A method for quantitation of food biologic activity: results with peach allergen extracts

Usefulness of manufactured tomato extracts in the diagnosis of tomato sensitization: Comparison with the prick-prick method

BACKGROUND

Commercial available skin prick test with fruits can be negative in sensitized or allergic patients due to a reduction in biological activity during the manufacturing process. Prick-prick tests with fresh foods are often preferred, but they are a non-standardized procedure. The usefulness of freeze-dried extracts of Canary Islands tomatoes, comparing the wheal sizes induced by prick test with the prick-prick method in the diagnosis of tomato sensitization has been analyzed.The objective of the study was to assess the potential diagnostic of freeze-dried extracts of Canary Islands tomatoes, comparing the wheal sizes induced by prick test with the prick-prick method.

METHODS

Two groups of patients were analyzed: Group I: 26 individuals reporting clinical symptoms induced by tomato contact or ingestion. Group II: 71 control individuals with no symptoms induced by tomato: 12 of them were previously skin prick test positive to a tomato extract, 39 were atopic and 20 were non-atopic. All individuals underwent prick-prick with fresh ripe peel Canary tomatoes and skin prick tested with freeze-dried peel and pulp extracts obtained from peel and pulp of Canary tomatoes at 10 mg/ml. Wheal sizes and prick test positivity (>/= 7 mm2) were compared between groups.

RESULTS

In group I, 21 (81%) out of 26 patients were prick-prick positive. Twenty patients (77%) had positive skin prick test to peel extracts and 12 (46%) to pulp extracts. Prick-prick induced a mean wheal size of 43.81 +/- 40.19 mm2 compared with 44.25 +/- 36.68 mm2 induced by the peel extract (Not significant), and 17.79 +/- 9.39 mm2 induced by the pulp extract (p < 0.01).In group II, 13 (18%) out of 71 control patients were prick-prick positive. Twelve patients (all of them previously positive to peel extract) had positive skin prick test to peel and 3 to pulp. Prick-prick induced a mean wheal size of 28.88 +/- 13.12 mm2 compared with 33.17 +/- 17.55 mm2 induced by peel extract (Not significant), and 13.33 +/- 4.80 mm2 induced by pulp extract (p < 0.05 with peel extract and prick-prick).

CONCLUSION

Canary peel tomato extract seems to be as efficient as prick-prick tests with ripe tomatoes to diagnose patients sensitized to tomato. The wheal sizes induced by prick-prick and peel extracts were very similar and showed a high correlation coefficient.

Allergenicity of 10 different apple varieties

BACKGROUND

More than 100 apple varieties are consumed worldwide. However, the allergenic composition of most apple varieties has not been fully characterized.

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the antigenic and allergenic profiles of 10 different commercially available apple varieties.

METHODS

Golden, Golden Perlim, Reineta, Reineta Parda, Fuji, Verdedoncella, Granny-Smith, Pink Lady, Royal Gala, and Starking apple varieties were carefully peeled. Peels were individually extracted and centrifuged, and the supernatants were collected, dialyzed, filtered, frozen, and freeze-dried. The extracts were characterized using sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and immunoblots. Protein content was measured using the Lowry-Biuret method. Twenty-two Spanish patients with oral allergy syndrome after apple ingestion were included in the study. Specific IgE to all apple varieties and birch pollen was evaluated. Eleven patients underwent skin prick testing using extracts of Golden, Starking, and Reineta Parda varieties to determine differences in their in vivo allergenicity.

RESULTS

The antigenic profile of the 10 varieties showed differences using sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. A 9-kDa band, which could correspond to Mal d 3, was visualized in all the extracts. The Starking variety had the highest protein content. Higher specific IgE values were also obtained for the Starking variety, and the lowest values were for Reineta Parda and Royal Gala. The largest wheals were obtained in all patients with the Starking variety, and the smallest with Reineta Parda. Fourteen patients (64%) recognized Mal d 3 in the Golden variety using immunoblots; 6 patients (27%), who also had specific IgE to Betula, recognized bands with higher molecular weights.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated differences in the antigenic and allergenic profiles of the analyzed varieties and a significant variation in Mal d 3 content.

Characterization and improvement of apple extracts for the diagnosis of apple IgE-mediated allergy

BACKGROUND

The production process of reliable fruit extracts is not well established.

OBJECTIVES

To improve the overall quality of apple extracts by reducing protein loss during the manufacturing process and to evaluate the improved extracts using in vivo and in vitro experiments.

