An in vitro protocol to characterise the resistance of food proteins to intestinal digestion.

In vitro digestion tests provide data on the form in which dietary proteins maybe presented to the gut mucosal immune system, one of many strands of evidence used in allergenicity risk assessment. A 96-well plate format in vitro intestinal digestion protocol has been developed with a high and low enzyme activity test executed at pH 6.5 and 8.0. It was applied to the systematic analysis of test proteins (including six allergens and one non-allergenic comparator) which were either completely resistant to pepsinolysis or gave rise to large persistent fragments following in vitro gastric digestion. Digestion was monitored using SDS-PAGE and densitometry. Proteins resistant to pepsin were also resistant to intestinal digestion irrespective of the protocol applied and gave rise to large persistent digestion fragments. In contrast persistent fragments from pepsin digestion were readily digested. Bile salts enhanced the digestibility of two highly resistant proteins, lysozyme ad ß-lactoglobulin, changing the rank order of protein digestibility. Intestinal digestion tests that include bile salts provide a more physiologically relevant system for future investigation into how digestion products may influence the balance between tolerance and sensitization - and hence contribute to future development of a more effective allergenicity risk assessment process.

Assessing protein digestibility in allergenicity risk assessment: A comparison of in silico and high throughput in vitro gastric digestion assays.

The susceptibility of a novel food protein to digestion in the pepsin resistance test is widely used to inform the allergenicity risk assessment process. However, it does not model the variation in the intragastric environment found in vivo. Consequently a 96-well plate format in vitro gastric digestion protocol has been developed with a high and low pepsin activity test executed at pH 1.2, 2.5, 5.5 and 6.5. It was used to analyse seven allergens (from milk, egg, peach and peanut) and two non-allergens (cytochrome c and zein). Digestion was monitored using SDS-PAGE and densitometry. In silico predictions were not confirmed experimentally for most of the proteins studied. Proteins were ranked according to half-life and showed susceptibility to digestion was related to the stability of protein structure and protein solubility rather than allergenicity per se. Highly digestible proteins, such as ß-casein and Ara h 1, generated abundant resistant fragments Mr > 3.5 kDa in the low pepsin activity test which could be immunologically significant within the context of allergenicity risk assessment for susceptible groups such as infants. The high- and low pepsin activity tests used in this study provided complementary data to support allergenicity risk assessment and used only 10 mg protein.

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.

Can we define a level of protection for allergic consumers that everyone can accept?

Substantial progress has been made in characterising the risk associated with exposure to allergens in food. However, absence of agreement on what risk is tolerable has made it difficult to set quantitative limits to manage that risk and protect allergic consumers effectively. This paper reviews scientific progress in the area and the diverse status of allergen management approaches and lack of common standards across different jurisdictions, including within the EU. This lack of regulation largely explains why allergic consumers find Precautionary Allergen Labelling confusing and cannot rely on it. We reviewed approaches to setting quantitative limits for a broad range of food safety hazards to identify the reasoning leading to their adoption. This revealed a diversity of approaches from pragmatic to risk-based, but we could not find clear evidence of the process leading to the decision on risk acceptability. We propose a framework built around the criteria suggested by Murphy and Gardoni (2008) for approaches to defining tolerable risks. Applying these criteria to food allergy, we concluded that sufficient knowledge exists to implement the framework, including sufficient expertise across the whole range of stakeholders to allow opinions to be heard and respected, and a consensus to be achieved.

Deriving individual threshold doses from clinical food challenge data for population risk assessment of food allergens.

BACKGROUND: Food allergies are a significant public health issue, and the only effective management option currently available is strict avoidance of all foods containing the allergen. In view of the practical impossibility of limiting risks to zero, quantitative allergen risk assessment and management strategies are needed. OBJECTIVE: We sought to develop appropriate methods for informing population-based risk assessments and risk management programs to benefit all stakeholders but particularly patients with food allergy. METHODS: Individual thresholds for food allergens (maximum tolerable doses and minimum eliciting doses) can ideally be established through double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges. If double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge data are not available, data from widely used open food challenges using predefined objective criteria can also provide useful data regarding minimum eliciting doses. For more than 20 years, the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research and the Food Allergy Research and Resource Program at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln have been collecting individual maximum tolerable doses and minimum eliciting doses that produce objective symptoms from published and unpublished clinical data to better refine knowledge regarding the sensitivity of the population to food allergens. RESULTS: In this article we provide in-depth insights into the methodology applied by the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research and Food Allergy Research and Resource Program to derive individual maximum tolerable doses and minimum eliciting doses for objective symptoms from clinical food challenge data. More than 90 examples for determining individual allergic thresholds are presented. CONCLUSION: With the methodology presented in this article, we aim to stimulate harmonization and transparency in quantitative food allergen risk assessment and risk management programs, encouraging their wider adoption.

