Sucralose Non-Carcinogenicity: A Review of the Scientific and Regulatory Rationale

References

• National Institutes of Health; National Cancer Institute: Artificial Sweeteners and Cancer, 2009. Available at http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/diet/artificial-sweeteners-fact-sheet
   Google Scholar
• Mayo Clinic: Artificial Sweeteners and Other Sugar Substitutes, 2015. Available at http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/nutrition-and-healthy-eating/in-depth/artificial-sweeteners/art-20046936
   Google Scholar
• Medicine Net: Artificial Sweeteners, 2005. Available at http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=47816
   Google Scholar
• de Vries RBM, Wever KE, Avey MT, Stephens ML, Sena ES, et al.: The usefulness of systematic reviews of animal experiments for the design of preclinical and clinical studies. ILAR J 55(3), 427–437, 2014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams GM, Iatropoulos MJ, and Enzmann HG: Principles of Testing for Carcinogenic Activity. Principles and Methods of Toxicology. 5th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Environment Directorate: Joint meeting of the chemicals committee and the working party on chemicals, pesticides and biotechnology. Guidance Document on the Validation of (Quantitative)Structure-Activity Relationships [(Q)SAR] Models. OECD Environment Health Safey Publications Series on Testing and Assessment. No. 69. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources Added to Food: Guidance for submission for food additive evaluations. EFSA J 10, 2760–2819, 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Berry CL: Relativism, regulation and the dangers of indifferent science. The Sir Roy Cameron lecture of the Royal College of Pathologists. Toxicology 267, 7–13, 2010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US Department of Health and Human Services; Food and Drug Administration; Office of Food Additive Safety; Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition: Chapter II. Agency review of toxicology information in petitions for direct food additives and color additives used in food. Redbook 2000. (Updated July 2007) Guidance for Industry and Other Stakeholders. Toxicological Principles for the Safety Assessment of Food Ingredients. Silver Spring, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration, 2000, pp. 9–18.
   Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: OECD Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships Project [(Q)SARs]. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Paris, France, 2015. Available at http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/risk-assessment/oecdquantitativestructure-activityrelationshipsprojectqsars.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: OECD Chemical Safety and Biosafety. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals and Related Documents. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Paris, France, 2015. Available at http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/oecdguidelinesforthetestingofchemicalsandrelateddocuments.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Joint Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization Expert Committee on Food Additives: Seventy-Ninth Meeting. June 2014. JECFA/79/SC. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2014. Available at www.fao.org/fileadmin/templattes/agns/pdf/jecfa/JECFA_79_Summary_Version_Final.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Joint Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization: EHC 240: Food Safety. Project to Update the Principles and Methods for the Assessment of Chemicals in Food. Principles and Methods for the Risk Assessment of Chemicals in Food. World Health Organization, Monograph EHC 240. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Press, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Dorne JLCM and AG Renwick: The refinement of uncertainty/safety factors in risk assessment by the incorporation of data on toxicokinetic variability in humans. Toxicol Sci 86 (1), 20–26, 2005.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrman JL and Younes M: Background to the ADI/TDI/PTWI. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 30(2 Pt 2), S109–S113, 1999.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US Department of Health and Human Services; Food and Drug Administration; Office of Food Additive Safety; Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition: Chapter IV.C.4.a. Subchronic toxicity studies with rodents. Toxicological Principles for the Safety Assessment of Food Ingredients. Redbook 2000 (November 2003), Silver Spring, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration, 2003. Available at http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/IngredientsAdditivesGRASPackaging/ucm078345.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Redbook 2000: Chapter IV.B.1. General guidelines for designing and conducting toxicity studies. Toxicological Principles for the Safety Assessment of Food Ingredients. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD. Available at http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/IngredientsAdditivesGRASPackaging/ucm078315.htm
   Google Scholar
• OECD: Test No. 421: Reproduction/Developmental Toxicity Screening Test, OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4, Paris: OECD Publishing, 2015. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264242692-en. Available at http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/9715241e.pdf?expires=1453499610&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=F7F8F5FDBD5E9F59C0C74FEEC314714D
   Google Scholar
• Edler L, Hart A, Greaves P, Carthew P, Coulet M, et al.: Selection of appropriate tumour data sets for Benchmark Dose Modeling (BMD) and derivation of a Margin of Exposure (MoE) for substances that are genotoxic and carcinogenic considerations of biological relevance of tumour type, data quality and uncertainty. Food Chem Toxicol 70, 264–89, 2014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• US Department of Health and Human Services; Food and Drug Administration; Office of Regulatory Affairs: Guidance for Industry. Good Laboratory Practices Questions and Answers. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration, 2007. Available at www.fda.gov.downloads/ICECI/EnforcementActions/BioresearchMonitoring/UCM133748.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• US Department of Health and Human Services; Food and Drug Administration: Code of Federal Regulations Title 21 Part 58. Good Laboratory Practice for Nonclinical Laboratory Studies. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration, 2015. Available at www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRsearch/cfm?CRFPart=58.
   Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: Good Laboratory Practice (GLP). Chemical safety and biosafety. Testing of chemicals. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2015. Available at www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/goodlaboratorypracticeglp.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency: Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) for Safety Tests on Chemicals. Medicines, Medical Devices and Blood Regulation and Safety—Guidance. London UK: Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, 2014. Available at www.gov.uk/good-laboratory-practice-glp-for-safety-tests-on-chemicals.
   Google Scholar
• Keenan C, Elmore S, Francke-Carroll S, Kemp R, Kerlin R, et al.: Best practices for use of historical control data of proliferative rodent lesions. Toxicol Pathol 37(5), 679–93, 2009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes AW, Dayan AD, Hall WC, Kodell RL, Williams GM, et al.: A review of mammalian carcinogenicity study design and potential effects of alternate test procedures on the safety evaluation of food ingredients. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 60(1Suppl), S1–S34, 2011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmes AM, Creton S, and Chapman K: Working in partnership to advance the 3Rs in toxicity testing. Toxicology 267, 14–19, 2010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EFSA Scientific Committee (Scientific Committee). Existing approaches incorporating replacement, reduction and refinement of animal testing: applicability in food and feed risk assessment. EFSA J, 7, 1–77, 2009. Available at http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/1052.htm. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1052
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nature: Consensus on reporting principles aims to improve quality control in biomedical research and encourage public trust in science. Nature 515, 7, 2014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams GM, Iatropoulos MJ, and Enzmann HG: Principles of Testing for Carcinogenic Activity. Principles and Methods of Toxicology. 5th ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• International Programme on Chemical Safety: Environmental Health Criteria 70. Principles for the Safety Assessment of Food Additives and Contaminants in Food. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Orgnization, 1987. Available at www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ejc70.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Ashby J and Paton D: The influence of chemical structure on the extent and sites of carcinogenesis for 522 rodent carcinogens and 55 difference human carcinogen exposures. Mutat Res 286, 3–74, 1993.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benigni R and Bossa C: Structure alerts for carcinogenicity and the Salmonella assay system: a novel insight through the chemical relational databases technology. Mutat Res 659, 248–261, 2008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Broustas CG and Lieberman HB: DNA damage response genes and the development of cancer metastasis. Radiation Res 181, 111–130, 2014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weisburger JH and Williams GM: Profiles in toxicology. the distinction between genotoxic and epigenetic carcinogens and implication for cancer risk. Toxicol Sci 57, 4–5, 2004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams GM and Whysner J: Epigenetic carcinogens: evaluation and risk assessment. Exp Toxicol Pathol 48, 189–195, 1996.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IARC: Saccharin and its salts. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenesis Risks to Humans. Lyon, France: IARC, 1999; vol. 73, pp. 517–624.