METHODS

Two types of extracts were prepared from peels of Golden Delicious apples (Malus domesticus). Extract A was extracted, 1:2 wt/vol, for 30 minutes at 40 degrees C in 0.01 M phosphate-buffered saline, and extract B was extracted, 1:2 wt/vol, in phosphate-buffered saline with 20% polyvinylpolypyrrolidone and 2-mmol/L EDTA. Both extracts were filtered, dialyzed in 3.5-kDa dialysis membranes, and lyophilized. The antigenic and allergenic profiles were analyzed using immunoblot and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Nine patients clinically sensitive to apples and 12 controls underwent skin testing with both extracts.

RESULTS

Extracts A and B had dry weight yields of 0.71% and 1.86% and protein contents of 104.6 and 257 microg/mg of freeze-dried material, respectively. A steady and progressive loss of protein, greater in extract A than in extract B, was detected at different intervals during the manufacturing process of both extracts. Extract B produced larger wheal sizes than extract A (P = .008). Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay inhibition results confirmed that extract B had a greater inhibition capacity than extract A.

CONCLUSIONS

A progressive loss of protein content occurs during the manufacturing of apple extracts. Wheal sizes induced by extract B were significantly larger than those induced by extract A and prick-by-prick solutions. Extract B was also more potent in vitro than extract A.

Allergy to kiwi

BACKGROUND

Allergy to kiwi fruit is being increasingly reported, but it has never been evaluated by means of a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DBPCFC) study.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess kiwi allergy on the basis of a DBPCFC and identify the patterns of allergen recognition in sensitized patients from a birch-free area.

METHODS

Forty-three patients with allergy symptoms who were sensitized to kiwi were evaluated by means of clinical history, skin tests, IgE determinations, and DBPCFCs. The pattern of allergen recognition was assessed by means of IgE immunoblotting. Sequence analysis of IgE-binding bands was performed by using Edman degradation.

RESULTS

DBPCFCs were performed in 33 patients; 4 patients had experienced severe anaphylaxis, and 6 patients declined informed consent. DBPCFC results were positive in 23 patients and negative in 10 patients. The most frequent clinical manifestation was oral allergy syndrome. Twenty-one percent of the patients were not allergic to pollen. Forty-six percent of patients experienced systemic symptoms, and this happened with higher frequency in patients not allergic to pollen (100%). Twenty-eight percent of the patients were sensitized to latex. The IgE-binding bands in kiwi extract more frequently recognized by patient sera were those of 30, 24, 66, and 12 kd, and they could not be associated with any pattern of kiwi-induced allergic reactions.

CONCLUSION

The results provide evidence that kiwi allergy is not a homogeneous disorder because several clinical subgroups can be established. No definite allergen-recognition pattern was associated with the type of allergic reactions to kiwi. One of 5 patients with kiwi allergy was not allergic to pollen, and these patients had the highest risk of systemic reactions to kiwi.

Kiwi fruit allergy: a review

Allergy to kiwi fruit was first described in 1981, and there have since been reports of the allergy presenting with a wide range of symptoms from localized oral allergy syndrome (OAS) to life-threatening anaphylaxis. The article reviews the available information concerning the clinical features of kiwi fruit allergy and the role of clinical investigations for diagnosis. Work identifying the major allergens in kiwi fruit has resulted in conflicting results, the possible reasons for which are discussed. The clinical associations of kiwi fruit allergy with allergies to pollens or latex are reviewed.

Clinical characteristics of melon (Cucumis melo) allergy

BACKGROUND

Although melon is a frequent allergy-eliciting fruit, allergic reactions to melon have rarely been reported.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and describe the clinical characteristics of melon allergy in melon-allergic patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated patients allergic to melon and a control group of patients allergic to pollen. The diagnosis of melon allergy was based on a convincing clinical history, positive skin test results (prick-by-prick test), and positive results on oral challenge tests to melon.

RESULTS

A total of 161 patients were included in the study: 66 in the melon allergy group and 95 in the pollen control group. The melon allergy group included 35 female and 31 male patients with a mean age of 26.6 +/- 2.7 years (range, 5-61 years). Although all patients had oral symptoms, 13 (19.7%) of the patients had extraoral symptoms and none experienced generalized urticaria or anaphylaxis. Excluding other Cucurbitaceae fruits, peach, fig, and kiwi most frequently elicited positive skin test results and symptoms. Up to 23% of melon-allergic patients had a concomitant latex sensitization. Melon allergy was especially linked to pollen allergy, since all the melon-allergic patients were also allergic to pollen. Some differential features with respect to the pollen allergy control group were a higher prevalence of asthma (odds ratio [OR], 2.13; P < 0.05) and a statistical increase in the frequency of sensitization to several tree and weed pollens, including Ulmus (OR, 42.8) and Ambrosia (OR, 22.4).

