Probiotics and prebiotics, alone or together (synbiotics), can influence the intestinal microbiota and modulate the immune response. They may therefore be tools that can prevent or alleviate certain pathologies involving the gut immune system, such as allergies for which no treatment is yet available. This review focuses first on the definitions of probiotics, prebiotics, and synbiotics and key cells in the gut immune system. It then discusses their effects on mucosal immune stimulation. Experimental findings suggest that different probiotic species have similar effects on innate immunity by improving the mechanisms of pathogen destruction. On the contrary, their impacts seem to be variable on the adaptive immune system. Prebiotics can also exert an influence on the gut immune system via the stimulation of the autochthonous bacteria metabolism. Finally, this review focuses on the effects of food supplements on allergy. Different studies performed in humans or rodents have supported a potential role for selected probiotics and prebiotics in reducing some allergic parameters. Probiotic effects on allergy treatment are unclear, especially in human studies. However, they are potentially effective at short-term for prevention when they are administered in perinatal conditions. A clinical study performed with an infant cohort revealed a beneficial effect of prebiotics in preventing allergic manifestations at long-term. Further studies are nonetheless essential to confirm these findings. Food supplements offer potential tools for the prevention or treatment of allergy, but insufficient evidence is available at present to recommend their use in clinical practice.

BackgroundThe introduction of whole new foods in a population may lead to sensitization and food allergy. This constitutes a potential public health problem and a challenge to risk assessors and managers as the existing understanding of the pathophysiological processes and the currently available biological tools for prediction of the risk for food allergy development and the severity of the reaction are not sufficient. There is a substantial body of in vivo and in vitro data describing molecular and cellular events potentially involved in food sensitization. However, these events have not been organized in a sequence of related events that is plausible to result in sensitization, and useful to challenge current hypotheses. The aim of this manuscript was to collect and structure the current mechanistic understanding of sensitization induction to food proteins by applying the concept of adverse outcome pathway (AOP).Main bodyThe proposed AOP for food sensitization is based on information on molecular and cellular mechanisms and pathways evidenced to be involved in sensitization by food and food proteins and uses the AOPs for chemical skin sensitization and respiratory sensitization induction as templates. Available mechanistic data on protein respiratory sensitization were included to fill out gaps in the understanding of how proteins may affect cells, cell–cell interactions and tissue homeostasis. Analysis revealed several key events (KE) and biomarkers that may have potential use in testing and assessment of proteins for their sensitizing potential.ConclusionThe application of the AOP concept to structure mechanistic in vivo and in vitro knowledge has made it possible to identify a number of methods, each addressing a specific KE, that provide information about the food allergenic potential of new proteins. When applied in the context of an integrated strategy these methods may reduce, if not replace, current animal testing approaches. The proposed AOP will be shared at the www.aopwiki.org platform to expand the mechanistic data, improve the confidence in each of the proposed KE and key event relations (KERs), and allow for the identification of new, or refinement of established KE and KERs.

Food allergy has become a major health issue in developed countries, therefore there is an urgent need to develop analytical methods able to detect and quantify with a good sensitivity and reliability some specific allergens in complex food matrices. In this paper, we present a targeted MS/MS approach to compare the relative abundance of the major recognized wheat allergens in the salt-soluble (albumin/globulin) fraction of wheat grains. Twelve allergens were quantified in seven wheat varieties, selected from three Triticum species: T. aestivum (bread wheat), T. durum (durum wheat), and T. monococcum. The allergens were monitored from one or two proteotypic peptides and their relative abundance was deduced from the intensity of one fragment measured in MS/MS. Whereas the abundance of some of the targeted allergens was quite stable across the genotypes, others like alpha-amylase inhibitors showed clear differences according to the wheat species, in accordance with the results of earlier functional studies. This study enriches the scarce knowledge available on allergens content in wheat genotypes, and brings new perspectives for food safety and plant breeding.

The Working Group on Prolamin Analysis and Toxicity (WGPAT) organized a collaborative study to confirm whether the two R5 antibody-based ELISA test kits are able to detect gliadin in the lower mg/kg (ppm) level. Twenty laboratories investigated 12 blind-coded samples, spiked and naturally contaminated, to show the possibility of determining traces of gliadin in heat-treated or nonheat-treated foods by ELISA. It was shown that very small amounts of gliadin (below 100 ppm) could be detected by ELISA with a reproducibility RSD(R) (37%) and a repeatability RSD, (27%) common for ELISA under these conditions. The recovery of gliadin from the spiked samples was between 84 and 109%, based on the results of all laboratories, including those with poor performance. No false positives were found by the method (P < or =0.05), but one negative sample was contaminated during the bakery process. It is recommended that the method be accepted by AOAC as Official First Action.

No abstract