Anzeige

Mycotoxins: analysis and human exposure

European co-manager at Platform for African – European Partnership in Agricultural Research for Development um Platform for African – European Partnership in Agricultural Research for Development
7. Sep 2014
Anzeige

Más contenido relacionado

Anzeige

Similar a Mycotoxins: analysis and human exposure(20)

Más de Francois Stepman(20)

Anzeige

Mycotoxins: analysis and human exposure

  1. Mycotoxins: analysis and human exposure Prof. Dr. Sarah De Saeger Laboratory of Food Analysis Ghent University, Belgium www.food2know.org www.mytox.be
  2. Outline 1.Introduction 2.Overview of analytical methods 1.Confirmatory analysis 2.Rapid screening tests 3.Human exposure to mycotoxins September 2014
  3. 1.Introduction 2.Overview of analytical methods 1.Confirmatory analysis 2.Rapid screening tests 3.Human exposure to mycotoxins September 2014
  4. Mycotoxigenic Fungi September 2014
  5. Mycotoxins = secondary fungal metabolites with toxic effects for humans and animals Field Storage Aspergillus √ √ Fusarium √ Penicillium √ Claviceps √ Alternaria √ √ September 2014
  6. More than 400 chemically diverse mycotoxins have been identified. Ergocornine Fumonisin B1 Aflatoxin B1 Deoxynivalenol September 2014 Zearalenone
  7. AFLATOXINS: Tropical climate (recently also found in Southern Europe) Pre- and/or post-harvest Carcinogen (group 1 IARC) - liver Aflatoxin B1 Correlation with human liver cancer! Acute toxicity B1, B2, G1, G2 in maize, pistachio, Brazil nuts, dried figs, spices … M1 in milk OCHRATOXIN A: Moderate climate (Penicillium) – Tropical (Aspergillus) Post-harvest (ex. grapes) Nephrotoxic Ochratoxin A Possible carcinogen (group 2B IARC) Associated to Balkan endemic nephropathy September 2014
  8. CITRININ: Aspergillus, Penicillium and Monascus Post-harvest Nephrotoxic, and weakly genotoxic but carcinogenicity has not been demonstrated; possible synergistic effect with ochratoxin A. Available occurrence data were not appropriate to carry out a dietary exposure assessment by EFSA. Stored grains, beans, fruits, fruit and vegetable juices, herbs and spices. It is also an undesirable contaminant in Monascus fermentation products (generally described as red mould rice), which are in use in Asia since many centuries for meat preservation and food colouring. 1 Citrinin September 2014
  9. TRICHOTHECENES (DON, T-2): Moderate/cold climate (also more data from Africa) Pre-harvest Deoxynivalenol Diarrhea, vomiting, immunotoxic, gastro-intestinal, … Pigs most sensitive Cereals, cereal products … FUMONISINS: Fumonisin B1 Worldwide Pre-harvest Possible carcinogen (groep 2B IARC) – esophagus Spina bifida (NTD)? Horses September (ELEM), 2014 pigs (PE) Maize, cornflakes, polenta …
  10. ZEARALENONE: Worldwide Pre-harvest Hyperestrogenism: pigs, sheep, poultry Maize, maize products … ERGOT ALKALOIDS: Worldwide Pre-harvest (rye, wheat) Ergotamine, ergocornine, ergosine, ergocryptine … Interaction with adrenergic, dopaminergic and serotinergic receptors. Ergotism; St Anthony’s fire (gangreen) September 2014
  11. ALTERNARIA TOXINS: Alternaria alternata Pre-harvest and during storage In lentils, oil seeds, tomatoes and products, juices, wine, cereals, carrots … Alternariol (AOH), alternariol methyl ether (AME), altenuene (ALT), tenuazonic acid (TeA), tentoxin (TEN) … Request from EFSA for monitoring food and feed. September 2014
  12. 1.Introduction 2.Overview of analytical methods 1.Confirmatory analysis 2.Rapid Screening tests 3.Human exposure to mycotoxins September 2014
  13. 82% of animal feed samples were contaminated with at least one mycotoxin 75% of the infected samples were contaminated with more than one mycotoxin = Co- contamination by multiple mycotoxins September 2014
  14. Levels of mycotoxins in food and feed Part per million (ppm) 1 mg/kg = 0.001 g in 1000 g Part per billion (ppb) 1 g/kg = 0.000001 g in 1000 g September 2014
  15. Mycotoxin analysis in food and feed - General scheme: 1. Sampling = selection of a representative sample of a given size from a bulk lot 2. Sample preparation = grinding + sub-sampling 3. Analysis a. Extraction of mycotoxins from the food/feed b. Clean-up of the extract c. Detection of mycotoxin in the purified extract The sampling step can be the largest source of error (depending on the food/feed matrix)!! September 2014
  16. Masked (MODIFIED) mycotoxins Rychlik et al, Mycotoxin Research, 2014 ‘Proposal of a comprehensive definition’ MYCOTOXINS MASKED MYCOTOXINS September 2014
  17. Quality Assurance 1. Method validation a. Commission Regulation 2006/401/EC b. Commission Decision 2002/657/EC (criteria for LC-MS/MS, but only for feed and animal products) 2. Proficiency Tests 3. Official CEN methods 4. Accreditation according to ISO 17025 September 2014
