ref. 2).
We also estimated the eaters-only
dietary exposure to both advantame and
its degradation products for other
subpopulations, including various age
groups of children, and have concluded
that the exposure estimated for the U.S.
population (all ages) represents the
upper-bound cumulative dietary
exposure to advantame and its
degradation products from food (Ref. 2).
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
B. Overview of Advantame Safety
Studies
In support of the safety of advantame,
the petitioner submitted 37 preclinical
(animal), clinical (human subjects), and
specialty toxicology studies, along with
several additional exploratory or
screening studies. All pivotal preclinical
studies were conducted in accordance
with our Good Laboratory Practice
(GLP) regulations appearing in 21 CFR
part 58, or in accordance with other
internationally accepted GLP standards.
The preclinical studies included in
vivo short-term, sub-chronic, and
chronic studies in the rat, mouse, rabbit,
and dog, including reproductive and
developmental studies in the rat and
rabbit. The safety data also included
neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity
studies in the rat; pharmacokinetic
studies in the mouse, rat, and dog;
carcinogenicity studies in the mouse
and rat; and a series of in vitro
mutagenicity and genotoxicity studies.
The petitioner also submitted studies
assessing tolerance in the rabbit and
dog, and palatability in the mouse.
In addition, the petitioner submitted
four clinical studies that examined
tolerance, absorption, distribution,
metabolism, and excretion (ADME) of
advantame in human subjects. Subjects
in the ADME studies included healthy
adult males and females, as well as
adult males and females with type 2
diabetes.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:14 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
C. Toxicology/Safety Assessment of
Advantame
1. Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism of
Advantame
The petitioner conducted
pharmacokinetic and metabolism
studies in the rat, dog, and humans to
support the safety of advantame for
human use. The studies were designed
to address the metabolic fate (i.e.,
absorption, distribution, metabolism,
and excretion) of advantame.
a. Absorption of advantame.
Pharmacokinetic parameters estimated
from advantame study data show that
absorption of advantame and its
metabolites occurs almost entirely in the
small intestine, and that the amount
absorbed can approach 15 percent in
humans. Advantame absorption rates
varied 2- to 4-fold between individuals.
The rat and dog appeared to absorb less
advantame than humans (8 to 15
percent as compared to humans).
Absorption of advantame was limited by
rapid intestinal hydrolysis of the methyl
ester in all species.
b. Distribution of advantame. The
petitioner conducted studies with
radiolabelled advantame to identify
which organs might accumulate
advantame or its metabolites if
absorbed. In the rat, the radiolabelled
advantame was found primarily in the
organs of absorption (gastrointestinal
(GI) tract), metabolism (liver), and
excretion (GI tract, kidneys, and urinary
bladder). Low levels of radioactivity
were observed in all other tissues.
Distribution of radiolabelled advantame
in the dog was studied after oral dosing
and was dominated by high
concentrations of radioactivity in the
organs of absorption, followed by
excretory organs, such as the liver and
kidneys. There was very little
radioactivity detected in other tissues.
In a study using radiolabelled
advantame in pregnant rats, low levels
of radioactivity were observed in the
placenta, with no radioactivity observed
in the fetuses. Based on these findings,
we conclude there is no concern for
possible accumulation of advantame or
its metabolites at expected human
intake levels.
c. Metabolism of advantame. Data
from metabolism studies using
radiolabelled advantame in the rat, dog,
and human volunteers showed five
metabolites: (1) The methyl ester
hydrolysis product (ANS9801-acid); (2)
a sulfate conjugate of ANS9801-acid
(ANS-a-SO4), N-[N-[3-(3-sulfoxy-4methoxyphenyl)propyl]-L-a-aspartyl]-Lphenylalanine; (3) de-methyoxylated
metabolite of ANS9801-acid (RF–1), N[N-[3-(3,4-dihydroxyphenyl)propyl]-L-
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
a-aspartyl]-L-phenylalanine; (4) the
phenylalanine cleavage product of
ANS9801-acid (HF–1), N-[3-(3-hydroxy4-methoxyphenyl)propyl]-L-a-aspartic
acid; and (5) 3-(3-hydroxy-4methoxyphenyl) propylamine (HU–1).
ANS9801-acid represented 40 percent
or more of the excreted metabolic
products in all species tested. HF–1 and
HU–1 were other minor metabolites.
These metabolites likely are derived
from ANS9801-acid in the intestines. In
humans, HF–1 and ANS9801-acid were
the only metabolites identified in feces,
at 30 ± 12 percent and 52 ± 13 percent
of the dose, respectively. Other
(uncharacterized) metabolites accounted
for 0 to 3 percent of the dose in feces.
ANS9801-acid represented 43 percent of
urinary radioactivity, with HU–1 and
HF–1 representing 35 percent and 19
percent of the urinary radioactivity,
respectively. The remaining 2 to 3
percent of urinary radioactivity
consisted of uncharacterized
metabolites. Overall, 82 to 100 percent
of the radioactivity was accounted for in
these studies, which is within the
acceptable range of recoveries for
pharmacokinetic studies.
Methanol and phenylalanine both are
released during the metabolism of
advantame. The metabolism studies
provided by the petitioner indicated
that most advantame residues excreted
in the feces and urine are in the form
of the metabolite ANS9801-acid. At the
EDI for advantame, it is unlikely that
even 100 percent conversion of
advantame to methanol or
phenylalanine would affect
physiological levels of methanol or
phenylalanine. Therefore, we conclude
that the amounts of methanol and
phenylalanine released from
metabolism of advantame do not
represent a safety concern (Ref. 5).
d. Excretion of advantame.
Advantame and its metabolites were
rapidly eliminated from the rat and
human. The findings were similar in
dogs, with the exception of the
excretion of the metabolite ANS-a-SO4,
which was eliminated more slowly.
Advantame has an approximate half-life
(the amount of time required for a
quantity of a substance to fall to half its
initial value) of less than 60 minutes
after absorption in humans. The
metabolite ANS9801-acid has a half-life
of 3 to 5 hours in humans. Ultimately,
90 to 95 percent of absorbed advantame
is excreted in the feces and urine within
24 hours of absorption. Based on the
review findings from the metabolism
and pharmacokinetic studies on
advantame, there is no indication that
advantame or its metabolites will
accumulate in humans. In addition,
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
given the rapid rates of excretion, there
is no indication that advantame or its
metabolites will accumulate in the body
from the proposed uses of advantame
(Ref. 3). The potential intake of the
primary metabolite, the ANS9801-acid,
as well as other minor metabolites is of
no toxicological consequence.
Therefore, we conclude that the
metabolism and pharmacokinetic
studies of advantame do not raise any
safety concerns (Ref. 5).
2. Neurotoxicity and Immunotoxicity
Assessment of Advantame
The petitioner investigated the
potential neurotoxicity of advantame in
rats. Within each of the standard
toxicology studies submitted, the
petitioner also reported physical,
behavioral, and clinical observations for
each animal, followed by extensive
histological evaluations of brain, spinal
cord, and peripheral nerves. Data on
critical prenatal neurological
development were examined in the in
utero phase of the carcinogenicity/
chronic toxicity studies in rats. No
treatment-related neurotoxicological
effects or abnormal behaviors were seen
in animals that were exposed to
advantame in these studies.
In addition to examining various
general endpoints related to
neurological systems within standard
toxicology studies, the petitioner
conducted a neurobehavioral study in
which rats were fed diets containing 10,
100, or 1,000 milligrams per kilogram
body weight (mg/kg bw) of advantame.
One group of rats was fed a diet
containing 3 mg/kg bw of amphetamine
sulfate as a positive control. Locomotor
activity of the rats was measured for 10
minutes at each dose interval beginning
with the pre-dose period followed by
measurements performed at 30, 60, 180,
and 300 minutes post-dose. The study
authors concluded that there were no
significant effects of advantame on
spontaneous locomotor activity at any
dose level under the conditions of the
study.
Based on the lack of effect on rat
locomotor activity of advantame given
at the highest dose, we concluded that
the No Observed Effect Level (NOEL)
under the conditions of this study was
1,000 mg/kg bw (Ref. 6). Given the lack
of signs of neurotoxicity, as well as an
absence of histopathological change in
the central nervous system (brain and
spinal cord) and peripheral nerves in
any of the treated animals, we conclude
that the neurotoxicity studies of
advantame do not raise safety concerns
(Ref. 4).
The petitioner presented data for two
general, repeat-dose toxicology studies,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
a 4-week and a 13-week rat study, that
evaluated the immunotoxicity potential
of advantame. Findings related to
various immune responses in these rat
studies initially appeared to represent
potential immunotoxicity responses
(Ref. 7). After further evaluation, we
determined that the lymphocyte
reduction observed in the studies was
due to individual animal variations and
not to treatment with advantame. We
also evaluated the reported low thymic
weights in the high-dose groups of both
sexes for the 4-week study and
concluded that this change was
consistent with a non-specific high-dose
stress response because it was limited to
the high-dose groups and affected only
a few animals. We reviewed the
seemingly dose-related degenerative
changes in the thymuses of the 13-week
female groups and determined that this
change likely was incidental because it
was not reported in either the 4-week or
2-year rat studies. Overall, we
concluded that the immunological
findings observed in the two rat studies
did not have any toxicological
significance as there was no evidence of
a treatment-related immunotoxic
response (Ref. 8). Based on these
evaluations, we concluded that
advantame did not cause
immunotoxicological effects within the
context of these rat studies (Ref. 4).
