Challenges and Path Forward on Mandatory Allergen Labeling and Voluntary Precautionary Allergen Labeling for a Global Company.

For food manufacturers, the label on a food package is a tool meant to alert consumers to the presence of specific allergens, allowing consumers to make informed decisions and not unnecessarily limit their food choices. Mandatory allergen labeling is used when the allergen is an intentionally added ingredient, whereas voluntary allergen labeling is used when the presence of the allergen is unintentional and may be in the finished product as a result of cross-contact. In a globalized economy, ensuring food safety is a growing challenge for manufacturers. When ingredients and technologies are sourced worldwide from multiple business partners, complexity rises, which can increase the chance for errors, leading to potential harm. Threshold science, Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labelling (VITAL) reference doses, fit-for-purpose analytical technology, and common sense enable us to optimize allergen management for the benefit of allergic consumers. This is a good strategy because all stakeholders share the common goal of making foods safe and wholesome for all. Herein, we recommend that (1) senior management make science-based thresholds a priority for both regulatory authorities and the food industry; (2) VITAL 2.0 be adopted as a risk assessment and risk management tool for precautionary allergen labeling (PAL); (3) a standardized message for PAL, i.e., "may contain x," be used to make it easily understandable to allergic consumers so they can make informed food choices; and (4) validated fit-for-purpose allergen methods be used to meet analytical needs. This is an opportunity for us to speak with one voice and demonstrate that food safety is not a competitive issue, but a shared responsibility. This approach could significantly improve allergic consumers' lives.

Stakeholders' Guidance Document for Consumer Analytical Devices with a Focus on Gluten and Food Allergens.

Until recently, analytical tests for food were performed primarily in laboratories, but technical developments now enable consumers to use devices to test their food at home or when dining out. Current consumer devices for food can determine nutritional values, freshness, and, most recently, the presence of food allergens and substances that cause food intolerances. The demand for such products is driven by an increase in the incidence of food allergies, as well as consumer desire for more information about what is in their food. The number and complexity of food matrixes creates an important need for properly validated testing devices with comprehensive user instructions (definitions of technical terms can be found in ISO 5725-1:1994 and the International Vocabulary of Metrology). This is especially important with food allergen determinations that can have life-threatening consequences. Stakeholders-including food regulators, food producers, and food testing kit and equipment manufacturers, as well as representatives from consumer advocacy groups-have worked to outline voluntary guidelines for consumer food allergen- and gluten-testing devices. These guidelines cover areas such as kit validation, user sampling instructions, kit performance, and interpretation of results. The recommendations are based on (1) current known technologies, (2) analytical expertise, and (3) standardized AOAC INTERNATIONAL allergen community guidance and best practices on the analysis of food allergens and gluten. The present guidance document is the first in a series of papers intended to provide general guidelines applicable to consumer devices for all food analytes. Future publications will give specific guidance and validation protocols for devices designed to detect individual allergens and gluten, as statistical analysis and review of any validation data, preferably from an independent third party, are necessary to establish a device's fitness-for-purpose. Following the recommendations of these guidance documents will help ensure that consumers are equipped with sufficient information to make an informed decision based on an analytical result from a consumer device. However, the present guidance document emphasizes that consumer devices should not be used in isolation to make a determination as to whether a food is safe to eat. As advances are made in science and technology, these recommendations will be reevaluated and revised as appropriate.

Validation procedures for quantitative gluten ELISA methods: AOAC allergen community guidance and best practices.

The food allergen analytical community is endeavoring to create harmonized guidelines for the validation of food allergen ELISA methodologies to help protect food-sensitive individuals and promote consumer confidence. This document provides additional guidance to existing method validation publications for quantitative food allergen ELISA methods. The gluten-specific criterion provided in this document is divided into sections for information required by the method developer about the assay and information for the implementation of the multilaboratory validation study. Many of these recommendations and guidance are built upon the widely accepted Codex Alimentarius definitions and recommendations for gluten-free foods. The information in this document can be used as the basis of a harmonized validation protocol for any ELISA method for gluten, whether proprietary or nonproprietary, that will be submitted to AOAC andlor regulatory authorities or other bodies for status recognition. Future work is planned for the implementation of this guidance document for the validation of gluten methods and the creation of gluten reference materials.

Validation procedures for quantitative food allergen ELISA methods: community guidance and best practices.

This document provides supplemental guidance on specifications for the development and implementation of studies to validate the performance characteristics of quantitative ELISA methods for the determination of food allergens. It is intended as a companion document to other existing publications on method validation. The guidance is divided into two sections: information to be provided by the method developer on various characteristics of the method, and implementation of a multilaboratory validation study. Certain criteria included in the guidance are allergen-specific. Two food allergens, egg and milk, are used to demonstrate the criteria guidance. These recommendations will be the basis of the harmonized validation protocol for any food allergen ELISA method, whether proprietary or nonproprietary, that will be submitted to AOAC and/or regulatory authorities or other bodies for status recognition. Regulatory authorities may have their own particular requirements for data packages in addition to the guidance in this document. Future work planned for the implementation and validation of this guidance will include guidance specific to other priority allergens.