   Google Scholar
• US Department of Health and Human Services; Food and Drug Administration; Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition: Chapter IV. Guidelines for toxicity studies. Redbook 2000 (Updated July 2007). Guidance for Industry and Other Stakeholders. Toxicological Principles for the Safety Assessment of Food Ingredients. Silver Spring, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration, 2000. Available at http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/GuidanceRegulation/UCM222779.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen SM: Evaluation of possible carcinogenic risk to humans based on liver tumors in rodent assays: The two-year bioassay is no longer necessary. Toxicol Pathol 38, 487, 2010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen SM: Human carcinogenic risk evaluation: an alternative approach to the two-year rodent bioassay. Toxicol Sci 80, 225–229, 2004.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wood CE, Hukkanen RR, Sura R, Jacobson-Kram D, Nolte T, et al.: Scientific and regulatory policy committee (SRPC) review: interpretation and use of cell proliferation data in cancer risk assessment. Toxicol Pathol 43, 760–775, 2015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: OECD Guidance Document for the Performance of Chronic Toxicity and Carcinogenicity Studies, Supporting TG 451, 452, and 453. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2008. Available at http://www.oecd.org/chemicalsafety/testing/41829966.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• National Center for Biotechnology Information: PubChem Compound Database; CID = 71485. Sucralose. Bethesda, MD: U.S. National Library of Medicine. Available at http://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Sucralose#section=Top. Accessed June 19, 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Parker KJ: The Potential Interaction of Sucralose with Food Components. Report prepared for Dr WM Nicol, Divisional Director, Speciality Sweeteners. Reading, UK: Tate & Lyle Plc, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Benigni R, Bossa C, Battistelli CL, and Tcheremenskaia O: IARC Classes 1 and 2 carcinogens are successfully identified by an alternative strategy that detects DNA-reactivity and cell transformation ability of chemicals. Mutat Res 758, 58–61, 2013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grice HC and Goldsmith LA: Sucralose—an overview of the toxicity data. Food Chem Toxicol 38(Suppl 2), S1–S6, 2000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• John BA, Wood G, and Hawkins DR: The pharmacokinetics and metabolism of sucralose in the mouse. Food Chem Toxicol 38 (Suppl 2), S107–S110, 2000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts A, Renwick AG, Sims J, and Snodin DJ: Sucralose metabolism and pharmacokinetics in man. Food Chem Toxicol 38 (Suppl 2), S31–S41, 2000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sims J, Roberts A, Daniel JW, and Renwick AG: The metabolic fate of sucralose in rats. Food Chem Toxicol 38(Suppl 2), S115–S121, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• Wood SG, John BA, and Hawkins DR: The pharmacokinetics and metabolism of sucralose in the dog. Food Chem Toxicol 38(Suppl 2), S99–S106, 2000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nabors LO (ed.): Chapter 11. Sucralose. Alternative Sweeteners, 3rd ed. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission; Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General: Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on sucralose. Sucralose—SCF/CS/EDUL/190Final, 19/9/2000. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission; Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General, 2000. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sc/scf/out68_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• US Department of Health and Human Services; Food and Drug Administration: Food Additives Permitted for Direct Addition to Food for Human Consumption; Sucralose. Final rule. Docket No 87F-0086. Federal Register, 1998; vol. 63 (64), pp. 16417–16433.
   Google Scholar
• US Department of Health and Human Services; Food and Drug Administration: Food Additives Permitted for Direct Addition to Food for Human Consumption; Sucralose. Final Rule. Federal Register, 1999; vol. 64 (155), pp. 43908–43909.
   Google Scholar
• Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization; Expert Committee on Food Additives: Evaluation of Certain Food Additives and Contaminants. Thirty-fourth Report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. World Health Organization Technical Report Series, No 776. Geneva, Switzerland : WHO Press, 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization; Expert Committee on Food Additives: Evaluation of Certain Food Additives and Contaminants. Forty-ninth Report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. WHO Technical Report Series, No 884. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Press, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Health Organization; Expert Committee on Food Additives: Evaluation of Certain Food Additives and Contaminants. Thirty-seventh Report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. WHO Technical Report Series, No 806. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO Press, 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Beyts P. Interaction of TGS with Food Components—Model System Study. Reading, UK: Tate & Lyle, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• National Food Laboratory: Stability of Sucralose in Heat Processed Foods (a feasibility study). Dublin, CA: National Food Laboratory, Inc, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Barndt RL and Jackson G: Stability of sucralose in baked goods. Food Technol 44(1), 62–66, 1990.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hutchinson SA, Ho GS, and Ho C-T: Stability and degredation of the high intensity sweeteners: Aspartame, alitame, and sucralose. Food Rev Int 15, 249–261, 1999.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bannach G, Almeida RR, Lacerda L, Schnitzler E, and Ionashiro M: Thermal stabiliyt and thermal decomposition of sucralose. Edetica Qumia 34, 21–26, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Rahn A and Yaylayan VA: Thermal degredation of sucralose and its potential in generating chloropropanols in the presence of glycerol. Food Chem 118, 56–61, 2010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grotz VL and Brusick D: Response to the Letter to the Editor by S Schiffman and M Abou-Donia: Additional evidence to clarify the evidence of sucralose safety. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 63, 509–513, 2012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brusick D, Grotz VL, Slesinski R, Kruger CL, and Hayes AW: The absence of genotoxocity of sucralose. Food Chem Toxicol 48, 3067–3072, 2010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bootman J and Lodge DC: 1,6-Dichloro-1,6-Dideoxyfructose: Assessment of Its Mutagenic Potential in Histidine Auxotrophs of Salmonella typhimurium. Essex, UK: Life Science Research, Ltd. to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1980.
