Ineffective degradation of immunogenic gluten epitopes by currently available digestive enzyme supplements.

BACKGROUND: Due to the high proline content of gluten molecules, gastrointestinal proteases are unable to fully degrade them leaving large proline-rich gluten fragments intact, including an immunogenic 33-mer from α-gliadin and a 26-mer from γ-gliadin. These latter peptides can trigger pro-inflammatory T cell responses resulting in tissue remodeling, malnutrition and a variety of other complications. A strict lifelong gluten-free diet is currently the only available treatment to cope with gluten intolerance. Post-proline cutting enzymes have been shown to effectively degrade the immunogenic gluten peptides and have been proposed as oral supplements. Several existing digestive enzyme supplements also claim to aid in gluten degradation. Here we investigate the effectiveness of such existing enzyme supplements in comparison with a well characterized post-proline cutting enzyme, Prolyl EndoPeptidase from Aspergillus niger (AN-PEP). METHODS: Five commercially available digestive enzyme supplements along with purified digestive enzymes were subjected to 1) enzyme assays and 2) mass spectrometric identification. Gluten epitope degradation was monitored by 1) R5 ELISA, 2) mass spectrometric analysis of the degradation products and 3) T cell proliferation assays. FINDINGS: The digestive enzyme supplements showed comparable proteolytic activities with near neutral pH optima and modest gluten detoxification properties as determined by ELISA. Mass spectrometric analysis revealed the presence of many different enzymes including amylases and a variety of different proteases with aminopeptidase and carboxypeptidase activity. The enzyme supplements leave the nine immunogenic epitopes of the 26-mer and 33-mer gliadin fragments largely intact. In contrast, the pure enzyme AN-PEP effectively degraded all nine epitopes in the pH range of the stomach at much lower dose. T cell proliferation assays confirmed the mass spectrometric data. CONCLUSION: Currently available digestive enzyme supplements are ineffective in degrading immunogenic gluten epitopes.

Consumption of gluten with gluten-degrading enzyme by celiac patients: a pilot-study.

AIM: To assesses the safety and efficacy of Aspergillus niger prolyl endoprotease (AN-PEP) to mitigate the immunogenic effects of gluten in celiac patients. METHODS: Patients with initial diagnosis of celiac disease as confirmed by positive serology with subtotal or total villous atrophy on duodenal biopsies who adhere to a strict gluten-free diet (GFD) resulting in normalised antibodies and mucosal healing classified as Marsh 0 or I were included. In a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled pilot study, patients consumed toast (approximately 7 g/d gluten) with AN-PEP for 2 wk (safety phase). After a 2-wk washout period with adherence of the usual GFD, 14 patients were randomised to gluten intake with either AN-PEP or placebo for 2 wk (efficacy phase). Measurements at baseline included complaints, quality-of-life, serum antibodies, immunophenotyping of T-cells and duodenal mucosa immunohistology. Furthermore, serum and quality of life questionnaires were collected during and after the safety, washout and efficacy phase. Duodenal biopsies were collected after the safety phase and after the efficacy phase. A change in histological evaluation according to the modified Marsh classification was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: In total, 16 adults were enrolled in the study. No serious adverse events occurred during the trial and no patients withdrew during the trial. The mean score for the gastrointestinal subcategory of the celiac disease quality (CDQ) was relatively high throughout the study, indicating that AN-PEP was well tolerated. In the efficacy phase, the CDQ scores of patients consuming gluten with placebo or gluten with AN-PEP did not significantly deteriorate and moreover no differences between the groups were observed. During the efficacy phase, neither the placebo nor the AN-PEP group developed significant antibody titers. The IgA-EM concentrations remained negative in both groups. Two patients were excluded from entering the efficacy phase as their mucosa showed an increase of two Marsh steps after the safety phase, yet with undetectable serum antibodies, while 14 patients were considered histologically stable on gluten with AN-PEP. Also after the efficacy phase, no significant deterioration was observed regarding immunohistological and flow cytometric evaluation in the group consuming placebo compared to the group receiving AN-PEP. Furthermore, IgA-tTG deposit staining increased after 2 wk of gluten compared to baseline in four out of seven patients on placebo. In the seven patients receiving AN-PEP, one patient showed increased and one showed decreased IgA-tTG deposits. CONCLUSION: AN-PEP appears to be well tolerated. However, the primary endpoint was not met due to lack of clinical deterioration upon placebo, impeding an effect of AN-PEP.