The petitioner conducted an
additional immunotoxicity study in the
same rat strain used in the 4-week and
13-week rat studies. In this study, rats
were fed diets containing 0 mg/kg bw
(control); 1,500 mg/kw bw; 5,000 mg/kg
bw; and 15,000 mg/kg bw of advantame
for 4 weeks. Groups of 10 rats of each
sex were examined at the end of
treatment, as well as after a 30-day
recovery period. No treatment-related
effects were detected in the various
immunological parameters examined,
including lymphocyte counts, thymus
weights, immunophenotyping of
lymphocytes, and lymphocyte
proliferation assay, in the study. Based
on these data, we concluded that
advantame did not produce any
immunotoxic effects under the
conditions of this study (Ref. 9).
3. Human Clinical Studies
The petitioner submitted four human
clinical studies as part of the safety data
for advantame to demonstrate tolerance
of the sweetener in humans. The first
clinical study was conducted to
investigate the tolerability of advantame
when administered orally to healthy
adult males at dose levels of 0.1 mg/kg
bw, 0.25 mg/kg bw, and 0.35 mg/kg bw.
The study also investigated the
pharmacokinetic profile of advantame
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29081
in the same volunteers. We concluded
that the oral administration of
advantame was tolerable in healthy
adult male subjects when administered
as a single dose at each dose level
without the occurrence of any
treatment-related adverse events during
a subsequent 7-day observation period
(Ref. 10). Based on this study, we
concluded that advantame is well
tolerated in healthy human males.
The second clinical study was
conducted to characterize the metabolic
profile of advantame in urine and feces
in human subjects. This study
investigated the absorption, metabolism,
and excretion of radiolabelled
advantame after a single oral dose at
0.25 mg/kg bw in six healthy adult male
volunteers. In this study, systemic
absorption of advantame was reported
to be in the range of 9 to 30 percent (Ref.
10). We concluded that data on the
pharmacokinetic profile of advantame
from this study, although limited, was
useful in our evaluation of the safety of
advantame. Based on this study, we
have no safety concerns with the
absorption, metabolism, or excretion of
advantame as it was well tolerated in
human subjects.
The third clinical study was
conducted to investigate the tolerability
of repeated daily consumption of a 30
mg dose of advantame (equivalent to
0.375 mg/kg bw/day to 0.5 mg/kg bw/
day) over a period of 4 weeks using six
healthy subjects of each sex. The study
also included a placebo control group
consisting of six healthy subjects of each
sex that received diets without
advantame. Based on results of the
study, we concluded that, although
there were apparent small differences in
blood plasma values of the main
metabolite of advantame, ANS9801acid, the differences were not due to
randomization procedures of the study
and, instead, were reflective of withinsubject variability inherent in the
subjects of the study (Ref. 10). We
concluded advantame was well
tolerated in these subjects and that there
were no safety concerns.
The fourth clinical study was
conducted as a double blind, placebocontrolled study in diabetic subjects
designed to investigate the tolerability
of repeated daily consumption of a 30
mg dose (equivalent to 0.375 mg/kg bw/
day to 0.5 mg/kg bw/day) of advantame
fed daily for 12 weeks, using 18 diabetic
subjects of each sex per group. Diabetic
subjects in the placebo-controlled group
received diets without advantame.
Based on the results of this study, we
noted that there were no clinically
significant changes identified. We
concluded that advantame was tolerated
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
29082
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
at daily doses up to 0.5 mg/kg bw/day
in people with type 2 diabetes.
We raised concerns about the
experimental design (e.g., sample size
and the randomization procedures) in
some of the clinical studies (Ref. 10).
However, overall, we ultimately
concluded that advantame was welltolerated in healthy males when fed a
single dose of advantame at dose levels
of 0.1 mg/kg bw/day to 0.5 mg/kg bw/
day. The third and fourth clinical
studies showed that advantame was
tolerated in healthy males and females
and type 2 diabetic males and females
when repeatedly fed a dose of 0.375mg/
kg bw/day to 0.5 mg/kg bw/day for 4
weeks. The doses administered in the
third and fourth studies were
approximately 3-fold higher than the
EDI for consumers of all ages at the 90th
percentile of consumption (Ref. 10).
Pharmacokinetic evaluations of
advantame were conducted on blood
plasma samples from the human
subjects that received single and repeat
dose administrations of advantame. Data
from these analyses showed that
advantame was undetectable in plasma
samples 4 hours after its administration.
The repeat dosing studies showed
variation in the plasma levels of
ANS9801-acid for some subjects. The
significance of this variability could not
be determined because of the small
number of subjects examined. However,
the variable ANS9801-acid levels were
not associated with any clinically
significant, treatment-related toxicity in
these subjects.
Clinically significant treatmentrelated toxicities or adverse events were
not noted in the advantame-treated
groups in any of these clinical studies.
Overall, the clinical studies showed that
oral administration of advantame was
tolerated in humans fed up to 30 mg per
day (Ref. 10).
4. Critical Toxicology Studies
We reviewed all studies and
supplemental information submitted by
the petitioner. During our review, we
determined that certain studies were
more pivotal in supporting a regulatory
decision on the petitioned uses of
advantame. We based our determination
on the experimental design of the
studies as well as the types of the
studies’ endpoints. We gave greater
weight to the studies that examined the
reproductive and developmental effects,
long-term exposure, chronic toxicity,
carcinogenicity potential, and
investigations of specific toxicological
issues presented by these studies. The
critical studies were: (1) A twogeneration reproduction study in rats;
(2) a chronic (52-week) dog study; (3) a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
104-week mouse carcinogenicity study,
and (4) a combined 104-week rat
carcinogenicity feeding study with in
utero and chronic (52-week) phases.
a. Two-generation reproduction study
in the rat. Reproductive performance
and fertility were assessed over two
generations in rats fed diets containing
advantame at levels of 2,000 ppm,
10,000 ppm, or 50,000 ppm. The
parental rats received the advantame
diet for 10 weeks before pairing and
during mating. Parental and first
generation female rats continued to
receive the advantame treatment
throughout gestation, lactation, and
until death. A control group of rats
received the untreated basal diet for the
same period of time. The first generation
contained 25 male and 25 females from
each of the parent groups and received
advantame at the same dietary
concentrations as their parents
throughout the study until termination.
Direct treatment of the first generation
rats began at 4 weeks of age for 10 weeks
before pairing and mating for the second
generation litters. The first generation
continued treatment until termination
after the second generation litters were
weaned.
Under the conditions of this study,
advantame administration to rats did
not produce any effects on mortality,
body weight, estrous cycle, sperm
motility, mating, fertility, duration of
gestation, outcome of parturition, litter
size, sex ratio, pup birth weights,
survivability of pups, motor activity of
pups, organ weights, or histopathology
in either generation. However, at the
50,000 ppm dose level, statistically
significant increased feed consumption
in the advantame treated rats compared
to the control rats during the maturation
phases (before pairing) of parental males
and first generation males and females
was reported. This increased feed
consumption, in the absence of any
effect on feed conversion efficiency and
body weight gain, was not considered
toxicologically significant (Refs. 4 and
11). Based upon the findings, we
established a No Observed Adverse
Effect Level (NOAEL) at the 50,000 ppm
dose for advantame-treated rats in this
study.
b. Chronic (52-week) study in dogs.
Chronic toxicity of advantame was
evaluated in beagle dogs that were fed
diets containing advantame at levels of
0 ppm, 2,000 ppm, 10,000 ppm, and
50,000 ppm over a 52-week period using
four dogs/per sex/per group. Two
additional dogs per sex were assigned to
each dose group as part of a 6-week
recovery phase without advantame. This
study was performed to evaluate
systemic toxicity of advantame in non-
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
rodent species. The only clinical sign
related to advantame treatment was the
observation of pale feces in all highdose and some mid-dose dogs of both
sexes. We established a NOAEL for this
study at the 50,000 ppm dose of
advantame, the highest dose tested,
equivalent to 2,058 mg/kg bw/day in
male dogs and 2,139 mg/kg bw/day in
female dogs (Refs. 4 and 12). We also
concluded that systemic toxicity in the
test animals associated with advantame
administration was not apparent.
c. The 104-week mouse
carcinogenicity study. The
carcinogenicity potential of advantame
was evaluated in mice (64/sex/group).
The mice were fed diets containing
advantame at levels of 0 ppm, 2,000
ppm, 10,000 ppm, or 50,000 ppm for
104 weeks beginning when they were
approximately 6 weeks old. One
hundred seventy-three male and 177
female mice died or were euthanized at
the point of near death over the study
period. A statistically significant effect
of treatment on the distribution of
deaths in the various dosing groups
compared to the controls was not
reported. The study’s authors noted that
the high death rate was not altered by
the administration of advantame and
that no specific factors that contributed
to this rate were greater in number in
the experimental groups compared to
the control groups.
We noted a low survival rate of the
test animals, a common finding in 2year bioassays using the CD–1 mouse,
and a number of various clinical signs
in both the control and treated mice
(Ref. 13). Our evaluation of the mouse
survival data revealed no evidence of
premature deaths that were due to
treatment and none of the findings
indicated a proliferative response as the
cause of early death in these mice. We
considered the data available up to the
92-week observation period and
determined that 25 or more surviving
animals per group was adequate to
evaluate the carcinogenic potential for
advantame. We concluded that none of
the clinical signs observed correlated
consistently with a histomorphological
diagnosis or were an indication of
treatment-related toxicity (Ref. 14).
The Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition’s Cancer Assessment
Committee (CAC) evaluated data from
the 104-week mouse study for the
carcinogenic potential of advantame.
The CAC concluded that oral
administration of advantame at doses up
to 50,000 ppm for 104 weeks did not
produce any treatment-related tumors or
any evidence of increased incidences of
tumors in mice (Ref. 15). We established
a NOEL for female mice of 10,000 ppm
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
advantame in the diet (based on
decreased weight gain at 50,000 ppm)
and a NOEL of 50,000 ppm advantame
in the diet for male mice, equivalent to
5,693 mg/kg bw/day (Ref. 16).
d. Combined 104-week rat
carcinogenicity study with in utero
phase and toxicity phase. This study
included three phases: (1) An in utero
reproduction phase; (2) a 52-week
chronic toxicity phase; and (3) a 104week oral carcinogenicity phase. In each
of the study phases, rats were fed diets
containing advantame at levels of 2,000
ppm, 10,000 ppm, or 50,000 ppm. The
control groups of rats received a similar
diet without advantame for the same
period of time. The in utero
reproduction phase of this study was
designed to generate and assess
populations of rats that had been
exposed to advantame prior to mating,
during mating, and throughout gestation
and lactation up to weaning and the
start of the main chronic and
carcinogenicity studies. Four-week-old
offspring produced during the parent
mating were used to populate the first
generation that was subsequently used
in the 104-week carcinogenicity study
and in the 52-week chronic toxicity rat
study. Offspring that did not meet the
survival criteria or had abnormal
bodyweights were not used, and where
possible, the numbers of surviving
offspring per litter were reduced by
random selection to four males and four
females per litter. Adult parent males
were killed after mating; adult parent
females were killed after litters were
weaned. Body weights, feed
consumption, and survival rates were
evaluated in the parent rats. The
abilities to mate and give birth also were
evaluated in the parent rats. The
numbers of offspring, sex ratios, and
litter weights were recorded for the first
generation offspring.
Results from the in utero phase of the
rat study showed that: (1) Fertility,
growth, and survival in the parent rats
was unaffected by advantame treatment;
(2) body weights and feed consumption
in the treated parent groups were
similar to that seen in the control rats;
and (3) initial body weights of the first
generation rats that were selected for
either the carcinogenicity study or the
52-week toxicity study were not affected
by exposure to advantame during
preconception, in utero, or during
weaning.
The chronic toxicity phase of this
study consisted of three advantame
treatment groups of first generation rats
selected from the in utero study, with 20
of each sex per group. The rats were fed
diets containing advantame at levels of
2,000 ppm, 10,000 ppm, and 50,000
ppm. A group of untreated first
generation rats not exposed to
advantame was selected to serve as
controls for this 52-week phase of the
study. An additional 10 rats of each sex
were added to the control group and the
10,000 ppm and 50,000 ppm treatment
groups to provide animals for a 6-week
recovery phase without advantame
following their initial advantame
exposure period (week 0 to week 52).
The study’s authors reported no effect
of the administration of advantame on
mortality, maternal body weight gain
and feed consumption, fertility, or on
the growth and survival of offspring
during the in utero phase. (‘‘In utero,’’
29083
in this context, refers to the exposure of
the developing embryo-fetus within the
womb (uterus) of the mother (Parental
F0 females).) Two animals died during
the course of the treatment phase. These
deaths, however, were not dose related.
One male in the high-dose group died
during the recovery phase.
The CAC evaluated data from the 104week rat carcinogenicity study for the
carcinogenic potential of advantame.
The CAC concluded that oral
administration of advantame at doses up
to 50,000 ppm for 104 weeks did not
produce any treatment-related tumors or
any evidence of increased incidences of
tumors in rats (Ref. 15). We established
a NOAEL for this study of 50,000 ppm
advantame in the diet, equivalent to an
achieved dose of 3,279 and 4,025 mg/kg
bw/day in males and females,
respectively (Ref. 16). We also
concluded that advantame treatment did
not result in an increased incidence of
tumors in rats.
Based on our review of the previously
mentioned critical studies, we
concluded that there is no cause for
concern regarding the carcinogenicity
potential of advantame as proposed for
its use as a non-nutritive sweetener and
flavor enhancer in foods.
D. Estimating an Acceptable Daily
Intake of Advantame
In determining an acceptable daily
intake (ADI) for a new ingredient, we
rely on a comprehensive evaluation of
all relevant studies and information
submitted by the petitioner. Four
studies had the greatest impact in our
reaching a safety decision. These studies
are highlighted in table 1.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF STUDY DATA PERTINENT TO ESTABLISHING AN ACCEPTABLE DAILY INTAKE VALUE FOR
ADVANTAME
Study
Pivotal 1
Endpoint
Dose range (ppm)
Rat two-generation reproductive study .....................
Dog 52-week study ...................................................
Mouse 2-year bioassay .............................................
Rat 2-year bioassay with in utero and 1-year chronic phase.
0,
0,
0,
0,
2,000,
2,000,
2,000,
2,000,
10,000,
10,000,
10,000,
10,000,
50,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
ND
ND
ND
ND
NOEL 2
(ppm)
10,000
10,000
10,000
10,000
NOAEL 3
(ppm)
50,000
50,000
50,000
50,000
1 ND
= None Detected.
= No Observed Effect Level.
3 NOAEL = No Observed Adverse Effect Level.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
2 NOEL
Based on our review of the studies
summarized in table 1, we determined
the most appropriate study for
establishing an ADI for advantame was
the combined 104-week rat
carcinogenicity study with in utero and
chronic (52-week) phases. This study
was of sufficient length and overall
complexity to produce information on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
chronic exposure, potential toxicity, and
potential carcinogenicity of advantame.
Therefore, the data from the 1-year
chronic phase of this study was chosen
to determine the ADI. The primary
reasons for selecting it were its length
(52-weeks) and the inclusion of a 6week recovery phase (control, 10,000
ppm, and 50,000 ppm dose groups), the
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
total number of animals in each dose
group (20 animals of each sex per group
for the chronic phase with 10 additional
animals of each sex for groups in the
recovery phase), and the high overall
animal survival rate. In addition, the
results from the 2-year phase showed no
indication that advantame is
carcinogenic.
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
29084
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Based on the NOAEL for the 1-year
chronic toxicity study, we concluded
that the appropriate ADI for advantame
is 1,970 mg/p/d (Ref. 4). This level is
significantly higher than the EDI for
advantame of 10 mg/p/d for humans of
all ages at the 90th percentile.
We received two comments in
response to the advantame food additive
petition. One comment merely
expressed support for the petitioned use
of advantame, providing that safety is
shown and the substance is properly
declared when used as an ingredient in
food. The other comment stated that
they did not object to the petition, but
rather to the use of advantame as a
flavoring substance in food prior to a
premarket approval for use as a
sweetener and flavor enhancer without
declaring advantame as an ingredient on
the food label. Because this comment is
not relevant to the safety of advantame,
it has no bearing on our evaluation of
the advantame petition.
IV. Conclusion
We have evaluated the data and other
information submitted by the petitioner
in support of the safe use of advantame
as a general-purpose sweetener and
flavor enhancer in food and conclude
that there is a reasonable certainty that
the substance is not harmful under the
petitioned conditions of use. Therefore,
we conclude that the food additive
regulations should be amended as set
forth in this document.
V. Public Disclosure
In accordance with § 171.1(h) (21 CFR
171.1(h)), the petition and the
documents that we considered and
relied upon in reaching our decision to
approve the petition will be made
available for public disclosure (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). As
provided in § 171.1(h), we will delete
from the documents any materials that
are not available for public disclosure.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
VI. Environmental Impact
We have carefully considered the
potential environmental effects of this
action and have concluded that it will
not have a significant impact on the
human environment, and that an
environmental impact statement is not
required. FDA’s finding of no significant
impact and the evidence supporting that
finding, contained in an environmental
assessment, may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES)
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday.
16:26 May 20, 2014
This final rule contains no collection
of information. Therefore, clearance by
the Office of Management and Budget
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 is not required.
VIII. Section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act
III. Comments
VerDate Mar<15>2010
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
Jkt 232001
Our review of this petition was
limited to section 409 of the FD&C Act.
This final rule is not a statement
regarding compliance with other
sections of the FD&C Act. For example,
the Food and Drug Administration
Amendments Act of 2007, which was
signed into law on September 27, 2007,
amended the FD&C Act to, among other
things, add section 301(ll) of the FD&C
Act (21 U.S.C. 331(ll)). Section 301(ll) of
the FD&C Act prohibits the introduction
or delivery for introduction into
interstate commerce of any food that
contains a drug approved under section
505 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355), a
biological product licensed under
section 351 of the Public Health Service
Act (42 U.S.C. 262), or a drug or
biological product for which substantial
clinical investigations have been
instituted and their existence has been
made public, unless one of the
exemptions in section 301(ll)(1) to (ll)(4)
of the FD&C Act applies. In our review
of this petition, we did not consider
whether section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act
or any of its exemptions apply to food
products containing this food additive.
Accordingly, this final rule should not
be construed to be a statement that a
product containing this food additive, if
introduced or delivered for introduction
into interstate commerce, would not
violate section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act.
Furthermore, this language is included
in all food additive final rules that
pertain to food and therefore should not
be construed to be a statement of the
likelihood that section 301(ll) of the
FD&C Act applies.
