Cited by 10Contact Dermatitis and AllergiesPhytochemistry Medicinal Plant ApplicationsAgricultural safety and regulations

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Safety assessment of Cnidium officinale rhizome extract in cosmetics using the Threshold of Toxicological Concern (TTC) approach

Jeon, Soha, Lee, Eun-Young, Hillman, Prima F., Nam, Sang-Jip, Lim, Kyung-Min·2023·Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

Abstract

Cosmetics often contain botanical extracts, which present a challenge for safety assessors due to their complex composition. The threshold of toxicological concern (TTC) approach is considered as a solution for the safety assessment of botanical extracts in cosmetics as part of next-generation risk assessment. In this study, we applied the TTC approach to evaluate the safety of Cnidium officinale rhizome extract (CORE), a widely used botanical extract in skin conditioning products. We identified 32 components of CORE through the USDA database and literature and determined the content of each component through literature or actual analysis where an authentic standard was available. Macro- and micronutrients were also analyzed to exclude them as safe components. The Toxtree® software was used to identify the Cramer class of remaining components. We estimated the systemic exposure of each component from leave-on type cosmetic products containing CORE at a 1% concentration and compared the results to TTC thresholds. All components of CORE had a systemic exposure below the TTC threshold. While batch variations and presence of unknown chemicals in individual CORE materials should be considered, this study demonstrated that the TTC approach can be a useful tool for the safety assessment of botanical extracts in cosmetics.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.yrtph.2023.105433

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 20 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. 2022, Food additives code, Minist. Food Drug Saf.
  2. 2022, INCI decoder, Prod.Cnid. Offic.Root Extr., 2022
  3. Patel, 2020, Bolstering the existing database supporting the non-cancer Threshold of Toxicological Concern values with toxicity data on fragrance-related materials, Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 116, 10.1016/j.yrtph.2020.104718 · DOI
  4. 2021, SCCS (scientific committee on consumer safety), SCCS Note.Guid.Test.Cosmet. Ingred. Saf.Evaluat. 11th Rev., 30

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Jeon, S., Lee, E.-Y., Hillman, P. F., Nam, S.-J., & Lim, K.-M.
Affiliations
Ewha Womans University (KR)
Corresponding author
  • Nam, Sang-Jip
  • Lim, Kyung-Min
Venue
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2023-08
Volume
142
Pages
105433
ISSN
0273-2300 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4380151583
Cited by
9
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1
FWCI
2.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Research Foundation of Korea (2021R1A2C2013347)
  • Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning (2018R1A5A2025286)
  • Ministry of Health and Welfare
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Contact Dermatitis and Allergies
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Phytochemistry Medicinal Plant Applications
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
Keywords
threshold of toxicological concern, plant extracts, cosmetic safety assessment, systemic exposure, Toxtree, next generation risk assessment, batch-to-batch variation
MeSH terms
Cosmetics, Software, Risk Assessment, No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level, Rhizome, Cnidium

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review