Peanut Can Be Used as a Reference Allergen for Hazard Characterization in Food Allergen Risk Management: A Rapid Evidence Assessment and Meta-Analysis.

Regional and national legislation mandates the disclosure of "priority" allergens when present as an ingredient in foods, but this does not extend to the unintended presence of allergens due to shared production facilities. This has resulted in a proliferation of precautionary allergen ("may contain") labels (PAL) that are frequently ignored by food-allergic consumers. Attempts have been made to improve allergen risk management to better inform the use of PAL, but a lack of consensus has led to variety of regulatory approaches and nonuniformity in the use of PAL by food businesses. One potential solution would be to establish internationally agreed "reference doses," below which no PAL would be needed. However, if reference doses are to be used to inform the need for PAL, then it is essential to characterize the hazard associated with these low-level exposures. For peanut, there are now published data relating to over 3000 double-blind, placebo-controlled challenges in allergic individuals, but a similar level of evidence is lacking for other priority allergens. We present the results of a rapid evidence assessment and meta-analysis for the risk of anaphylaxis to a low-level allergen exposure for priority allergens. On the basis of this analysis, we propose that peanut can and should be considered an exemplar allergen for the hazard characterization at a low-level allergen exposure.

Allergen risk assessment: Food intake levels of the general population represent those of food allergic patients.

Unintentional intake of allergens through food products poses a daily risk for allergic patients. Models estimating the risk of reactions mostly use intake data from general population surveys. Our study evaluates the comparability of food intake levels in the general population to those in the food allergic population. Data were collected by a 24-h recall method on 2 non-consecutive days in 38 cow's milk and/or hen's egg and 35 peanut and/or tree nut allergic adult patients. All products were assigned to food groups previously developed for allergen risk assessment. Food intake distributions from the allergic populations and a matched sample from the Dutch National Food Consumption Survey were compared, and risk assessments were performed. Food intake data was obtained for 92% of the food groups. Comparison of the intake showed no statistically significant differences between either of the two allergic populations and the general population. Consequently, only small variations in estimated risks were found, that would not result in different risk management decisions. In conclusion, food intake data from the general population can be used for food allergen risk assessment and will not lead to a relevant under- or overestimation of the risk for the food allergic population.

Development and evolution of risk assessment for food allergens.

The need to assess the risk from food allergens derives directly from the need to manage effectively this food safety hazard. Work spanning the last two decades dispelled the initial thinking that food allergens were so unique that the risk they posed was not amenable to established risk assessment approaches and methodologies. Food allergens possess some unique characteristics, which make a simple safety assessment approach based on the establishment of absolute population thresholds inadequate. Dose distribution modelling of MEDs permitted the quantification of the risk of reaction at the population level and has been readily integrated with consumption and contamination data through probabilistic risk assessment approaches to generate quantitative risk predictions. This paper discusses the strengths and limitations of this approach and identifies important data gaps, which affect the outcomes of these predictions. These include consumption patterns among allergic individuals, analytical techniques and their application, severity-dose relationships, and the impact of extraneous factors which alter an individual's physiology, such as infection or exercise. Nevertheless, application of these models has provided valuable insights, leading to further refinements and generating testable hypotheses. Their application to estimate the risk posed by the concurrent consumption of two potentially contaminated foods illustrates their power.

Assessment of allelic diversity in intron-containing Mal d 1 genes and their association to apple allergenicity.

BACKGROUND: Mal d 1 is a major apple allergen causing food allergic symptoms of the oral allergy syndrome (OAS) in birch-pollen sensitised patients. The Mal d 1 gene family is known to have at least 7 intron-containing and 11 intronless members that have been mapped in clusters on three linkage groups. In this study, the allelic diversity of the seven intron-containing Mal d 1 genes was assessed among a set of apple cultivars by sequencing or indirectly through pedigree genotyping. Protein variant constitutions were subsequently compared with Skin Prick Test (SPT) responses to study the association of deduced protein variants with allergenicity in a set of 14 cultivars. RESULTS: From the seven intron-containing Mal d 1 genes investigated, Mal d 1.01 and Mal d 1.02 were highly conserved, as nine out of ten cultivars coded for the same protein variant, while only one cultivar coded for a second variant. Mal d 1.04, Mal d 1.05 and Mal d 1.06 A, B and C were more variable, coding for three to six different protein variants. Comparison of Mal d 1 allelic composition between the high-allergenic cultivar Golden Delicious and the low-allergenic cultivars Santana and Priscilla, which are linked in pedigree, showed an association between the protein variants coded by the Mal d 1.04 and -1.06A genes (both located on linkage group 16) with allergenicity. This association was confirmed in 10 other cultivars. In addition, Mal d 1.06A allele dosage effects associated with the degree of allergenicity based on prick to prick testing. Conversely, no associations were observed for the protein variants coded by the Mal d 1.01 (on linkage group 13), -1.02, -1.06B, -1.06C genes (all on linkage group 16), nor by the Mal d 1.05 gene (on linkage group 6). CONCLUSION: Protein variant compositions of Mal d 1.04 and -1.06A and, in case of Mal d 1.06A, allele doses are associated with the differences in allergenicity among fourteen apple cultivars. This information indicates the involvement of qualitative as well as quantitative factors in allergenicity and warrants further research in the relative importance of quantitative and qualitative aspects of Mal d 1 gene expression on allergenicity. Results from this study have implications for medical diagnostics, immunotherapy, clinical research and breeding schemes for new hypo-allergenic cultivars.

In vivo assessment with prick-to-prick testing and double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge of allergenicity of apple cultivars.

BACKGROUND: Apple cultivars have been reported to differ in allergenicity on the basis of in vitro and skin prick tests with apple extracts. OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the efficacy of the prick-to-prick method in assessing differences in allergenicity of apple cultivars and to confirm differences by means of double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC). METHODS: Intra-assay and intracultivar variation of prick-to-prick test results were determined in 6 Dutch and 8 Spanish patients with apple allergy by using 5 apples of the cultivars Golden Delicious, Fuji, and Ecolette in duplicate. In addition, 21 cultivars were screened for allergenicity in 15 Dutch patients with birch pollen and apple allergy. Two selected cultivars (Golden Delicious and Santana) were tested with DBPCFCs. The influence of storage conditions on allergenicity was assessed in 5 cultivars. RESULTS: Intra-assay variation of skin prick testing was 3.9%, and intracultivar variation was 4.1%. A ranking of 21 cultivars was made on the basis of prick-to-prick tests in 9 patients. Apple cultivars were classified as of low, intermediate, and high allergenicity, with a significant difference between low and high allergenicity (P < .001). A significant difference in allergenicity determined between Golden Delicious and Santana cultivars (P < .05) was confirmed by means of DBPCFC. With 5 cultivars, controlled atmosphere (2.5% oxygen/1% carbon dioxide) was shown to reduce allergenicity (P < .001) by 15% compared with storage at 2 degrees C. CONCLUSIONS: Prick-to-prick testing with fresh apples is a reproducible method of assessing allergenicity. Apples can be classified as of low or high allergenicity for the majority of patients. This was confirmed by using DBPCFCs. Selection of cultivars and control of storage conditions are both viable strategies for reduction of symptoms in patients with apple allergy.