IX. Objections
If you will be adversely affected by
one or more provisions of this
regulation, you may file with the
Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) either electronic or written
objections. You must separately number
each objection, and within each
numbered objection you must specify
with particularity the provision(s) to
which you object, and the grounds for
your objection. Within each numbered
objection, you must specifically state
whether you are requesting a hearing on
the particular provision that you specify
in that numbered objection. If you do
not request a hearing for any particular
objection, you waive the right to a
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
hearing on that objection. If you request
a hearing, your objection must include
a detailed description and analysis of
the specific factual information you
intend to present in support of the
objection in the event that a hearing is
held. If you do not include such a
description and analysis for any
particular objection, you waive the right
to a hearing on the objection.
It is only necessary to send one set of
documents. Identify documents with the
docket number found in brackets in the
heading of this document. Any
objections received in response to the
regulation may be seen in the Division
of Dockets Management between 9 a.m.
and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and
will be posted to the docket at https://
www.regulations.gov.
X. References
The following references have been
placed on display in the Division of
Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES)
and may be seen by interested persons
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday
through Friday, and are available
electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov.
1. Memorandum from H. Lee, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA to F.
Ellison, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, July 28, 2009.
2. Memorandum from H. Lee, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA to F.
Ellison, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, December 26, 2012.
3. Memorandum from H. Lee, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA to F.
Ellison, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, November 24, 2009.
4. Memorandum from T. S. Thurmond,
Division of Petition Review, CFSAN,
FDA to F. Ellison, Division of Petition
Review, CFSAN, FDA, May 14, 2013.
5. Memorandum from W. Roth, Division of
Food Contact Notification, CFSAN, FDA
to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, January 22, 2013.
6. Memorandum from T. Walker, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA to F.
Ellison, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, December 8, 2011.
7. Memorandum from S.K. Park, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA to F.
Ellison, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, April 18, 2011.
8. Memorandum from S. Francke-Carroll and
S. Mog, Senior Science and Policy Staff,
CFSAN, FDA to T.S. Thurmond, S.K.
Park, and C. Whiteside, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, March
17, 2011.
9. Memorandum from S. Francke-Carroll and
S. Mog, Senior Science and Policy Staff,
CFSAN, FDA to C. Whiteside, T.S.
Thurmond, and S.K. Park, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, March 1,
2013.
10. Memorandum from C. Whiteside,
Division of Petition Review, CFSAN,
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 98 / Wednesday, May 21, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
FDA to F. Ellison, Division of Petition
Review, CFSAN, FDA, February 7, 2013.
11. Memorandum from A. Khan, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA to F.
Ellison, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, June 22, 2010.
12. Memorandum from T. Walker, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA to F.
Ellison, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, December 27, 2011.
13. Memorandum from I. Chen, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA to F.
Ellison, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, May 24, 2010.
14. Memorandum from S. Francke-Carroll
and S. Mog, Senior Science and Policy
Staff, CFSAN, FDA to C. Whiteside and
A. Khan, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, March 17, 2011.
15. Memorandum from A. Khan, Division of
Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA to F.
Ellison, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA, March 3, 2012.
16. CFSAN Cancer Assessment Committee
Full Committee Review, Carcinogenicity
Evaluation of Advantame, April 27,
2012.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 172
Food additives, Incorporation by
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part 172 is
amended as follows:
PART 172—FOOD ADDITIVES
PERMITTED FOR DIRECT ADDITION
TO FOOD FOR HUMAN
CONSUMPTION
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 172 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 341, 342, 348,
371, 379e.
2. Add § 172.803 to subpart I to read
as follows:
■
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 172.803
Advantame.
(a) Advantame is the chemical N-[N[3-(3-hydroxy-4methoxyphenyl)propyl]-a-aspartyl]-Lphenylalanine 1-methyl ester,
monohydrate (CAS Reg. No. 714229–
20–6).
(b) Advantame meets the following
specifications when it is tested
according to the methods described or
referenced in the document entitled
‘‘Specifications and Analytical Methods
for Advantame’’ dated April 1, 2009, by
the Ajinomoto Co. Inc., Sweetener
Department 15–1, Kyobashi 1-chome,
Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104–8315, Japan. The
Director of the Office of the Federal
Register approves this incorporation by
reference in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies are
available from the Office of Food
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 May 20, 2014
Jkt 232001
Additive Safety (HFS–200), Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park,
MD 20740. Copies may be examined at
the Food and Drug Administration’s
Main Library, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 2, Third Floor, Silver Spring,
MD 20993, 301–796–2039, or at the
National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this
material at NARA, call 202–741–6030 or
go to: https://www.archives.gov/federalregister/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
(1) Assay for advantame, not less than
97.0 percent and not more than 102.0
percent on a dry basis.
(2) Free N-[N-[3-(3-hydroxy-4methoxyphenyl)propyl]-a-aspartyl]-Lphenylalanine, not more than 1.0
percent.
(3) Total other related substances, not
more than 1.5 percent.
(4) Lead, not more than 1.0 milligram
per kilogram.
(5) Water, not more than 5.0 percent.
(6) Residue on ignition, not more than
0.2 percent.
(7) Specific rotation, determined at
20 °C [a]D: ¥45.0 to ¥38.0° calculated
on a dry basis.
(c) The food additive advantame may
be safely used as a sweetening agent and
flavor enhancer in foods generally,
except in meat and poultry, in
accordance with current good
manufacturing practice, in an amount
not to exceed that reasonably required
to achieve the intended technical effect,
in foods for which standards of identity
established under section 401 of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
do not preclude such use.
(d) If the food containing the additive
purports to be or is represented to be for
special dietary use, it must be labeled in
compliance with part 105 of this
chapter.
Dated: May 15, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014–11584 Filed 5–19–14; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4160–01–P
PO 00000
29085
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[DOD–2012–OS–0105]
RIN 0720–AB58
32 CFR Part 199
TRICARE Revision to CHAMPUS DRGBased Payment System, Pricing of
Hospital Claims
Office of the Secretary,
Department of Defense.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This Final rule changes
TRICARE’s current regulatory provision
for inpatient hospital claims priced
under the DRG-based payment system.
Claims are currently priced by using the
rates and weights that are in effect on a
beneficiary’s date of admission. This
Final rule changes that provision to
price such claims by using the rates and
weights that are in effect on a
beneficiary’s date of discharge.
DATES:
Effective Date: This Final rule is
effective June 20, 2014.
Applicability Date: This rule applies
to claims with a discharge date of
October 1, 2014, or later from hospitals
paid by TRICARE under the Inpatient
Prospective Payment System/DiagnosisRelated Groups-based payment system.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Amber Butterfield, TRICARE
Management Activity, Medical Benefits
and Reimbursement Office, telephone
(303) 676–3565.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Dates
The effective date above is the date
that the policies herein take effect and
are considered to be officially adopted.
The applicability date, which is
different than the effective date, is the
date on which the policies adopted in
this rule shall apply to claims from
hospitals paid by TRICARE under the
Inpatient Prospective Payment System/
Diagnosis-Related Groups-based
payment system, and must be
implemented.
II. Executive Summary and Overview
A. Purpose of the Final Rule
1. Need for the Regulatory Action
This Final rule amends the TRICARE/
CHAMPUS regulatory provision (32
CFR 199.14(a)(1)(i)(C)(3)) of pricing
inpatient hospital claims that are
reimbursed under the DRG-based
payment system from the beneficiary’s
date of admission, to pricing such
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\21MYR1.SGM
21MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 98 (Wednesday, May 21, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29078-29085]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-11584]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 172
[Docket No. FDA-2009-F-0303]
Food Additives Permitted for Direct Addition to Food for Human
Consumption; Advantame
AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is amending the
food additive regulations to provide for the safe use of advantame as a
non-nutritive sweetener and flavor enhancer in foods generally, except
meat and poultry. This action is in response to a petition filed by
Ajinomoto Co., Inc.
DATES: This rule is effective May 21, 2014. See section IX for further
information on the filing of objections. Submit either electronic or
written objections and requests for a hearing by June 20, 2014. The
Director of the Office of the Federal Register approves the
incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule
as of May 21, 2014.
ADDRESSES: You may submit either electronic or written objections and
requests for a hearing identified by Docket No. FDA-2009-F-0303, by any
of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic objections in the following way:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Written Submissions
Submit written objections in the following way:
[[Page 29079]]
Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for paper submissions):
Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Agency name
and Docket No. FDA-2009-F-0303 for this rulemaking. All objections
received will be posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information provided. For detailed instructions
on submitting objections, see the ``Objections'' heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
objections received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into
the ``Search'' box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of
Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Felicia M. Ellison, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-265), Food and Drug Administration,
5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740-3835, 240-402-1264.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Evaluation of Safety of Advantame
A. Chemistry and Intake Considerations of Advantame
B. Overview of Advantame Safety Studies
C. Toxicology/Safety Assessment of Advantame
D. Estimating an Acceptable Daily Intake of Advantame
III. Comments
IV. Conclusion
V. Public Disclosure
VI. Environmental Impact
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
VIII. Section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act
IX. Objections
X. References
I. Background
In a notice published in the Federal Register of July 21, 2009 (74
FR 35871), we announced that Ajinomoto Co., Inc., c/o Ajinomoto
Corporate Services LLC, 1120 Connecticut Ave. NW., Suite 1010,
Washington DC, 20036, had filed a food additive petition (FAP 9A4778).