Evidence-based approaches to the application of precautionary allergen labelling: Report from two iFAAM workshops.

Food allergy is a major public health concern with avoidance of the trigger food(s) being central to management by the patient. Food information legislation mandates the declaration of allergenic ingredients; however, the labelling of the unintentional presence of allergens is less defined. Precautionary allergen labelling (PAL) was introduced by the food industry to help manage and communicate the risk of reaction from the unintended presence of allergens in foods. In its current form, PAL is counterproductive for consumers with food allergies as there is no standardized approach to applying PAL. Foods with a PAL often do not contain the identified food allergen while some products without a PAL contain quantities of common food allergens that are capable of inducing an allergic reaction. Integrated Approaches to Food Allergen and Allergy Risk Management (iFAAM) was an EU-funded project that aimed to improve the management of food allergens by the food industry for the benefit of people with food allergies. Within iFAAM, a clinically validated tiered risk assessment approach for food allergens was developed. Two cross-stakeholder iFAAM workshops were held on 13-14 December 2016 and 19-20 April 2018. One of the objectives of these workshops was to develop a proposal to make PAL effective for consumers. This paper describes the outcomes from these workshops. This provides the basis for the development of more informative and transparent labelling that will ultimately improve management and well-being in consumers with food allergy.

Sensitivity analysis to derive a food consumption point estimate for deterministic food allergy risk assessment.

One of the input parameters in food allergy risk assessment is the amount of a given food consumed at an eating occasion. There is no consensus on how to use food consumption data when assessing the risk from unintended allergen presence in food products. A sensitivity analysis was performed to establish the optimal food consumption estimate for a deterministic food allergy risk assessment. Exposure was calculated for consumption percentiles (50th percentile, P50 to maximum) using the iFAAM consumption database in conjunction with an allergen concentration range from 1 to 1000 ppm. The resulting allergen intakes were compared to the allergic population reference doses proposed by Taylor et al. (2014) for 10 major allergenic foods. Optimal consumption percentiles were defined as those which predicted an intake below the relevant reference dose and met the defined acceptable risk level confirmed by probabilistic risk assessments. Analysis showed that, for 99% of the food groups, the P50 consumption met our criteria, while the P75 did so for 100% of the food groups. We suggest that the P75 is the optimal point estimate for use in deterministic food allergy risk assessment. It meets the safety objective and is adequately conservative for a public health context.

Assessing food allergy risks from residual peanut protein in highly refined vegetable oil.

Refined vegetable oils including refined peanut oil are widely used in foods. Due to shared production processes, refined non-peanut vegetable oils can contain residual peanut proteins. We estimated the predicted number of allergic reactions to residual peanut proteins using probabilistic risk assessment applied to several scenarios involving food products made with vegetable oils. Variables considered were: a) the estimated production scale of refined peanut oil, b) estimated cross-contact between refined vegetable oils during production, c) the proportion of fat in representative food products and d) the peanut protein concentration in refined peanut oil. For all products examined the predicted risk of objective allergic reactions in peanut-allergic users of the food products was extremely low. The number of predicted reactions ranged depending on the model from a high of 3 per 1000 eating occasions (Weibull) to no reactions (LogNormal). Significantly, all reactions were predicted for allergen intakes well below the amounts reported for the most sensitive individual described in the clinical literature. We conclude that the health risk from cross-contact between vegetable oils and refined peanut oil is negligible. None of the food products would warrant precautionary labelling for peanut according to the VITAL® programme of the Allergen Bureau.

Translating reference doses into allergen management practice: challenges for stakeholders.

