Detection of soy proteins in processed foods: Literature overview and new experimental work

Several tests for the detection of soy proteins in foods have been described in the literature, and some are commercially available. This article gives an overview of these methods and discusses the advantages and disadvantages of each individual method. Based on the conclusions of this inventory, an experimental approach was designed to improve the sensitivity of measuring soy protein in processed foods. The aimed sensitivity is 10 ppm (10 ¿g soy protein in 1 g solid sample), which is over 100-fold lower than presently available tests. The aimed sensitivity is this low because levels of food allergens at 10 ppm and above may provoke reactions in food allergic persons. Native soybean meal, soy protein isolate, soy protein concentrate, and textured soy flakes were used as test materials. Several extraction procedures were compared and a new method using high pH was selected. Polyclonal antibodies were raised in rabbits and goats, and immunopurified antibodies were used in sandwich and inhibition enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Extraction at pH 12 resulted in good yields for all tested samples, both quantitatively (Bradford) and qualitatively by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Immunopurified rabbit antibodies against this extract used in a competition ELISA format resulted in a sensitive test with a detection limit of 0.02 ¿g/mL, corresponding to 0.4 ¿g/g (0.4 ppm) in food samples. Cross-reactivity with some main food ingredients was measured and appeared to be negative in all cases. The presently developed test is applicable for soy ingredients and soy-containing foods that are processed in different ways. The limit of quantitation is 1 ppm, which is an enormous improvement over earlier described methods

Presentation of allergen in different food preparations affects the nature of the allergic reaction - a case series

Background Characterization of fatal and non-fatal reactions to food indicates that the majority of reactions are due to the ingestion of prepared foods rather than the non-processed allergen. In an ongoing study that used a double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge to investigate peanut allergy and clinical symptoms, the observed reaction severity in four of the first six subjects was greater than anticipated. We hypothesized that this was due to differences in the composition of the challenge vehicle.Objective The aim was to investigate whether the severity of observed challenge reactions would be repeated on re-challenge with a lower fat challenge vehicle.Methods Peanut-allergic subjects were re-challenged with a lower fat recipe after reacting more severely than was anticipated to an initial peanut challenge. Similar challenge vehicle recipes were used, the only difference being the lower fat content (22.9% compared with 31.5%). The peanut content of the two recipes was analysed using RAST inhibition studies and ELISA tests.Results Three of four subjects reacted to much smaller doses of peanut protein on re-challenge (mean dose equivalence – 23 times less peanut) with the lower fat recipe. RAST inhibition showed that neither recipe altered epitope recognition. The higher fat recipe required twice as much peanut to cause 50% inhibition. ELISA detected far lower levels of peanut in the higher fat recipe (220 000 parts per million (p.p.m.)) than in the lower fat recipe (990 000 p.p.m.).Conclusion The fat content of a challenge vehicle has a profound effect on the reaction experienced after allergen ingestion. This is another factor to be considered in assessing the risk of certain foods to food-allergic consumers and adds another dimension to clinical, research and regulatory practice

Clinical relevance of sensitization to lupine in peanut-sensitized adults

Background: The use of lupine in food has been increasing during the last decade and allergic reactions to lupine have been reported, especially in peanut-allergic patients. The frequency and the degree of cross-reactivity to other legumes are not known. The aim of the study was to investigate the frequency of sensitization to lupine, and in addition to pea and soy, and its clinical relevance, in peanut-sensitized patients. Furthermore, to determine the eliciting dose (ED) for lupine using double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC). Methods: Thirty-nine unselected peanut-sensitized patients were evaluated by skin prick tests (SPT) and ImmunoCAP to lupine, pea, and soy. Clinical reactivity was measured by DBPCFC for lupine, and by history for pea and soy. Results: Eighty-two percent of the study population was sensitized to lupine, 55% to pea, and 87% to soy. Clinically relevant sensitization to lupine, pea, or soy occurred in 35%, 29%, and 33% respectively of the study population. None of the patients was aware of the use of lupine in food. The lowest ED for lupine, inducing mild subjective symptoms, was 0.5 mg, and the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) was 0.1 mg. No predictive factors for lupine allergy were found. Conclusion: In peanut-sensitized patients, clinically relevant sensitization to either lupine or to pea or soy occurs frequently. The ED for lupine is low (0.5 mg), which is only fivefold higher than for peanut. Patients are not aware of lupine allergy and the presence of lupine in food, indicating that education is important to build awareness. © 2008 Blackwell Munksgaard