The petition proposed to amend the food additive regulations in part
172 Food Additives Permitted for Direct Addition to Food for Human
Consumption (21 CFR part 172), to provide for the safe use of advantame
as a non-nutritive sweetener in tabletop applications and powdered
beverage mixes.
In a letter dated August 24, 2012, the petitioner informed us that
the care of FAP 9A4778 had been transferred from Ajinomoto Corporate
Services LLC to Ajinomoto North America, Inc., One Parker Plaza, 400
Kelby St., Fort Lee, NJ 07024.
In an amended notice published in the Federal Register of October
26, 2012 (77 FR 65340), we announced that Ajinomoto Co., Inc., c/o
Ajinomoto North America, Inc., One Parker Plaza, 400 Kelby St., Fort
Lee, NJ 07024, had amended its food additive petition to also provide
for the safe use of advantame as a non-nutritive sweetener and flavor
enhancer in foods generally, except in meat and poultry.
II. Evaluation of Safety of Advantame
Under section 409(c)(3)(A) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (the FD&C Act) (21 U.S.C. 348(c)(3)(A)), a food additive cannot be
approved for a particular use unless a fair evaluation of the data
available to FDA establishes that the additive is safe for that use.
``Safe'' or ``safety'' in the context of food additives means that
there is ``a reasonable certainty in the minds of competent scientists
that the substance is not harmful under the intended conditions of
use'' (21 CFR 170.3(i)). To establish with reasonable certainty that a
food additive is not harmful under its intended conditions of use, we
consider the projected human dietary exposure to the additive, the
additive's toxicological data, and other relevant information (such as
published literature) available to us. We compare an individual's
estimated daily intake (EDI) of the additive from all food sources to
an acceptable intake level established by toxicological data. The EDI
is determined by projections based on the amount of the additive
proposed for use in particular foods and on data regarding the amount
consumed from all food sources of the additive. We commonly use the EDI
for the 90th percentile consumer of a food additive as a measure of
high chronic dietary intake.
A. Chemistry and Intake Considerations of Advantame
Advantame is the common or usual name for the chemical N-[N-[3-(3-
hydroxy-4- methoxyphenyl)propyl]-[alpha]-aspartyl]-L-phenylalanine 1-
methyl ester, monohydrate (CAS Reg. No. 714229-20-6). The additive is a
white to yellowish crystalline powder that is an N-substituted
derivative of the sweetener aspartame (21 CFR 172.804), with the amino
nitrogen of aspartame alkylated with a 3-hydroxy-4-methoxy phenyl
moiety. Advantame also is similar to the sweetener neotame, another N-
substituted derivative of aspartame that is approved as a sweetener in
foods generally, except meat and poultry, in accordance with current
good manufacturing practice, in an amount not to exceed that reasonably
required to accomplish the intended technical effect, in foods for
which standards of identity established under section 401 of the FD&C
Act (21 U.S.C. 341) do not preclude such use (21 CFR 172.829). Data in
the petition show that advantame has a sweetening potency that is
approximately 20,000 times that of sucrose, depending on its food
application (Ref. 1). The petitioner has proposed the use of advantame
in food at levels not in excess of that reasonably required to produce
its intended technical effect. We have reviewed results from taste
panel studies that investigated the sweetness profile of advantame as a
function of concentration in a variety of foods, and these data
demonstrate that advantame can be used at self-limiting levels in food
(Refs. 1 and 2).
Based upon data from stability studies on advantame, we concluded
that advantame is stable under normal storage and use conditions. The
stability studies show that degradation of advantame is pH-, time-, and
temperature-dependent and is more likely to occur from its use in low
pH foods (i.e., acidic foods) during extended storage conditions. Under
such extreme conditions, the principal degradation product is N-[N-[3-
(3-hydroxy-4-methoxyphenyl)propyl]-[alpha]-aspartyl]-L-phenylalanine
(ANS-acid), which is the de-esterified form of advantame. As is the
case with neotame, the N-alkyl substituent effectively prevents the
common dipeptide cyclization reaction that results in the formation of
a diketopiperazine derivative (Refs. 1 to 3).
Further, there is no concern from exposure to these degradation
products under either normal or extended storage and use conditions
(Refs. 2 and 4).
The petitioner determined the eaters-only EDI of advantame (i.e.,
the EDI for the population of study subjects that consumed one or more
of the foods containing the additive) from its proposed use as a
general-purpose sweetener and flavor enhancer at the 90th percentile of
consumption to be 10 milligrams per person per day (mg/p/d) for the
total U.S. population (all ages) and 8.1 mg/p/d for children (3 to 11
years old). The corresponding mean estimated intakes are 4.9 mg/p/d and
4.6 mg/p/d, respectively. We concur with the petitioner's exposure
estimate for advantame (Ref. 2).
We also estimated the eaters-only EDI of the principal degradation
product
[[Page 29080]]
(ANS-acid), related impurities that may be formed during the
manufacture of advantame, and related degradation products that may be
formed under certain conditions in food. The eaters-only EDI of the
principal degradation product, related impurities, and related
degradation products at the 90th percentile of consumption is 0.10 mg/
p/d, 0.15 mg/p/d, and 0.20 mg/p/d, respectively, for the total U.S.
population (all ages); and 0.08 mg/p/d, 0.12 mg/p/d, and 0.16 mg/p/d,
respectively for children (3 to 11 years old) (Ref. 2).
We also estimated the eaters-only dietary exposure to both
advantame and its degradation products for other subpopulations,
including various age groups of children, and have concluded that the
exposure estimated for the U.S. population (all ages) represents the
upper-bound cumulative dietary exposure to advantame and its
degradation products from food (Ref. 2).
B. Overview of Advantame Safety Studies
In support of the safety of advantame, the petitioner submitted 37
preclinical (animal), clinical (human subjects), and specialty
toxicology studies, along with several additional exploratory or
screening studies. All pivotal preclinical studies were conducted in
accordance with our Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) regulations
appearing in 21 CFR part 58, or in accordance with other
internationally accepted GLP standards.
The preclinical studies included in vivo short-term, sub-chronic,
and chronic studies in the rat, mouse, rabbit, and dog, including
reproductive and developmental studies in the rat and rabbit. The
safety data also included neurotoxicity and immunotoxicity studies in
the rat; pharmacokinetic studies in the mouse, rat, and dog;
carcinogenicity studies in the mouse and rat; and a series of in vitro
mutagenicity and genotoxicity studies. The petitioner also submitted
studies assessing tolerance in the rabbit and dog, and palatability in
the mouse.
In addition, the petitioner submitted four clinical studies that
examined tolerance, absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion
(ADME) of advantame in human subjects. Subjects in the ADME studies
included healthy adult males and females, as well as adult males and
females with type 2 diabetes.
C. Toxicology/Safety Assessment of Advantame
1. Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism of Advantame
The petitioner conducted pharmacokinetic and metabolism studies in
the rat, dog, and humans to support the safety of advantame for human
use. The studies were designed to address the metabolic fate (i.e.,
absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion) of advantame.
a. Absorption of advantame. Pharmacokinetic parameters estimated
from advantame study data show that absorption of advantame and its
metabolites occurs almost entirely in the small intestine, and that the
amount absorbed can approach 15 percent in humans. Advantame absorption
rates varied 2- to 4-fold between individuals. The rat and dog appeared
to absorb less advantame than humans (8 to 15 percent as compared to
humans). Absorption of advantame was limited by rapid intestinal
hydrolysis of the methyl ester in all species.
b. Distribution of advantame. The petitioner conducted studies with
radiolabelled advantame to identify which organs might accumulate
advantame or its metabolites if absorbed. In the rat, the radiolabelled
advantame was found primarily in the organs of absorption
(gastrointestinal (GI) tract), metabolism (liver), and excretion (GI
tract, kidneys, and urinary bladder). Low levels of radioactivity were
observed in all other tissues. Distribution of radiolabelled advantame
in the dog was studied after oral dosing and was dominated by high
concentrations of radioactivity in the organs of absorption, followed
by excretory organs, such as the liver and kidneys. There was very
little radioactivity detected in other tissues. In a study using
radiolabelled advantame in pregnant rats, low levels of radioactivity
were observed in the placenta, with no radioactivity observed in the
fetuses. Based on these findings, we conclude there is no concern for
possible accumulation of advantame or its metabolites at expected human
intake levels.
c. Metabolism of advantame. Data from metabolism studies using
radiolabelled advantame in the rat, dog, and human volunteers showed
five metabolites: (1) The methyl ester hydrolysis product (ANS9801-
acid); (2) a sulfate conjugate of ANS9801-acid (ANS-a-SO4), N-[N-[3-(3-
sulfoxy-4-methoxyphenyl)propyl]-L-[alpha]-aspartyl]-L-phenylalanine;
(3) de-methyoxylated metabolite of ANS9801-acid (RF-1), N-[N-[3-(3,4-
dihydroxyphenyl)propyl]-L-[alpha]-aspartyl]-L-phenylalanine; (4) the
phenylalanine cleavage product of ANS9801-acid (HF-1), N-[3-(3-hydroxy-
4-methoxyphenyl)propyl]-L-[alpha]-aspartic acid; and (5) 3-(3-hydroxy-
4-methoxyphenyl) propylamine (HU-1).