  18. Take home message: MYCOTOXIN ANALYSIS I. Chemical diversity II. Co-contamination III. Low concentration levels IV. Different analytical approaches – general analytical scheme V. Sampling can be the largest source of error VI. Masked mycotoxins VII. Quality Assurance September 2014
  19. Confirmatory analysis Confirmation? Confirmatory method means methods that provide full or complementary information enabling the substance to be unequivocally identified and if necessary quantified at the level of interest. Commission Decision 2002/657/EC. September 2014
  20. Multi-analyte LC-MS/MS Liquid Chromatography tandem mass spectrometry Advantages: Measuring more than 25 mycotoxins in one single run Identification, quantification and confirmation of analytes Possibility to find mycotoxins in matrices where they were never expected to be present or found before Sample extraction and clean-up can be kept very simple: ‘dilute and shoot’ and ‘evap and shoot’ UPLC provides faster sample troughput and reduced solvent consumption Towards multi-contaminant analysis September 2014
  21. Multi-analyte LC-MS/MS Pitfalls: Compromise between conflicting different chemical properties of the analytes (extraction – ionisation) Matrix effects (ion suppression – ion enhancement) In some (or many?) cases clean-up still remains required to reduce matrix effects and increase sensitivity Use of (isotope labelled) internal standards September 2014
  22. A typical total ion chromatogram of DON, T2, ZEN and metabolites (2 ng.μL-1) De Boevre et al. 2012 Food Additives and Contaminants 5 (29): 819-835 September 2014
  23. Untargeted high resolution MS Characteristics: Measurement of accurate masses Identification of unknowns • New masked mycotoxins were detected and many more will be Collection of full scan spectra with possibility to reprocess stored data (= retrospective data analysis) Qualitative and quantitative analysis September 2014
  24. Multiple stage CID on-line coupling LC with LTQ Ion Trap MS -C2H2O - H2O m/z 339 (4): have common fragments with asparasone A m/z 315 (3) & September 2014
  25. Rapid screening tests Screening? Screening methods are methods that are used to detect the presence of a substance or class of substances at the level of interest. These methods have the capability for a high sample throughput and are used to sift large numbers of samples for potential non-compliant results. They are specifically designed to avoid false compliant results. Commission Decision 2002/657/EC. September 2014
  26. Rapid? • Different meanings depending upon the perspective and expectations of the analyst and the context of the analytical environment. • Assays’ speed should include sample preparation, extraction, isolation of analyte! • To deal with an increasing number of sample matrices and analytes of interest. September 2014
  27. General scheme of mycotoxin determination some samples confirmatory method Legal limit many samples, rapid low-cost method September 2014
  28. Immunochemical screening tests Simple to use: Simple sample extraction; Minimum assay steps; Short assay time; No or minimum toxic solvents; On-site applicability. Simple to interpret results: 1. Non-instrumental (without any special laboratory equipment) – visual evaluations ‧Good contrast between positive and negative results; ‧Absence of background coloring. 2. Instrumental (simple, handheld, low cost equipment) September 2014
  29. dcELISA icELISA Signal 2 3 Signal 1 2 1 3 4 Specific anti-mycotoxin antibody Mycotoxin Mycotoxin-enzyme conjugate Mycotoxin-carrier protein conjugate Secondary antibody, labeled with enzyme Typical immunoassays Competitive ELISA principle. September 2014
  30. microtiterplate ELISA tube-based aflatoxin B1; total aflatoxins September 2014 corn, corn meal, corn gluten meal, popcorn, corn/soy blend, soybeans, milled rice, sorghum, wheat, cottonseed, peanuts, paprika, chilli aflatoxin M1 milk and milk products deoxynivalenol fumonisin B1; total fumonisins zearalenone T-2 toxin nuts, cereals and other commodities including animal feeds Microtiterplate ELISA ochratoxin A cereals, cocoa, coffee, wine Tube-based ELISA aflatoxin corn, cereals, feed, peanuts
  31. lateral flow Membrane tests flow-through Gel-based column tests flow-through Lateral flow aflatoxin B1; total aflatoxins September 2014 corn, corn meal, corn gluten meal, popcorn, corn/soy blend, soybeans, milled rice, sorghum, wheat aflatoxin M1 milk deoxynivalenol wheat, barley zearalenone corn, cereals, sorghum Flow-through aflatoxin B1; total aflatoxins cereals, soybeans, nuts, derived products ochratoxin A cereals, wine, green coffee zearalenone cereals and derived products
  32. Lateral Flow Immunoassay (LFD) or immunochromatographic assay Anti-mycotoxin antibodies, labeled with colloidal gold Mycotoxin Mycotoxin-carrier protein conjugate Secondary antibody Test line Sample pad Conjugate pad Absorbent pad Membrane Control line Flow September 2014
  33. Advantages of LFD: 1. One-step assay; 2. Use of colloidal gold as label without necessity of substrate application (contrary to enzymatic assays); 3. Simple dipsticks to more complex systems with plastic housing; 4. Commercially available for different mycotoxins including handheld readers; 5. Multi-toxin screening. September 2014
  34. Pitfalls for rapid screening tests: • Very different sample matrices (matrix interference!!); • Low detection limits are needed; • False positives/false negatives (cut-off level or ‘indicator range’??); • Limited quality control; • Cross-reactivity to other toxins; • Robustness of on-site test; • Necessity of matrix-matched calibrations? September 2014
  35. Commercially available diagnostic kits: www.gipsa.usda.gov www.aoac.org September 2014
  36. 1.Introduction 2.Overview of analytical methods 1.Confirmatory analysis 2.Rapid Screening tests 3.Human exposure to mycotoxins September 2014
  37. Biomarker analysis Case study Cameroon: Objectives § Biomonitoring of mycotoxin exposure in Cameroon toddlers (1.5 –5 years) through assessment of urinary mycotoxin biomarkers § Target analytes: 7 mycotoxins and their potential biomarkers (18 analytes) § Aflatoxins: AFB1, AFB1-N7 Guanine, AFM1 § Trichothecenes: DON, DOM, DON-3Glu, T-2, HT-2 § Zearalenone: ZEN, ZEN-14Glu, α-ZEL, β-ZEL § Fumonisins: FB1, HFB1 § Ochratoxins: OTA, OTα, 4-OH OTA §SeCptiterimnibner 2014
  38. Case study Cameroon: Study Design § Six villages (2 agro-ecological zones, western highland and humid forest with monomodal rainfall): selection based on a previous study § 220 toddlers: one child/household § First morning urine samples § Questionnaire (including 24h dietary recall) Four age groups: 1 - < 2 years; 2 - < 3 years; 3 - < 4 years; > 4 years < 5 years Three breastfeeding categories: wholly breastfed, partially breastfed, fully weaned Exclusion factors: kidney or metabolic disease Approved by Ethical Committee of Ghent University Hospital Approved by Ministry of Public Health in Cameroon September 2014
  39. Case study Cameroon: Analytical Procedures (Njumbe Ediage et al. Anal. Chim. Acta 2012) Organic phase Evaporate 40 °C + 200 μl H2O/MeOH/FAc (61,8/37,9/0,3) 15 min centrifuge (14000 x g) 20 μl lower layer LC-MS/MS 10 ml urine + 15 ml EtOAc/FAc (99/1) 30 min shaken + 10 min centrifuge (4000g) water phase + 0,4 M Na2CO3 (pH 6,5) dilute in MeOH (1/5) SPE SAX 10 ml MeOH/H2O (85/15) 10 ml MeOH Sample 1 ml H2O 5 ml MeOH/FAc (99/1) + 500 μl hexane September 2014
  40. Case study Cameroon: Results September 2014
  41. Case study Cameroon: Results § Limit of quantification: 0.02 – 7.3 ng/mL § 160/220 (73%) tested positive (Njumbe Ediage et al, Environment International, 2013) September 2014
  42. Case study Cameroon: Results § Significant differences in the mean concentration levels of OTA (p=0.01) and β-ZEL (p= 0.017) between the two agro-ecological zones. § Did not correlate with the food preferences of the different regions § Mean AFM1 concentrations were significantly different across the different weaning categories. There were no differences in the mean OTA (and other mycotoxins) concentrations and weaning categories. September 2014 § The mean concentration of the different mycotoxins was statistically the same across the different age groups (p> 0.05)
  43. Case study Belgium: Study Design September 2012 – January 2014 Approved by Ethical Committee of Ghent University Hospital Cluster sampling 100 children 300 adults 19 - 65 year 3 -12 year Flanders - Wallonia - Brussels Companies/schools Year variation 25 % adults Winter 2013-2014 Morning urine vs. 24h Additional research September 2014 Funding: Federal Public Service of Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment (RT11/02 BIOMYCO);
  44. Case study Belgium: Study Design Contact employee Informed Consent General questionnaire Recruitment strategy Check exclusion factors Give ID number Ad random recruitment Check representativeness Confirm participation 1 week before sampling General questionnaire Food Frequency Questionnaire Instructions Urine collection material 1 Sampling day day before sampling Exclusion factors Exposure to a large extent of mycotoxins in another way than food - Diseases interfering with metabolism of mycotoxins and creatinin - More than one family member is participating in the study September 2014
  45. Case study Belgium: Results (season 1) Amount of participants per city 1 2 3 5 September 2014
  46. b Thank you for listening! September 2014