Clinical relevance of sensitization to lupine in peanut-sensitized adults

Background: The use of lupine in food has been increasing during the last decade and allergic reactions to lupine have been reported, especially in peanut-allergic patients. The frequency and the degree of cross-reactivity to other legumes are not known. The aim of the study was to investigate the frequency of sensitization to lupine, and in addition to pea and soy, and its clinical relevance, in peanut-sensitized patients. Furthermore, to determine the eliciting dose (ED) for lupine using double-blind placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC). Methods: Thirty-nine unselected peanut-sensitized patients were evaluated by skin prick tests (SPT) and ImmunoCAP to lupine, pea, and soy. Clinical reactivity was measured by DBPCFC for lupine, and by history for pea and soy. Results: Eighty-two percent of the study population was sensitized to lupine, 55% to pea, and 87% to soy. Clinically relevant sensitization to lupine, pea, or soy occurred in 35%, 29%, and 33% respectively of the study population. None of the patients was aware of the use of lupine in food. The lowest ED for lupine, inducing mild subjective symptoms, was 0.5 mg, and the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) was 0.1 mg. No predictive factors for lupine allergy were found. Conclusion: In peanut-sensitized patients, clinically relevant sensitization to either lupine or to pea or soy occurs frequently. The ED for lupine is low (0.5 mg), which is only fivefold higher than for peanut. Patients are not aware of lupine allergy and the presence of lupine in food, indicating that education is important to build awareness. © 2008 Blackwell Munksgaard

Reversible denaturation of Brazil nut 2S albumin (Ber e1) and implication of structural destabilization on digestion by pepsin

The high resistance of Brazil nut 2S albumin, previously identified as an allergen, against proteolysis by pepsin was examined in this work. Although the denaturation temperature of this protein exceeds the 110 °C at neutral pH, at low pH a fully reversible thermal denaturation was observed at ∼82 °C. The poor digestibility of the protein by pepsin illustrates the tight globular packing. Chemical processing (i.e., subsequent reduction and alkylation of the protein) was used to destabilize the globular fold. Far-UV circular dichroism and infrared spectroscopy showed that the reduced and alkylated form had lost its β-structures, whereas the α-helix content was conserved. The free energy of stabilization of the globular fold of the processed protein as assessed by a guanidine titration study was only 30-40% of that of the native form. Size exclusion chromatography indicated that the heavy chain lost its globular character once separated from the native 2S albumin. The consequences of these changes in structural stability for degradation by pepsin were analyzed using gel electrophoresis and mass spectrometry. Whereas native 2S albumin was digested slowly in 1 h, the reduced and alkylated protein was digested completely within 30 s. These results are discussed in view of the potential allergenicity of Brazil nut 2S albumin

Purification and immunoglobulin E-binding properties of peanut allergen Ara h 6: Evidence for cross-reactivity with Ara h 2

Background: IgE-binding peanut proteins smaller than 15 kDa were previously identified as potential allergens in the majority of our peanut allergic population. Objective: To characterize the novel allergen in order to determine whether it was similar to one of the thus far identified recombinant peanut allergens (Ara h 1-7). Methods: An IgE-binding protein of <15 kDa was purified and identified via N-terminal sequencing. Its IgE-binding properties were investigated using immunoblotting, basophil degranulation, and skin prick testing. Possible cross-reacting epitopes with other peanut allergens were studied using IgE-immunoblotting inhibition. Results: The purified protein is a monomeric protein with a molecular weight of 14981 Da as determined using matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) mass spectroscopy. The amino acid sequence of the first 39 N-terminal residues is identical to that of Ara h 6, indicating that the allergen is Ara h 6. It is recognized by 20 out of 29 peanut-allergic patients on IgE-immunoblot, and its potent biological functionality is demonstrated by the degranulation of basophils, even at concentrations below 10 pg/mL, and by positive skin prick reactions. Ara h 6 has homology to Ara h 2, especially in the middle part and at the C-terminal part of the protein. Almost complete inhibition of IgE-Ara h 6 interaction with Ara h 2 demonstrates that at least part of the epitopes of Ara h 6 are cross-reactive with epitopes on Ara h 2. Conclusions: Peanut-derived Ara h 6 is a biologically active allergen recognized by the majority of our peanut-allergic patient population and can be considered a clinically relevant peanut allergen. © 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Chemicals / CAS: immunoglobulin E, 37341-29-0; Albumins; Allergens; Ara h 2 allergen, Arachis hypogaea; Ara h 6 allergen, Arachis hypogaea; Glycoproteins; Immunoglobulin E, 37341-29-0; Plant Proteins; Recombinant Protein

Peanut allergen Ara h 3: Isolation from peanuts and biochemical characterization.