ANS9801-acid represented 40 percent or more of the excreted
metabolic products in all species tested. HF-1 and HU-1 were other
minor metabolites. These metabolites likely are derived from ANS9801-
acid in the intestines. In humans, HF-1 and ANS9801-acid were the only
metabolites identified in feces, at 30 12 percent and 52
13 percent of the dose, respectively. Other
(uncharacterized) metabolites accounted for 0 to 3 percent of the dose
in feces. ANS9801-acid represented 43 percent of urinary radioactivity,
with HU-1 and HF-1 representing 35 percent and 19 percent of the
urinary radioactivity, respectively. The remaining 2 to 3 percent of
urinary radioactivity consisted of uncharacterized metabolites.
Overall, 82 to 100 percent of the radioactivity was accounted for in
these studies, which is within the acceptable range of recoveries for
pharmacokinetic studies.
Methanol and phenylalanine both are released during the metabolism
of advantame. The metabolism studies provided by the petitioner
indicated that most advantame residues excreted in the feces and urine
are in the form of the metabolite ANS9801-acid. At the EDI for
advantame, it is unlikely that even 100 percent conversion of advantame
to methanol or phenylalanine would affect physiological levels of
methanol or phenylalanine. Therefore, we conclude that the amounts of
methanol and phenylalanine released from metabolism of advantame do not
represent a safety concern (Ref. 5).
d. Excretion of advantame. Advantame and its metabolites were
rapidly eliminated from the rat and human. The findings were similar in
dogs, with the exception of the excretion of the metabolite ANS-a-SO4,
which was eliminated more slowly. Advantame has an approximate half-
life (the amount of time required for a quantity of a substance to fall
to half its initial value) of less than 60 minutes after absorption in
humans. The metabolite ANS9801-acid has a half-life of 3 to 5 hours in
humans. Ultimately, 90 to 95 percent of absorbed advantame is excreted
in the feces and urine within 24 hours of absorption. Based on the
review findings from the metabolism and pharmacokinetic studies on
advantame, there is no indication that advantame or its metabolites
will accumulate in humans. In addition,
[[Page 29081]]
given the rapid rates of excretion, there is no indication that
advantame or its metabolites will accumulate in the body from the
proposed uses of advantame (Ref. 3). The potential intake of the
primary metabolite, the ANS9801-acid, as well as other minor
metabolites is of no toxicological consequence. Therefore, we conclude
that the metabolism and pharmacokinetic studies of advantame do not
raise any safety concerns (Ref. 5).
2. Neurotoxicity and Immunotoxicity Assessment of Advantame
The petitioner investigated the potential neurotoxicity of
advantame in rats. Within each of the standard toxicology studies
submitted, the petitioner also reported physical, behavioral, and
clinical observations for each animal, followed by extensive
histological evaluations of brain, spinal cord, and peripheral nerves.
Data on critical prenatal neurological development were examined in the
in utero phase of the carcinogenicity/chronic toxicity studies in rats.
No treatment-related neurotoxicological effects or abnormal behaviors
were seen in animals that were exposed to advantame in these studies.
In addition to examining various general endpoints related to
neurological systems within standard toxicology studies, the petitioner
conducted a neurobehavioral study in which rats were fed diets
containing 10, 100, or 1,000 milligrams per kilogram body weight (mg/kg
bw) of advantame. One group of rats was fed a diet containing 3 mg/kg
bw of amphetamine sulfate as a positive control. Locomotor activity of
the rats was measured for 10 minutes at each dose interval beginning
with the pre-dose period followed by measurements performed at 30, 60,
180, and 300 minutes post-dose. The study authors concluded that there
were no significant effects of advantame on spontaneous locomotor
activity at any dose level under the conditions of the study.
Based on the lack of effect on rat locomotor activity of advantame
given at the highest dose, we concluded that the No Observed Effect
Level (NOEL) under the conditions of this study was 1,000 mg/kg bw
(Ref. 6). Given the lack of signs of neurotoxicity, as well as an
absence of histopathological change in the central nervous system
(brain and spinal cord) and peripheral nerves in any of the treated
animals, we conclude that the neurotoxicity studies of advantame do not
raise safety concerns (Ref. 4).
The petitioner presented data for two general, repeat-dose
toxicology studies, a 4-week and a 13-week rat study, that evaluated
the immunotoxicity potential of advantame. Findings related to various
immune responses in these rat studies initially appeared to represent
potential immunotoxicity responses (Ref. 7). After further evaluation,
we determined that the lymphocyte reduction observed in the studies was
due to individual animal variations and not to treatment with
advantame. We also evaluated the reported low thymic weights in the
high-dose groups of both sexes for the 4-week study and concluded that
this change was consistent with a non-specific high-dose stress
response because it was limited to the high-dose groups and affected
only a few animals. We reviewed the seemingly dose-related degenerative
changes in the thymuses of the 13-week female groups and determined
that this change likely was incidental because it was not reported in
either the 4-week or 2-year rat studies. Overall, we concluded that the
immunological findings observed in the two rat studies did not have any
toxicological significance as there was no evidence of a treatment-
related immunotoxic response (Ref. 8). Based on these evaluations, we
concluded that advantame did not cause immunotoxicological effects
within the context of these rat studies (Ref. 4).
The petitioner conducted an additional immunotoxicity study in the
same rat strain used in the 4-week and 13-week rat studies. In this
study, rats were fed diets containing 0 mg/kg bw (control); 1,500 mg/kw
bw; 5,000 mg/kg bw; and 15,000 mg/kg bw of advantame for 4 weeks.
Groups of 10 rats of each sex were examined at the end of treatment, as
well as after a 30-day recovery period. No treatment-related effects
were detected in the various immunological parameters examined,
including lymphocyte counts, thymus weights, immunophenotyping of
lymphocytes, and lymphocyte proliferation assay, in the study. Based on
these data, we concluded that advantame did not produce any immunotoxic
effects under the conditions of this study (Ref. 9).
3. Human Clinical Studies
The petitioner submitted four human clinical studies as part of the
safety data for advantame to demonstrate tolerance of the sweetener in
humans. The first clinical study was conducted to investigate the
tolerability of advantame when administered orally to healthy adult
males at dose levels of 0.1 mg/kg bw, 0.25 mg/kg bw, and 0.35 mg/kg bw.
The study also investigated the pharmacokinetic profile of advantame in
the same volunteers. We concluded that the oral administration of
advantame was tolerable in healthy adult male subjects when
administered as a single dose at each dose level without the occurrence
of any treatment-related adverse events during a subsequent 7-day
observation period (Ref. 10). Based on this study, we concluded that
advantame is well tolerated in healthy human males.
The second clinical study was conducted to characterize the
metabolic profile of advantame in urine and feces in human subjects.
This study investigated the absorption, metabolism, and excretion of
radiolabelled advantame after a single oral dose at 0.25 mg/kg bw in
six healthy adult male volunteers. In this study, systemic absorption
of advantame was reported to be in the range of 9 to 30 percent (Ref.
10). We concluded that data on the pharmacokinetic profile of advantame
from this study, although limited, was useful in our evaluation of the
safety of advantame. Based on this study, we have no safety concerns
with the absorption, metabolism, or excretion of advantame as it was
well tolerated in human subjects.
The third clinical study was conducted to investigate the
tolerability of repeated daily consumption of a 30 mg dose of advantame
(equivalent to 0.375 mg/kg bw/day to 0.5 mg/kg bw/day) over a period of
4 weeks using six healthy subjects of each sex. The study also included
a placebo control group consisting of six healthy subjects of each sex
that received diets without advantame. Based on results of the study,
we concluded that, although there were apparent small differences in
blood plasma values of the main metabolite of advantame, ANS9801-acid,
the differences were not due to randomization procedures of the study
and, instead, were reflective of within-subject variability inherent in
the subjects of the study (Ref. 10). We concluded advantame was well
tolerated in these subjects and that there were no safety concerns.
The fourth clinical study was conducted as a double blind, placebo-
controlled study in diabetic subjects designed to investigate the
tolerability of repeated daily consumption of a 30 mg dose (equivalent
to 0.375 mg/kg bw/day to 0.5 mg/kg bw/day) of advantame fed daily for
12 weeks, using 18 diabetic subjects of each sex per group. Diabetic
subjects in the placebo-controlled group received diets without
advantame. Based on the results of this study, we noted that there were
no clinically significant changes identified. We concluded that
advantame was tolerated
[[Page 29082]]
at daily doses up to 0.5 mg/kg bw/day in people with type 2 diabetes.
We raised concerns about the experimental design (e.g., sample size
and the randomization procedures) in some of the clinical studies (Ref.
10). However, overall, we ultimately concluded that advantame was well-
tolerated in healthy males when fed a single dose of advantame at dose
levels of 0.1 mg/kg bw/day to 0.5 mg/kg bw/day. The third and fourth
clinical studies showed that advantame was tolerated in healthy males
and females and type 2 diabetic males and females when repeatedly fed a
dose of 0.375mg/kg bw/day to 0.5 mg/kg bw/day for 4 weeks. The doses
administered in the third and fourth studies were approximately 3-fold
higher than the EDI for consumers of all ages at the 90th percentile of
consumption (Ref. 10).
Pharmacokinetic evaluations of advantame were conducted on blood
plasma samples from the human subjects that received single and repeat
dose administrations of advantame. Data from these analyses showed that
advantame was undetectable in plasma samples 4 hours after its
administration. The repeat dosing studies showed variation in the
plasma levels of ANS9801-acid for some subjects. The significance of
this variability could not be determined because of the small number of
subjects examined. However, the variable ANS9801-acid levels were not
associated with any clinically significant, treatment-related toxicity
in these subjects.