   Google Scholar
• Haworth SR, Lawlor TE, Smith TK, Williams NA, Simmons RT, et al.: Salmonella/Mammalian-Microsome Plate Incorporation Mutagenesis Assay (1,6-dichlorofructose). New Brunswick, NJ: EG & G Mason Research Institute to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Bootman J and Lodge DC: 4-Chloro-4-Deoxy-D-Galactose: Assessment of Its Mutagenic Potential in Histidine Auxotrophs of Salmonella typhimurium. Essex, UK: Life Science Research, Ltd. to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1980.
   Google Scholar
• Bootman J and May K: The Detection of Mutagenic Activity by Increased Reversion of Histidine Auxotrophs of Salmonella typhimurium. Essex, UK: Life Science Research, Ltd. to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Kirby PE, Pizzarello RF, Brauninger RM, Vega RA, and Reichard GL: Evaluation of Test Article 1,6-Dichlorofructose (MRI No. 536) for Mutagenic Potential Employing the L5178Y TK+/− Mutagenesis Assay. Rockville, MD: EG & G Mason Research Institute. Submitted to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Kirby PE, Pizzarello RF, Cohen A, Williams PE, Reichard GL, et al.: Evaluation of Test Article 1,6-Dichlorofructose (MR1 No. 629) for Mutagenic Potential Employing the L5178Y TK+/− Mutagenesis Assay. Rockville, MD: EG & G Mason Research Institute. Submitted to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Jeffrey AM and Williams GM: Lack of DNA-damaging activity of five non-nutritive sweeteners in the rat hepatocyte/DNA repair assay. Food Chem Toxicol 38(4), 335–338, 2000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Molecular Toxicology (Microtest): Study to Evaluate the Potential of 1,6-Dichlorofructose to Induce Unscheduled DNA Synthesis in Isolated Rat Hepatocytes In Vitro. Hazleton Europe Study Number 178/2. Reading, UK: Tate & Lyle Speciality Sweeteners, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Kirby PE, Pizzarello RF, Williams PE, Reichard GL, Wattam RE, et al.: Evaluation of Test Article 4-Chlorogalactose (MRI No. 628) for Mutagenic Potential Employing the L5178Y TK+/− Mutagenesis Assay. Rockville, MD: EG & G Mason Research Institute. Submitted to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• van Eyk AD: The effect of five artificial sweeteners on Caco-2, HT-29, and HEK-293 cells. Drug Chem Toxicol 38(3), 318–327. doi: 10.3109/01480545.2014.966381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sasaki YF, Kawaguchi S, Kamaya A, Ohshita M, Kabasawa K, et al.: The comet assay with 8 mouse organs: results with 39 currently used food additives. Mutat Res 519, 103–119, 2002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bootman J and Whalley HE: Dominant Lethal Study in the Mouse After Subacute Treatment With an Equimolar Mixture of the Hydrolysis Products Derived From 1,6-Dichloro-1,6-Dideoxy-β-D-Fructofuranosyl-4-Chloro-4-Deoxy-Alpha-D-Galactopyranoside (TGS). Essex, UK: Life Science Research, Ltd. to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1983.