Background: Peanut allergen Ara h 3 has been the subject of investigation for the last few years. The reported data strongly depend on recombinant Ara h 3, since a purification protocol for Ara h 3 from peanuts was not available. Methods: Peanut allergen Ara h 3 (glycinin), was purified and its posttranslational processing was investigated. Its allergenic properties were determined by studying IgE binding characteristics of the purified protein. Results: Ara h 3 consists of a series of polypeptides ranging from approximately 14 to 45 kDa that can be classified as acidic and basic subunits, similar to the subunit organization of soy glycinin. N-terminal sequences of the individual polypeptides were determined, and using the cDNA deduced amino-acid sequence, the organization into subunits was explained by revealing posttranslational processing of the different polypeptides. IgE-binding properties of Ara h 3 were investigated using direct elisa and Western blotting with sera from peanut-allergic individuals. The basic subunits, and to a lesser extent the acidic subunits, bind IgE and may act as allergenic peptides. Conclusions: We conclude that peanut-derived Ara h 3, in contrast to earlier reported recombinant Ara h 3, resembles, to a large extent, the molecular organization typical for proteins from the glycinin family. Furthermore, posttranslational processing of Ara h 3 affects the IgE-binding properties and is therefore an essential subject of study for research on the allergenicity of Ara h 3

The range of minimum provoking doses in hazelnut-allergic patients as determined by double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges

Background: The risk for allergic reactions depends on the sensitivity of individuals and the quantities of offending food ingested. The sensitivity varies among allergic individuals, as does the threshold dose of a food allergen capable of inducing an allergic reaction. Objective: This study aimed at determining the distribution of minimum provoking doses of hazelnut in a hazelnut-allergic population. Methods: Thirty-one patients with a history of hazelnut-related allergic symptoms, a positive skin prick test to hazelnut and/or an elevated specific IgE level, were included. Double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenges (DBPCFC) were performed with seven increasing doses of dried hazelnut (1 mg to 1 g hazelnut protein) randomly interspersed with seven placebo doses. Results: Twenty-nine patients had a positive challenge. Itching of the oral cavity and/or lips was the first symptom in all cases. Additional gastrointestinal symptoms were reported in five patients and difficulty in swallowing in one patient. Lip swelling was observed in two patients, followed by generalized urticaria in one of these. Threshold doses for eliciting subjective reactions varied from a dose of 1 mg up to 100 mg hazelnut protein (equivalent to 6.4-640 mg hazelnut meal). Extrapolation of the dose-response curve showed that 50% of our hazelnut-allergic population will suffer from an allergic reaction after ingestion of 6 mg (95% CI, 2-11 mg) of hazelnut protein. Objective symptoms were observed in two patients after 1 and 1000 mg, respectively. Conclusion: DBPCFCs demonstrated threshold doses in half of the hazelnut-allergic patients similar to doses previously described to be hidden in consumer products. This stresses the need for careful labelling and strategies to prevent and detect contamination of food products with hazelnut residues. Chemicals/CAS: Allergen

How accurate and safe is the diagnosis of hazelnut allergy by means of commercial skin prick test reagents?

Background: Allergy to tree nuts, like hazelnuts, ranks among the most frequently observed food allergies. These allergies can start at early childhood and are, in contrast to other food allergies, not always outgrown by the patient. Tree nut allergy is frequently associated with severe reactions. Diagnosis partially relies on in vivo testing by means of a skin prick test (SPT) using commercially available SPT reagents. Methods: Protein and allergen composition of nine commercial SPT solutions was evaluated using standard protein detection methods and specific immunoassays for measurement of five individual allergens. Diagnostic performance was assessed by SPT in 30 hazelnut-allergic subjects, of which 15 were provocation proven. Results: Protein concentrations ranged from 0.2-14 mg/ml. SDS-PAGE/silver staining revealed clear differences in protein composition. The major allergen Cor a 1 was present in all extracts but concentrations differed up to a factor 50. An allergen associated with severe symptoms, Cor a 8 (lipid transfer protein), was not detected on immunoblot in three products, and concentrations varied by more than a factor 100 as was shown by RAST inhibition. Similar observations were made for profilin, thaumatin-like protein and a not fully characterized 38-kD allergen. Ratios of individual allergens were variable among the nine extracts. SPT showed significant difference, and 6/30 patients displayed false-negative results using 3/9 products. Conclusion: Variability in the composition of products for the diagnosis of hazelnut allergy is extreme. Sometimes, allergens implicated in severe anaphylaxis are not detected by immunoblotting. These shortcomings in standardisation and quality control can potentially cause a false-negative diagnosis in subjects at risk of severe reactions to hazelnuts. Copyright © 2003 S. Karger AG, Basel