Clinically significant treatment-related toxicities or adverse
events were not noted in the advantame-treated groups in any of these
clinical studies. Overall, the clinical studies showed that oral
administration of advantame was tolerated in humans fed up to 30 mg per
day (Ref. 10).
4. Critical Toxicology Studies
We reviewed all studies and supplemental information submitted by
the petitioner. During our review, we determined that certain studies
were more pivotal in supporting a regulatory decision on the petitioned
uses of advantame. We based our determination on the experimental
design of the studies as well as the types of the studies' endpoints.
We gave greater weight to the studies that examined the reproductive
and developmental effects, long-term exposure, chronic toxicity,
carcinogenicity potential, and investigations of specific toxicological
issues presented by these studies. The critical studies were: (1) A
two-generation reproduction study in rats; (2) a chronic (52-week) dog
study; (3) a 104-week mouse carcinogenicity study, and (4) a combined
104-week rat carcinogenicity feeding study with in utero and chronic
(52-week) phases.
a. Two-generation reproduction study in the rat. Reproductive
performance and fertility were assessed over two generations in rats
fed diets containing advantame at levels of 2,000 ppm, 10,000 ppm, or
50,000 ppm. The parental rats received the advantame diet for 10 weeks
before pairing and during mating. Parental and first generation female
rats continued to receive the advantame treatment throughout gestation,
lactation, and until death. A control group of rats received the
untreated basal diet for the same period of time. The first generation
contained 25 male and 25 females from each of the parent groups and
received advantame at the same dietary concentrations as their parents
throughout the study until termination. Direct treatment of the first
generation rats began at 4 weeks of age for 10 weeks before pairing and
mating for the second generation litters. The first generation
continued treatment until termination after the second generation
litters were weaned.
Under the conditions of this study, advantame administration to
rats did not produce any effects on mortality, body weight, estrous
cycle, sperm motility, mating, fertility, duration of gestation,
outcome of parturition, litter size, sex ratio, pup birth weights,
survivability of pups, motor activity of pups, organ weights, or
histopathology in either generation. However, at the 50,000 ppm dose
level, statistically significant increased feed consumption in the
advantame treated rats compared to the control rats during the
maturation phases (before pairing) of parental males and first
generation males and females was reported. This increased feed
consumption, in the absence of any effect on feed conversion efficiency
and body weight gain, was not considered toxicologically significant
(Refs. 4 and 11). Based upon the findings, we established a No Observed
Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL) at the 50,000 ppm dose for advantame-
treated rats in this study.
b. Chronic (52-week) study in dogs. Chronic toxicity of advantame
was evaluated in beagle dogs that were fed diets containing advantame
at levels of 0 ppm, 2,000 ppm, 10,000 ppm, and 50,000 ppm over a 52-
week period using four dogs/per sex/per group. Two additional dogs per
sex were assigned to each dose group as part of a 6-week recovery phase
without advantame. This study was performed to evaluate systemic
toxicity of advantame in non-rodent species. The only clinical sign
related to advantame treatment was the observation of pale feces in all
high-dose and some mid-dose dogs of both sexes. We established a NOAEL
for this study at the 50,000 ppm dose of advantame, the highest dose
tested, equivalent to 2,058 mg/kg bw/day in male dogs and 2,139 mg/kg
bw/day in female dogs (Refs. 4 and 12). We also concluded that systemic
toxicity in the test animals associated with advantame administration
was not apparent.
c. The 104-week mouse carcinogenicity study. The carcinogenicity
potential of advantame was evaluated in mice (64/sex/group). The mice
were fed diets containing advantame at levels of 0 ppm, 2,000 ppm,
10,000 ppm, or 50,000 ppm for 104 weeks beginning when they were
approximately 6 weeks old. One hundred seventy-three male and 177
female mice died or were euthanized at the point of near death over the
study period. A statistically significant effect of treatment on the
distribution of deaths in the various dosing groups compared to the
controls was not reported. The study's authors noted that the high
death rate was not altered by the administration of advantame and that
no specific factors that contributed to this rate were greater in
number in the experimental groups compared to the control groups.
We noted a low survival rate of the test animals, a common finding
in 2-year bioassays using the CD-1 mouse, and a number of various
clinical signs in both the control and treated mice (Ref. 13). Our
evaluation of the mouse survival data revealed no evidence of premature
deaths that were due to treatment and none of the findings indicated a
proliferative response as the cause of early death in these mice. We
considered the data available up to the 92-week observation period and
determined that 25 or more surviving animals per group was adequate to
evaluate the carcinogenic potential for advantame. We concluded that
none of the clinical signs observed correlated consistently with a
histomorphological diagnosis or were an indication of treatment-related
toxicity (Ref. 14).
The Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition's Cancer
Assessment Committee (CAC) evaluated data from the 104-week mouse study
for the carcinogenic potential of advantame. The CAC concluded that
oral administration of advantame at doses up to 50,000 ppm for 104
weeks did not produce any treatment-related tumors or any evidence of
increased incidences of tumors in mice (Ref. 15). We established a NOEL
for female mice of 10,000 ppm
[[Page 29083]]
advantame in the diet (based on decreased weight gain at 50,000 ppm)
and a NOEL of 50,000 ppm advantame in the diet for male mice,
equivalent to 5,693 mg/kg bw/day (Ref. 16).
d. Combined 104-week rat carcinogenicity study with in utero phase
and toxicity phase. This study included three phases: (1) An in utero
reproduction phase; (2) a 52-week chronic toxicity phase; and (3) a
104-week oral carcinogenicity phase. In each of the study phases, rats
were fed diets containing advantame at levels of 2,000 ppm, 10,000 ppm,
or 50,000 ppm. The control groups of rats received a similar diet
without advantame for the same period of time. The in utero
reproduction phase of this study was designed to generate and assess
populations of rats that had been exposed to advantame prior to mating,
during mating, and throughout gestation and lactation up to weaning and
the start of the main chronic and carcinogenicity studies. Four-week-
old offspring produced during the parent mating were used to populate
the first generation that was subsequently used in the 104-week
carcinogenicity study and in the 52-week chronic toxicity rat study.
Offspring that did not meet the survival criteria or had abnormal
bodyweights were not used, and where possible, the numbers of surviving
offspring per litter were reduced by random selection to four males and
four females per litter. Adult parent males were killed after mating;
adult parent females were killed after litters were weaned. Body
weights, feed consumption, and survival rates were evaluated in the
parent rats. The abilities to mate and give birth also were evaluated
in the parent rats. The numbers of offspring, sex ratios, and litter
weights were recorded for the first generation offspring.
Results from the in utero phase of the rat study showed that: (1)
Fertility, growth, and survival in the parent rats was unaffected by
advantame treatment; (2) body weights and feed consumption in the
treated parent groups were similar to that seen in the control rats;
and (3) initial body weights of the first generation rats that were
selected for either the carcinogenicity study or the 52-week toxicity
study were not affected by exposure to advantame during preconception,
in utero, or during weaning.
The chronic toxicity phase of this study consisted of three
advantame treatment groups of first generation rats selected from the
in utero study, with 20 of each sex per group. The rats were fed diets
containing advantame at levels of 2,000 ppm, 10,000 ppm, and 50,000
ppm. A group of untreated first generation rats not exposed to
advantame was selected to serve as controls for this 52-week phase of
the study. An additional 10 rats of each sex were added to the control
group and the 10,000 ppm and 50,000 ppm treatment groups to provide
animals for a 6-week recovery phase without advantame following their
initial advantame exposure period (week 0 to week 52).
The study's authors reported no effect of the administration of
advantame on mortality, maternal body weight gain and feed consumption,
fertility, or on the growth and survival of offspring during the in
utero phase. (``In utero,'' in this context, refers to the exposure of
the developing embryo-fetus within the womb (uterus) of the mother
(Parental F0 females).) Two animals died during the course of the
treatment phase. These deaths, however, were not dose related. One male
in the high-dose group died during the recovery phase.
The CAC evaluated data from the 104-week rat carcinogenicity study
for the carcinogenic potential of advantame. The CAC concluded that
oral administration of advantame at doses up to 50,000 ppm for 104
weeks did not produce any treatment-related tumors or any evidence of
increased incidences of tumors in rats (Ref. 15). We established a
NOAEL for this study of 50,000 ppm advantame in the diet, equivalent to
an achieved dose of 3,279 and 4,025 mg/kg bw/day in males and females,
respectively (Ref. 16). We also concluded that advantame treatment did
not result in an increased incidence of tumors in rats.
Based on our review of the previously mentioned critical studies,
we concluded that there is no cause for concern regarding the
carcinogenicity potential of advantame as proposed for its use as a
non-nutritive sweetener and flavor enhancer in foods.
D. Estimating an Acceptable Daily Intake of Advantame
In determining an acceptable daily intake (ADI) for a new
ingredient, we rely on a comprehensive evaluation of all relevant
studies and information submitted by the petitioner. Four studies had
the greatest impact in our reaching a safety decision. These studies
are highlighted in table 1.