Platelet-activating factor, PAF acetylhydrolase, and severe anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Platelet-activating factor (PAF) is an important mediator of anaphylaxis in animals, and interventions that block PAF prevent fatal anaphylaxis. The roles of PAF and PAF acetylhydrolase, the enzyme that inactivates PAF, in anaphylaxis in humans have not been reported. METHODS: We measured serum PAF levels and PAF acetylhydrolase activity in 41 patients with anaphylaxis and in 23 control patients. Serum PAF acetylhydrolase activity was also measured in 9 patients with peanut allergy who had fatal anaphylaxis and compared with that in 26 nonallergic pediatric control patients, 49 nonallergic adult control patients, 63 children with mild peanut allergy, 24 patients with nonfatal anaphylaxis, 10 children who died of nonanaphylactic causes, 15 children with life-threatening asthma, and 19 children with non-life-threatening asthma. RESULTS: Mean (+/-SD) serum PAF levels were significantly higher in patients with anaphylaxis (805+/-595 pg per milliliter) than in patients in the control groups (127+/-104 pg per milliliter, P<0.001 after log transformation) and were correlated with the severity of anaphylaxis. The proportion of subjects with elevated PAF levels increased from 4% in the control groups to 20% in the group with grade 1 anaphylaxis, 71% in the group with grade 2 anaphylaxis, and 100% in the group with grade 3 anaphylaxis (P<0.001). There was an inverse correlation between PAF levels and PAF acetylhydrolase activity (P<0.001). The proportion of patients with low PAF acetylhydrolase values increased with the severity of anaphylaxis (P<0.001 for all comparisons). Serum PAF acetylhydrolase activity was significantly lower in patients with fatal peanut anaphylaxis than in control patients (P values <0.001 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Serum PAF levels were directly correlated and serum PAF acetylhydrolase activity was inversely correlated with the severity of anaphylaxis. PAF acetylhydrolase activity was significantly lower in patients with fatal anaphylactic reactions to peanuts than in patients in any of the control groups. Failure of PAF acetylhydrolase to inactivate PAF may contribute to the severity of anaphylaxis.

Can commercial peanut assay kits detect peanut allergens?

Peanut is the food group mostly associated with severe and fatal allergic reactions. In the United States, more than 90% of peanut-allergic individuals' serum IgE recognized peanut proteins Ara h 1 and Ara h 2, thus establishing these proteins as major peanut allergens. The amount of Ara h 1 and Ara h 2 in 3 varieties of peanut cultivars that are commonly processed in the industrialized countries was determined to be 12-16 and 6-9%, respectively. Current commercial peanut test kits use polyclonal peanut-specific antibodies to detect soluble or buffer extractable peanut proteins. Because the 2 major peanut allergens Ara h 1 and Ara h 2 are isolated from soluble peanut proteins, it is generally assumed that these commercial kits can detect peanut allergens, although none of these kits claims to detect peanut allergen. This study showed for the first time that the peanut test kits could, in fact, detect major peanut allergens Ara h 1 and Ara h 2 in both native or heat-denatured structures; therefore, these kits qualified to be classified as peanut allergen enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays.

Immunochemical-based method for detection of hazelnut proteins in processed foods.

A competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was developed to detect hazelnut by using polyclonal antibodies generated against a protein extract of roasted hazelnut. No cross-reactivity was observed in tests against 39 commodities, including many common allergens, tree nuts, and legumes. Hazelnut protein standard solutions at 0.45 ng/mL [inhibition concentration (IC80) of the competitive test] were clearly identified by the ELISA. An extraction and quantification method was developed and optimized for chocolate, cookies, breakfast cereals, and ice cream, major food commodities likely to be cross-contaminated with undeclared hazelnut during food processing. No sample cleanup was required when extracts were diluted 10-fold. Recovery results were generated with blank matrixes spiked at 4 levels from 1 to 10 microg/g hazelnut protein. With the developed extraction and sample handling procedure, hazelnut proteins were recovered at 64-83% from chocolate and at 78-97% from other matrixes. A confirmatory technique was developed with sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and Western transfer. The developed methods were applied to a small market survey of chocolate products and allowed the identification of undeclared hazelnut in these products.

Determination of Cry9C protein in processed foods made with StarLink corn.

StarLink (Aventis CropScience US) hybrid corn has been genetically modified to contain a pesticidal protein, Cry9C, which makes it more resistant than traditional varieties to certain types of corn insect pests. Unlike other varieties of genetically engineered corn, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency authorized the use of StarLink corn for animal feed and industrial use only, not for human consumption. However, some Cry9C-containing corn was mistakenly or inadvertently comingled with yellow corn intended for human food use. Because corn containing the Cry9C construct was not approved for human use, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration considers food containing it to be adulterated. Consequently, this regulatory violation resulted in hundreds of recalls of corn-based products, such as taco shells, containing cry9C DNA. Detecting the novel protein in StarLink corn is an emerging issue; therefore, there is no standardized or established analytical method for detecting Cry9C protein in processed foods. We developed a procedure for quantitation of Cry9C protein, with validation data, in processed food matrixes with a limit of quantitation at 1.7 ng/g (ppb), using a commercial polyclonal antibody-based Cry9C kit that was intended for corn grain samples. Intra- and interassay coefficients of variation were 2.8 and 11.8%, respectively. Mean recoveries were 73 and 85% at 2 and 5 ng/g Cry9C fortifications, respectively, for 19 control non-StarLink corn-based matrixes. Our data demonstrate only 0-0.5% of Cry9C protein survived the processing of tortilla chips and soft tortillas made from 100% StarLink corn, resulting in levels from below the detection limit to 45 ppb.