Risk assessment describes the impact of a particular hazard as a function of dose and exposure. It forms the foundation of risk management and contributes to the overall decision-making process, but is not its endpoint. This paper outlines a risk analysis framework to underpin decision-making in the area of allergen cross-contact. Specifically, it identifies challenges relevant to each component of the risk analysis: risk assessment (data gaps and output interpretation); risk management (clear and realistic objectives); and risk communication (clear articulation of risk and benefit). Translation of the outputs from risk assessment models into risk management measures must be informed by a clear understanding of the model outputs and their limitations. This will lead to feasible and achievable risk management objectives, grounded in a level of risk accepted by the different stakeholders, thereby avoiding potential unintended detrimental consequences. Clear, consistent and trustworthy communications actively involving all stakeholders underpin these objectives. The conclusions, integrating the perspectives of different stakeholders, offer a vision where clear, science-based benchmarks form the basis of allergen management and labelling, cutting through the current confusion and uncertainty. Finally, the paper recognises that the proposed framework must be adaptable to new and emerging evidence.

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.

Advances in the risk management of unintended presence of allergenic foods in manufactured food products--an overview.

Food allergy is a relatively recent newcomer to the ranks of food safety issues, only being effectively recognised as such in the last 25-30 years. This recognition, allied with the near impossibility of avoiding the unintended presence of small, yet potentially dangerous residues of allergenic constituents, brought with it the need to assess and manage the resulting risk. This paper provides an overview of the development and current knowledge and thinking on risk assessment and its application to risk management of food allergens. It also discusses the associated challenges, in particular those around communicating meaningfully that risk to allergic consumers, including the use of precautionary labelling. The paper also provides an introductory context to the more detailed analyses of these issues in the following papers, based on the deliberations of a recent stakeholder workshop. The paper concludes that consistent risk management approaches using agreed quantitative action levels based on scientifically robust principles will provide optimal protection to allergic consumers. Growing amounts of data from oral food challenges along with the parallel development of risk assessment methodologies, such as probabilistic modelling, offer a realistic possibility of agreement among stakeholders on such levels in the near future.

Establishment of Reference Doses for residues of allergenic foods: report of the VITAL Expert Panel.

In 2011, an expert panel was assembled to establish appropriate Reference Doses for allergenic food residues as a part of the VITAL (Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labeling) program of The Allergen Bureau of Australia & New Zealand (ABA). These Reference Doses would guide advisory labeling decisions for use on food labels. Individual NOAELs and LOAELs were obtained from clinical challenges of food-allergic subjects. Statistical dose-distribution models (log-normal, log-logistic, Weibull) were applied to the individual NOAELs and LOAELs for each allergenic food. The Reference Doses, in terms of mg of total protein from the allergenic food, were based upon either the ED01 (for peanut, cow's milk), the 95% lower confidence interval of the ED05 (for wheat, soybean, cashew, shrimp, sesame seed, mustard, and lupine), or both (egg, hazelnut) using all appropriate statistical dose-distribution models. Reference Doses were established for 11 allergenic foods ranging from 0.03 mg for egg protein to 10mg for shrimp protein. Reference Doses were not established for fish or celery due to poor model fits with existing data. Reference Doses were not established for other tree nuts beyond hazelnut and cashew because of the absence of data on NOAELs and LOAELs from individual subjects.

Allergen reference doses for precautionary labeling (VITAL 2.0): clinical implications.

BACKGROUND: There has been a dramatic proliferation of precautionary labeling by manufacturers to mitigate the perceived risk from low-level contamination from allergens in food. This has resulted in a significant reduction in choice of potentially safe foods for allergic consumers. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to establish reference doses for 11 commonly allergenic foods to guide a rational approach by manufacturers based on all publically available valid oral food challenge data. METHODS: Reference doses were developed from statistical dose-distribution modeling of individual thresholds of patients in a dataset of more than 55 studies of clinical oral food challenges. Sufficient valid data were available for peanut, milk, egg, and hazelnut to allow assessment of the representativeness of the data used. RESULTS: The data were not significantly affected by the heterogeneity of the study methodology, including little effect of age on results for those foods for which sufficient numbers of adult challenge data were available (peanut and hazelnut). Thus by combining data from all studies, the eliciting dose for an allergic reaction in 1% of the population estimated for the following were 0.2 mg of protein for peanut, 0.1 mg for cow's milk, 0.03 mg for egg, and 0.1 mg for hazelnut. CONCLUSIONS: These reference doses will form the basis of the revised Voluntary Incidental Trace Allergen Labeling (VITAL) 2.0 thresholds now recommended in Australia. These new levels will enable manufacturers to apply credible precautionary labeling and provide increased consumer confidence in their validity and reliability, as well as improving consumer safety.

