Food processing can have many beneficial effects. However, processing may also alter the allergenic properties of food proteins. A wide variety of processing methods is available and their use depends largely on the food to be processed. In this review the impact of processing (heat and non-heat treatment) on the allergenic potential of proteins, and on the antigenic (IgG-binding) and allergenic (IgE-binding) properties of proteins has been considered. A variety of allergenic foods (peanuts, tree nuts, cows' milk, hens' eggs, soy, wheat and mustard) have been reviewed. The overall conclusion drawn is that processing does not completely abolish the allergenic potential of allergens. Currently, only fermentation and hydrolysis may have potential to reduce allergenicity to such an extent that symptoms will not be elicited, while other methods might be promising but need more data. Literature on the effect of processing on allergenic potential and the ability to induce sensitisation is scarce. This is an important issue since processing may impact on the ability of proteins to cause the acquisition of allergic sensitisation, and the subject should be a focus of future research. Also, there remains a need to develop robust and integrated methods for the risk assessment of food allergenicity.

No abstract

No abstract

Soybean (Glycine max) seed contain some proteins that are allergenic to humans and animals. However, the concentration of these allergens and their expression variability among germplasms is presently unknown. To address this problem, 10 allergens were quantified from 20 nongenetically modified commercial soybean varieties using parallel, label-free mass spectrometry approaches. Relative quantitation was performed by spectral counting and absolute quantitation was performed using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) with synthetic, isotope-labeled peptides as internal standards. During relative quantitation analysis, 10 target allergens were identified, and five of these allergens showed expression levels higher than technical variation observed for bovine serum albumin (BSA) internal standard (∼11%), suggesting expression differences among the varieties. To confirm this observation, absolute quantitation of these allergens from each variety was performed using MRM. Eight of the 10 allergens were quantified for their concentration in seed and ranged from approximately 0.5 to 5.7 μg/mg of soy protein. MRM analysis reduced technical variance of BSA internal standards to approximately 7%, and confirmed differential expression for four allergens across the 20 varieties. This is the first quantitative assessment of all major soybean allergens. The results show the total quantity of allergens measured among the 20 soy varieties was mostly similar.

This manuscript focuses on the toxicological evaluation of proteins introduced into GM crops to impart desired traits. In many cases, introduced proteins can be shown to have a history of safe use. Where modifications have been made to proteins, experience has shown that it is highly unlikely that modification of amino acid sequences can make a non-toxic protein toxic. Moreover, if the modified protein still retains its biological function, and this function is found in related proteins that have a history of safe use (HOSU) in food, and the exposure level is similar to functionally related proteins, then the modified protein could also be considered to be “as-safe-as” those that have a HOSU. Within nature, there can be considerable evolutionary changes in the amino acid sequence of proteins within the same family, yet these proteins share the same biological function. In general, food crops such as maize, soy, rice, canola etc. are subjected to a variety of processing conditions to generate different food products. Processing conditions such as cooking, modification of pH conditions, and mechanical shearing can often denature proteins in these crops resulting in a loss of functional activity. These same processing conditions can also markedly lower human dietary exposure to (functionally active) proteins. Safety testing of an introduced protein could be indicated if its biological function was not adequately characterized and/or it was shown to be structurally/functionally related to proteins that are known to be toxic to mammals.