Hinweis der Redaktion

  1. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  2. Therefore we decided to perform a detailed fragmentation study of the known compound to help us identify the unknowns by comparison. We did this fragmentation study on-line by coupling the LC with an LTQ Ion Trap MS system. This indicated that Asparasone shared common fragments with compounds (3) and (4); starting from the fragment shown here in red with m/z 297. Compound (1) showed the same neutral losses as for asparasone A; the corresponding fragments showing 16 Da differences, that were attributed to an additional Oxygen atom in compound (1). &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  3. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  4. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  5. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt; Very complete range of ELISA available on the market; in all possible forms
  6. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt; The availability of lateral flow/flow-through tests is enormously growing but not yet for all toxins. Some of them are not yet performing as they should be. Still improvements necessary.
  7. Design of a LFD can be simple (dipstick format) or can be more complex. If we look to literature, LFD is the major described rapid test. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  8. Why is LFD so poplular? &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  9. Why is LFD so poplular? &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  10. WH: western highland HFM: humid forest with monomodal rainfall &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  11. SAX SPE is voor de FUM &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  12. Seven of the 18 analytes were detected in one or more samples: OTA, DON, AFM1, FB1, ZEN, beta-ZOL, alpha-ZOL. The co-occurrence rate of 2, 3 and 4 co-occurring mycotoxins per sample was 35%, 5% and 5% respectively. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  13. Seven of the 18 analytes were detected in one or more samples: OTA, DON, AFM1, FB1, ZEN, beta-ZOL, alpha-ZOL. The co-occurrence rate of 2, 3 and 4 co-occurring mycotoxins per sample was 35%, 5% and 5% respectively. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  14. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  15. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  16. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  17. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
  18. &amp;lt;number&amp;gt;
Anzeige