Table 1--Summary of Study Data Pertinent to Establishing an Acceptable Daily Intake Value for Advantame
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOEL \2\ NOAEL \3\
Study Dose range (ppm) Pivotal \1\ Endpoint (ppm) (ppm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rat two-generation reproductive study. 0, 2,000, 10,000, 50,000. ND 10,000 50,000
Dog 52-week study..................... 0, 2,000, 10,000, 50,000. ND 10,000 50,000
Mouse 2-year bioassay................. 0, 2,000, 10,000, 50,000. ND 10,000 50,000
Rat 2-year bioassay with in utero and 0, 2,000, 10,000, 50,000. ND 10,000 50,000
1-year chronic phase.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ND = None Detected.
\2\ NOEL = No Observed Effect Level.
\3\ NOAEL = No Observed Adverse Effect Level.
Based on our review of the studies summarized in table 1, we
determined the most appropriate study for establishing an ADI for
advantame was the combined 104-week rat carcinogenicity study with in
utero and chronic (52-week) phases. This study was of sufficient length
and overall complexity to produce information on chronic exposure,
potential toxicity, and potential carcinogenicity of advantame.
Therefore, the data from the 1-year chronic phase of this study was
chosen to determine the ADI. The primary reasons for selecting it were
its length (52-weeks) and the inclusion of a 6-week recovery phase
(control, 10,000 ppm, and 50,000 ppm dose groups), the total number of
animals in each dose group (20 animals of each sex per group for the
chronic phase with 10 additional animals of each sex for groups in the
recovery phase), and the high overall animal survival rate. In
addition, the results from the 2-year phase showed no indication that
advantame is carcinogenic.
[[Page 29084]]
Based on the NOAEL for the 1-year chronic toxicity study, we
concluded that the appropriate ADI for advantame is 1,970 mg/p/d (Ref.
4). This level is significantly higher than the EDI for advantame of 10
mg/p/d for humans of all ages at the 90th percentile.
III. Comments
We received two comments in response to the advantame food additive
petition. One comment merely expressed support for the petitioned use
of advantame, providing that safety is shown and the substance is
properly declared when used as an ingredient in food. The other comment
stated that they did not object to the petition, but rather to the use
of advantame as a flavoring substance in food prior to a premarket
approval for use as a sweetener and flavor enhancer without declaring
advantame as an ingredient on the food label. Because this comment is
not relevant to the safety of advantame, it has no bearing on our
evaluation of the advantame petition.
IV. Conclusion
We have evaluated the data and other information submitted by the
petitioner in support of the safe use of advantame as a general-purpose
sweetener and flavor enhancer in food and conclude that there is a
reasonable certainty that the substance is not harmful under the
petitioned conditions of use. Therefore, we conclude that the food
additive regulations should be amended as set forth in this document.
V. Public Disclosure
In accordance with Sec. 171.1(h) (21 CFR 171.1(h)), the petition
and the documents that we considered and relied upon in reaching our
decision to approve the petition will be made available for public
disclosure (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). As provided in Sec.
171.1(h), we will delete from the documents any materials that are not
available for public disclosure.
VI. Environmental Impact
We have carefully considered the potential environmental effects of
this action and have concluded that it will not have a significant
impact on the human environment, and that an environmental impact
statement is not required. FDA's finding of no significant impact and
the evidence supporting that finding, contained in an environmental
assessment, may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
This final rule contains no collection of information. Therefore,
clearance by the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
VIII. Section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act
Our review of this petition was limited to section 409 of the FD&C
Act. This final rule is not a statement regarding compliance with other
sections of the FD&C Act. For example, the Food and Drug Administration
Amendments Act of 2007, which was signed into law on September 27,
2007, amended the FD&C Act to, among other things, add section 301(ll)
of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 331(ll)). Section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act
prohibits the introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate
commerce of any food that contains a drug approved under section 505 of
the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 355), a biological product licensed under
section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262), or a drug
or biological product for which substantial clinical investigations
have been instituted and their existence has been made public, unless
one of the exemptions in section 301(ll)(1) to (ll)(4) of the FD&C Act
applies. In our review of this petition, we did not consider whether
section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act or any of its exemptions apply to food
products containing this food additive. Accordingly, this final rule
should not be construed to be a statement that a product containing
this food additive, if introduced or delivered for introduction into
interstate commerce, would not violate section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act.
Furthermore, this language is included in all food additive final rules
that pertain to food and therefore should not be construed to be a
statement of the likelihood that section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act
applies.
IX. Objections
If you will be adversely affected by one or more provisions of this
regulation, you may file with the Division of Dockets Management (see
ADDRESSES) either electronic or written objections. You must separately
number each objection, and within each numbered objection you must
specify with particularity the provision(s) to which you object, and
the grounds for your objection. Within each numbered objection, you
must specifically state whether you are requesting a hearing on the
particular provision that you specify in that numbered objection. If
you do not request a hearing for any particular objection, you waive
the right to a hearing on that objection. If you request a hearing,
your objection must include a detailed description and analysis of the
specific factual information you intend to present in support of the
objection in the event that a hearing is held. If you do not include
such a description and analysis for any particular objection, you waive
the right to a hearing on the objection.
It is only necessary to send one set of documents. Identify
documents with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of
this document. Any objections received in response to the regulation
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at https://www.regulations.gov.
X. References
The following references have been placed on display in the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES) and may be seen by
interested persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday,
and are available electronically at https://www.regulations.gov.
1. Memorandum from H. Lee, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA
to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, July 28,
2009.
2. Memorandum from H. Lee, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA
to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, December 26,
2012.
3. Memorandum from H. Lee, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA
to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, November 24,
2009.
4. Memorandum from T. S. Thurmond, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN, FDA to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA,
May 14, 2013.
5. Memorandum from W. Roth, Division of Food Contact Notification,
CFSAN, FDA to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA,
January 22, 2013.
6. Memorandum from T. Walker, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN,
FDA to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, December
8, 2011.
7. Memorandum from S.K. Park, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN,
FDA to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, April
18, 2011.
8. Memorandum from S. Francke-Carroll and S. Mog, Senior Science and
Policy Staff, CFSAN, FDA to T.S. Thurmond, S.K. Park, and C.
Whiteside, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, March 17, 2011.
9. Memorandum from S. Francke-Carroll and S. Mog, Senior Science and
Policy Staff, CFSAN, FDA to C. Whiteside, T.S. Thurmond, and S.K.
Park, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, March 1, 2013.
10. Memorandum from C. Whiteside, Division of Petition Review,
CFSAN,
[[Page 29085]]
FDA to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, February
7, 2013.
11. Memorandum from A. Khan, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA
to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, June 22,
2010.
12. Memorandum from T. Walker, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN,
FDA to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, December
27, 2011.
13. Memorandum from I. Chen, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA
to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, May 24,
2010.
14. Memorandum from S. Francke-Carroll and S. Mog, Senior Science
and Policy Staff, CFSAN, FDA to C. Whiteside and A. Khan, Division
of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, March 17, 2011.
15. Memorandum from A. Khan, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA
to F. Ellison, Division of Petition Review, CFSAN, FDA, March 3,
2012.
16. CFSAN Cancer Assessment Committee Full Committee Review,
Carcinogenicity Evaluation of Advantame, April 27, 2012.
List of Subjects in 21 CFR Part 172
Food additives, Incorporation by reference, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Therefore, under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs, 21 CFR part
172 is amended as follows:
PART 172--FOOD ADDITIVES PERMITTED FOR DIRECT ADDITION TO FOOD FOR
HUMAN CONSUMPTION
0
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR part 172 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 341, 342, 348, 371, 379e.
0
2. Add Sec. 172.803 to subpart I to read as follows:
Sec. 172.803 Advantame.
(a) Advantame is the chemical N-[N-[3-(3-hydroxy-4-
methoxyphenyl)propyl]-[alpha]-aspartyl]-L-phenylalanine 1-methyl ester,
monohydrate (CAS Reg. No. 714229-20-6).
(b) Advantame meets the following specifications when it is tested
according to the methods described or referenced in the document
entitled ``Specifications and Analytical Methods for Advantame'' dated
April 1, 2009, by the Ajinomoto Co. Inc., Sweetener Department 15-1,
Kyobashi 1-chome, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-8315, Japan. The Director of the
Office of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference
in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies are
available from the Office of Food Additive Safety (HFS-200), Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, 5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College
Park, MD 20740. Copies may be examined at the Food and Drug
Administration's Main Library, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 2, Third
Floor, Silver Spring, MD 20993, 301-796-2039, or at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030 or go to:
https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
(1) Assay for advantame, not less than 97.0 percent and not more
than 102.0 percent on a dry basis.
(2) Free N-[N-[3-(3-hydroxy-4-methoxyphenyl)propyl]-[alpha]-
aspartyl]-L-phenylalanine, not more than 1.0 percent.
(3) Total other related substances, not more than 1.5 percent.
(4) Lead, not more than 1.0 milligram per kilogram.
(5) Water, not more than 5.0 percent.
(6) Residue on ignition, not more than 0.2 percent.
(7) Specific rotation, determined at 20 [deg]C
[[alpha]]D: -45.0 to -38.0[deg] calculated on a dry basis.
(c) The food additive advantame may be safely used as a sweetening
agent and flavor enhancer in foods generally, except in meat and
poultry, in accordance with current good manufacturing practice, in an
amount not to exceed that reasonably required to achieve the intended
technical effect, in foods for which standards of identity established
under section 401 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act do not
preclude such use.
(d) If the food containing the additive purports to be or is
represented to be for special dietary use, it must be labeled in
compliance with part 105 of this chapter.
Dated: May 15, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-11584 Filed 5-19-14; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P