Abstract
According to European regulations, migration from food packaging must be safe. However, currently, there is no consensus on how to evaluate its safety, especially for non-intentionally added substances (NIAS). The intensive and laborious approach, involving identification and then quantification of all migrating substances followed by a toxicological evaluation, is not practical or feasible. In alignment with the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) and the European Union (EU) guidelines on packaging materials, efforts are focused on combining data from analytics, bioassays and in silico toxicology approaches for the risk assessment of packaging materials. Advancement of non-targeted screening approaches using both analytical methods and in vitro bioassays is key. A protocol was developed for the chemical and biological screening of migrants from coated metal packaging materials. This protocol includes guidance on sample preparation, migrant simulation, chemical analysis using liquid chromatography (LC-MS) and validated bioassays covering endocrine activity, genotoxicity and metabolism-related targets. An inter-laboratory study was set-up to evaluate the consistency in biological activity and analytical results generated between three independent laboratories applying the developed protocol and guidance. Coated packaging metal panels were used in this case study. In general, the inter-laboratory chemical analysis and bioassay results displayed acceptable consistency between laboratories, but technical differences led to different data interpretations (e.g., cytotoxicity, cell passages, chemical analysis). The study observations with the greatest impact on the quality of the data and ultimately resulting in discrepancies in the results are given and suggestions for improvement of the protocol are made (e.g., sample preparation, chemical analysis approaches). Finally, there was agreement on the need for an aligned protocol to be utilized by qualified laboratories for chemical and biological analyses, following best practices and guidance for packaging safety assessment of intentionally added substances (IAS) and NIAS to avoid inconsistency in data and the final interpretation.