   Google Scholar
• Ivett JL: 6-Dichloro-1,6-Dideoxyfructose: In Vivo Micronucleus Assay in the Mouse. Rockville, MD: Hazleton Laboratories America, Inc. to the World Health Organisation by Tate & Lyle, 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Ivett JL: 6-Dichloro-1,6-Dideoxyfructose: Single Exposure Dose Selection Study for the In Vivo Micronucleus Assay in the Mouse. Rockville, MD: Hazleton Laboratories America, Inc. to the World Health Organisation by Tate & Lyle, 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Bootman J and Rees R: In Vitro Assessment of the Clastogenic Activity of 1,6-DCF, 4-CG, and TGS in Cultured Human Peripheral Lymphocytes. Essex, UK: Life Science Research, Ltd. to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Cimino MC and Lebowitz H: Mutagenicity Evaluation of 4-Chloro-Galactose (4-CG), Batch P3/102/15, in the Rat Bone Marrow Cytogenetic Assay. Kensington, MD: Litton Bionetics Inc. to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Ivett JL: 6-Dichloro-1,6-Dideoxyfructose: In Vivo Sister Chromatid Exchange Micronucleus Assay in the Mouse. Rockville, MD: Hazleton Laboratories America, Inc. to the World Health Organisation by Tate & Lyle, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• Dauterman WC: Chapter 5: Metabolism of toxicants: Phase II Reactions. Introduction to Biochemical Toxicology, 2nd ed. Levi PE and Hodgson E (eds.). Norwalk, CT: Appleton & Lange, 1994.
   Google Scholar
• Timbrell JA: Chapter 5. Biotransformation of xenobiotics. General and Applied Toxicology, 2nd ed., Marrs TC, Syversen T, and Ballantyne B (eds.). New York: Grove's Dictionaries Inc, 1999; vol. 1.
   Google Scholar
• Parkinson A: Chapter 6: Biotransformation of xenobiotics. Unit Two. Disposition of toxicants. Casarett and Doull's Toxicology: The Basic Science of Poisons. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Companies, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Kemper RA, Hayes JR, and Bogdanffy MS: Chapter 3. A determinant of toxicity. Principles and Methods of Toxicology, 5th ed., Hayes AW (ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Grotz VL and Munro IC: An overview of the safety of sucralose. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 55, 1–5, 2009.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLean Baird I, Shephard NW, Merritt RJ, and Hildick-Smith G: Repeated dose study of sucralose tolerance in human subjects. Food Chem Toxicol 38(Suppl 2), S123–S129, 2000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldsmith LA: Acute and subchronic toxicity of sucralose. Food Chem Toxicol 38(Suppl2), S53–S69, 2000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flamm WG, Blackburn GL, Comer CP, Mayhew DA, and Stargel WW: Long-term food consumption and body weight changes in neotame safety studies are consistent with the allometric relationship observed for other sweeteners and during dietary restrictions. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 38, 144–156, 2003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perry CJ, Hudson P, and Finn JP: Sucralose: Special Investigation in the Rat of the Effect of Administration by Oral Gavage on Body Weight and Selected Organs. Musselburgh, Scotland: Inveresk Research International to the World Health Organization by Tate & Lyle, 1988.
   Google Scholar
• Konno A, Utsuyama M, Kurashima C, Kasai M, Kimura S, et al.: Effects of a protein-free diet or food restriction on the immune system of Wistar and Buffalo rats at different ages. Mech Ageing Dev 72(3), 183–197, 1993.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savino W1, Dardenne M, Velloso LA, and Dayse Silva-Barbosa S: The thymus is a common target in malnutrition and infection. Br J Nutr 98 (Suppl 1), S11–S16, 2007.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duggan C, Watkins JB, and Walker WA: Nutrition in Pediatrics: Basic Science, Clinical Applications. Hamilton, ON: BC Decker, 2008. 4th ed. Available at https://books.google.com/books?id=wSTISCdSIosC&pg=PA264&lpg=PA264&dq=premature+thymic+involution+nutrition&source=bl&ots=K_9wIZBkcy&sig=4cS1iCCl2I5v9mWGfO5_qPyF8SM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjf_a_4hrfKAhWKbD4KHWafCpwQ6AEIQjAE#v=onepage&q=premature%20thymic%20involution%20nutrition&f=false (page 264)
   Google Scholar