Quantification and partial characterization of the residual protein in fully and partially refined commercial soybean oils.

A method has been developed to determine residual protein in refined oils, a potential trigger of allergic reactions. High-pH bicarbonate or borate buffers were found to be the most effective extractants, residual oil protein comprising a mixture of proteins of M(r) 6000-100000. Extracted protein could be quantified with superior precision using 3-(4-carboxybenzoyl)quinolone-2-carboxaldehyde (CBQCA). Residual protein content determined in a set of oils using the borate extraction-CBQCA assay was positively correlated with contents determined using a bicarbonate-total amino acid analysis method. Oil refining substantially reduced the oil protein content determined by the borate-CBQCA assay with neutralized/refined, bleached, and deodorized (fully refined) oils containing 62-265 ng/g oil, whereas crude un-degummed oils contained 86000-87900 ng/g of protein. These analyses and published data on cumulative threshold doses for soybean suggest that even the most sensitive individuals would need to consume at least 50 g of highly refined oil to experience subjective symptoms.

Threshold dose for peanut: Risk characterization based upon diagnostic oral challenge of a series of 286 peanut-allergic individuals.

Clinical records of 286 consecutive patients reacting positively with objective symptoms to double-blind, placebo-controlled oral peanut challenges at University Hospital, Nancy, France were examined for individual No Observed Adverse Effect Levels (NOAELs) and Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Levels (LOAELs). After fitting to a log-normal probability distribution model, the ED(10) and ED(05) were 14.4 and 7.3mg (expressed as whole peanut), respectively, with 95% lower confidence intervals of 10.7 and 5.2mg, respectively. Compared to results from a previous study where the ED(10) was based upon individual peanut thresholds gleaned from 12 publications, a statistically significant difference was observed between the ED(50)'s, but not the ED(10)'s of the two probability distribution curves. The Nancy patient group contains more sensitive subjects than the group from the published literature thus contributing to the observed differences. Minimum eliciting dose-distributions for patients with histories of more severe reactions (grade 4 or 5; 40 subjects) did not differ significantly from those of patients with histories of less severe reactions (grades 1-3; 123 subjects). These data and this modeling approach could be used to establish population thresholds for peanut-allergic consumers and thereby provide a sound basis for allergen control measures in the food industry.

Threshold dose for peanut: risk characterization based upon published results from challenges of peanut-allergic individuals.

Population thresholds for peanut are unknown. However, lowest- and no-observed adverse effect levels (LOAELs and NOAELs) are published for an unknown number of peanut-allergic individuals. Publications were screened for LOAELs and NOAELs from blinded, low-dose oral challenges. Data were obtained from 185 peanut-allergic individuals (12 publications). Data were analyzed by interval-censoring survival analysis and three probability distribution models fitted to it (Log-Normal, Log-Logistic, and Weibull) to estimate the ED(10). All three models described the data well and provided ED(10)'s in close agreement: 17.6, 17.0, and 14.6 mg of whole peanut for the Log-Normal, Log-Logistic, and Weibull models, respectively. The 95% lower confidence intervals for the ED(10)'s were 9.2, 8.1, and 6.0mg of whole peanut for the Log-Normal, Log-Logistic, and Weibull models, respectively. The modeling of individual NOAELs and LOAELs identified from three different types of published studies - diagnostic series, threshold studies, and immunotherapy trials - yielded significantly different whole peanut ED(10)'s of 11.9 mg for threshold studies, 18.0mg for diagnostic series and 65.5mg for immunotherapy trials; patient selection and other biases may have influenced the estimates. These data and risk assessment models provide the type of information that is necessary to establish regulatory thresholds for peanut.