CONCLUSION

The most important conditions linked to melon allergy are pollen allergy (100%), allergy to other nonrelated fruits, mainly peach (up to 62%), and latex sensitivity (up to 23%). Some differential features of the pollinosis in melon allergy were a higher prevalence of asthma and a higher frequency of sensitization to several weed and tree pollens.

Immunoassay to quantify the major peach allergen Pru p 3 in foodstuffs. Differential allergen release and stability under physiological conditions

Pru p 3 is a lipid transfer protein (LTP) that has been identified as the major peach (Prunus persica) allergen. However, little is known about the amount present in both raw and processed foodstuffs. Moreover, the in vivo release upon consumption of peach-containing foods remains unclear. We have developed a sensitive monoclonal antibody-based ELISA for Pru p 3. The method has been applied to measure the allergen levels in foodstuffs and the allergen release under different physiological conditions. A significant variability in all raw peaches and peach-containing foods tested has been detected. The allergen was extracted more efficiently at a low pH, and it was highly resistant to pepsin. This ELISA will be very useful in controlling the allergen concentration in diagnostics, in evaluating threshold levels in provocation tests, and in detecting hidden allergens in processed foods and cosmetics.

Allergy to plant-derived fresh foods in a birch- and ragweed-free area

BACKGROUND

Allergy to plant-derived fresh foods has often been reported in geographical areas where birch or ragweed pollens are frequent and has been attributed to cross-reactivity to pollens.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study has been to evaluate allergy to plant-derived fresh foods among pollen-allergic patients from a birch and ragweed-free area.

METHODS

Ninety-five pollen-allergic patients took part in the study. The study consisted of a questionnaire, skin prick tests and challenge tests. Pollen skin tests to five grasses, eight trees and seven weeds were performed in duplicate. Prick tests (prick by prick) and challenge tests were carried out with the fresh foods.

RESULTS

Most patients allergic to pollens were sensitized to grass (Lolium and Phleum; 97.9%), followed by tree (Olea; 82.1%) and weed pollens (Plantago; 64.2%). 35 of the 95 pollen-allergic patients had positive skin test responses to some plant-derived fresh foods, the highest percentage corresponding to several fruits in the Rosaceae family (peach and pear, 26.3%), followed by Cucurbitacea fruits (melon, 13.7%). The 21. 05% of the pollen-allergic patients were allergic to some type of plant-derived fresh food. Peach was the plant-derived fresh food which most frequently elicited allergy symptoms (12.6%), followed by melon (7.36%). The cluster of positive responses to Rosaceae fruits was higher for skin testing than for challenge testing.

CONCLUSION

Peach was the most important allergy provoking fruit in a birch and ragweed free-area where apples were consumed at a rate of two times more than peaches and the patients allergic to pollen were principally sensitized to grass pollens.

Pollen allergy in peach-allergic patients: sensitization and cross-reactivity to taxonomically unrelated pollens

BACKGROUND

Fruit allergy has been attributed to cross-reactive IgE to pollens and has been associated with a particular pollen sensitization.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to evaluate sensitization to several taxonomically unrelated pollens in peach- and pollen-allergic patients and to study cross-reactivity between them.

METHODS

One hundred sixty-five patients were evaluated: 70 peach- allergic patients together with 95 pollen-allergic patients (control group). Pollen skin tests in duplicate were performed to 5 grasses, 8 trees, and 7 weeds. Cross-reactivity between peach and taxonomically diverse pollens was determined by radioallergosorbent inhibition and Western blot inhibition tests. Experiments were also carried out after preadsorption of the sera with purified natural profilin.

RESULTS

The skin test results revealed that peach-allergic patients frequently reacted to most pollens-grasses, weeds, and trees-even when some of these are not found in our geographic area. There was a statistically significant increase in sensitization frequency to most trees and weeds, with a statistically higher occurrence of asthma (odds ratio 2.98, 95% confidence interval 1.46-6.09). Inhibition test results provided evidence that taxonomically unrelated grasses, weeds, and trees produced various and substantial degrees of inhibition in specific IgE to peach and that the peach extract elicited strong inhibitions to those pollens. Profilin was found to be a relevant cross-reactive antigen in these patients.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study provide evidence that peach allergy is linked to sensitization to several taxonomically unrelated pollens. This is attributable to the ubiquitous nature of the IgE binding determinants-such as profilins-between peach and taxonomically unrelated pollens.