• Mann SW, Yuschak MM, Amyes SJG, Aughton P, and Finn JP: A combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity study of sucralose in Sprague Dawley Rats. Food Chem Toxicol 38 (Suppl 2), S71–S89, 2000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mann SW, Yuschak MM, Amyes SJG, Aughton P, and Finn JP: A carcinogenicity study of sucralose in the CD-1 mouse. Food Chem Toxicol 38(Suppl 2), S91–S98, 2000.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sistare FD, Morton D, Alden C, Christensen J, Keller D, et al.: An analysis of pharmaceutical experience with decades of rat carcinogenicity testing: support for a proposal to modify current regulatory guidelines. Toxicol Pathol 39(4), 716–744, 2011. doi: 10.1177/0192623311406935.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCollough ML, Teras LR, Shah R, Diver WR, Gaudet MM, et al.: Artificially and sugar-sweetened carbonated beverage consumption is not associated with risk of lymphoid neoplasms in older men and women. J Nutr 144, 2014–2019, 2014.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schernhammer ES, Bertrand KA, Birmann BM, Sampson L, Willett WC, et al.: Consumption of artificial sweetener- and sugar-containing soda and risk of lymphoma and leukemia in men and women. Am J Clin Nutr 96, 1419–1428, 2012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soffritti M, Padovani M, Tibaldi E, Falcioni L, Manservisi F, et al.: Sucralose administered in feed, beginning prenatally through lifespan, incudes hematopoietic neoplasias in male swiss mice. Int J Occup Env Health, 22, 7–17, 2016. Available at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10773525.2015.1106075)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soffritti M, Belpoggi F, Manservigi M, Tibaldi E, Lauriola M, et al.: Aspartame administered in feed, beginning prenatally through life span, induces cancers of the liver and lung in male Swiss mice. Am J Ind Med 53(12), 1197–1206, 2010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soffritti M, Belpoggi F, Degli Esposti D, Lambertini L, Tibaldi E, et al.: First experimental demonstration of the multipotential carcinogenic effects of aspartame administered in the feed to Sprague-Dawley rats. Environ Health Perspect 114(3), 379–385, 2006.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Food Safety Authority (EFSA): Statement of EFSA on the scientific evaluation of two studies related to the safety of artificial sweeteners. EFSA J 9(2), 2089, 2011.
   Google Scholar
• National Toxicology Program (NTP): Summary Report of the National Toxicology Program and Environmental Protection Agency-Sponsored Review of Pathology Materials from Selected Ramazzini Institute Rodent Cancer Bioassays. Research Triangle Park, NC: NTP. 2011. Available at: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/partnerships/international/summarypwg_report_ri_bioassays.pdf
   Google Scholar
• European Food Safety Authority (EFSA): Scientific opinion on the re-evaluation of aspartame (E 951) as a food additive. EFSA J 11(12), 3496, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Canada Gazette: Food and drug regulations, amendment [sucralose] (SOR/91/527). Can Gaz Part II 125 (20), 3125–3130, 1991.
   Google Scholar
• JMHW (Japanese Ministry of and Welfare), Approval of New High-Intensity Sweetener: Sucralose: Revision of the Enforcement Regulations under the Food Sanitation Law and of the Standards and specifications for Food and Food Additives, etc. (published in Official Gazette, No 2678, July 30, 1999). Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare Ordinance No 75 (Ministerial Ordinance to Revise Part of the Enforcement Regulations Under the Food Sanitation Law) and Ministry of Health and Welfare Announcement No 167 [Translation]. 1999. Available at http://www.ffcr.or.jp/saidan/FFCRHOME.nsf/pages/e-kousei-sucra2.
   Google Scholar
• SCF (Scientific Committee on Food): Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on Sucralose (adopted by the SCF on 7 September 2000). European commission health & consumer protection directorate-general directorate C-scientific opinions C3—management of scientific committees II; scientific cooperation and networks. Scientific Committee on Food (SCF/CS/ADDS/EDUL/190 Final 12/9/2000]. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/food/fs/sHealthc/scf/out68_en.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• EU (European Union): Directive 2003/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 December 2003 amending Directive 94/35/EC on sweeteners for use in foodstuffs. Off J Eur Union 47 (L24), 65–71, 2004.
   Google Scholar
• FSANZ (Food Standards of Australia and New Zealand): Chapter 1: General food standards. Standard 1.3.1: Food additives. Schedule 1, in: Food Standards Code, October 16, 2008. Food Standards Australia New Zealand, Kingston ACT, Australia. Available at http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/Standard_1_3_1_Additives_Part_2_v98.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Grotz VL, Henry RR, McGill JB, Prince MJ, Shamoon H, et al.: Lack of effect of sucralose on glucose homeostasis in subjects with type 2 diabetes. J Am Diet Assoc 103, 1607–1612, 2003.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar