Clinical Pharmacist and Master’s student in Clinical Pharmacy with research interests in pharmacovigilance, behavioral interventions in mental health, and AI applications in clinical decision support. Experience includes digital health research with Bloomsbury Health (London) and pharmacovigilance practice in patient support programs. Published work covers drug awareness among healthcare providers, postpartum depression management, and patient safety reporting. 
Clinical Pharmacist and Master’s student in Clinical Pharmacy with research interests in pharmacovigilance, behavioral interventions in mental health, and AI applications in clinical decision support. Experience includes digital health research with Bloomsbury Health (London) and pharmacovigilance practice in patient support programs. Published work covers drug awareness among healthcare providers, postpartum depression management, and patient safety reporting. What was reviewed
This paper reviewed global evidence on heavy metal compliance alongside pesticides and mycotoxins in apples and apple-derived foods, using EFSA maximum residue limits (MRLs) as the benchmark. Through systematic searches of PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase, the authors built a harmonized database of concentrations and/or MRL exceedances reported since 1996, then meta-analyzed noncompliance patterns by world region, climate (Köppen classes), and 2024 Human Development Index. The heavy-metal component is especially relevant to HMTC because EFSA MRL coverage is narrow (primarily arsenic, cadmium, lead) and often does not extend cleanly across apple derivatives, creating blind spots where products can be “tested” yet not truly “certifiable” against a consistent regulatory target.
Who was reviewed
The review synthesized results from 90 eligible publications where EFSA compliance could be assessed, spanning raw apples and multiple apple products (including juices, purées/sauces, jams, concentrates, vinegars/ciders, and infant/young-child foods when apples were the main ingredient). For heavy metals specifically, 35 selected studies from 21 countries reported 14 metals measured in apple matrices; however, EFSA compliance checks effectively centered on arsenic, cadmium, and lead because those are the metals with defined EFSA MRLs for apples and certain apple foods. The underlying samples reflected both industrial and small-scale production contexts, and the evidence base was geographically uneven, with reported noncompliance clustering in particular countries and regions rather than being uniformly distributed.
Most important findings
Across xenobiotic categories, the headline result is a high global noncompliance rate, with heavy metals contributing a substantial share and revealing important regulatory gaps for apple derivatives. For HMTC, the key takeaway is that “passing” depends heavily on which metals are regulated for which apple product types; this can mask meaningful contamination risk unless certification expands targets, matrices, and decision rules.
| Critical point | Details |
|---|---|
| High overall exceedance in apples and derivatives | Among 90 assessed articles, 42.8% of EFSA MRL checks exceeded limits overall; by category, pesticides were highest, while heavy metals still showed a large exceedance frequency. |
| Heavy-metal noncompliance is common and lead-driven | Heavy metals showed ~42.55% exceedance frequency; 25 analyses exceeded EFSA MRLs, including 18 reports for lead, 12 for cadmium, and 1 for arsenic (counts overlap because some studies reported multiple metals). |
| EFSA heavy-metal MRL coverage is narrow and incomplete across derivatives | EFSA MRLs in apples/apple foods were described as defined mainly for arsenic, cadmium, and lead, with product-specific thresholds (e.g., lead differs for raw apples vs juice vs newborn foods), and with important gaps for many apple-derived products. |
| Regulatory blind spots can hide extreme contamination | The review highlights that some derivatives may show very high metal levels that are difficult to benchmark under EFSA rules; an example cited is apple vinegar reported with >50 mg/kg arsenic—roughly 2500× the 0.02 mg/kg level used for apple juice/newborn apple foods—illustrating why matrix-specific certification thresholds matter. |
| Geography and development context shape compliance risk | Noncompliance varied by world region; for heavy metals, Europe and Africa were noted as more affected, while samples from North and South America were described as compliant in the EFSA-based checks reported. The authors also report heterogeneity patterns tied to climate category and HDI, implying that sourcing context should influence monitoring intensity. |
Key implications
For heavy metal compliance programs like HMTC, the primary regulatory impact is that EFSA-style limits are useful but incomplete for many apple derivatives, so certification should define metal–matrix pairs beyond arsenic, cadmium, and lead and require product-specific decision thresholds that prevent “regulatory void” pass-through. Industry application should prioritize risk-based sourcing and lot-level verification for high-signal regions and for products where metals can concentrate (e.g., concentrates, vinegars). Research gaps include inconsistent reporting of sample counts and derivative coverage, limiting enforceable comparability. Practical recommendations are to standardize testing panels, mandate transparent MRL mapping by product type, and incorporate soil/water risk screening into supplier qualification.
Citation
Noel A, Guéant-Rodriguez R-M, Cachard O, et al. (2025). Asystematic review/meta-analysis of xenobiotics in apple products highlights lack of compliance with European Food Safety Authority Regulation. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, 24, e70153. doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.70153
