Threshold Dose for Peanut: A Risk Characterization Based Upon Published Results from Challenges of Peanut-Allergic Individuals

Taylor, Stephen L; Crevel, R.W.R.; Sheffield, David; Kabourek, Jamie; Baumert, Joe L.

doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2008.12.654

Cited by 15 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…EDp (expressed as milligrams of peanut and not as milligrams of protein, not included in Appendix A) were calculated by the same authors for peanut using two different datasets (Taylor et al, 2009b;Taylor et al, 2010). In the first study, data were obtained from 185 subjects participating in DBPCFCs for diagnostic purposes, because they were enrolled in immunotherapy trials, or for threshold-finding purposes.…”

Section: The Bench Mark Dose Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Scientific Opinion on the evaluation of allergenic foods and food ingredients for labelling purposes

Products¹

2014

EFS2

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following a request from the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the evaluation of allergenic foods and food ingredients for labelling purposes. In view of the request, the NDA Panel decided to update its previous opinions relative to food ingredients or substances with known allergenic potential listed in Annex IIIa of 2003/89/EC, as amended. These include cereals containing gluten, milk and dairy products, eggs, nuts, peanuts, soy, fish, crustaceans, molluscs, celery, lupin, sesame, mustard and sulphites. The opinion relates to immunoglobulin (Ig)E-and non-IgE-mediated food allergy, to coeliac disease and to adverse reactions to sulphites in food, and it does not address non-immune-mediated adverse reactions to food. It includes information on the prevalence of food allergy in unselected populations, proteins identified as food allergens, cross-reactivities, the effects of food processing on the allergenicity of foods and ingredients, methods for the detection of allergens and allergenic foods, doses observed to trigger adverse reactions in sensitive individuals and risk assessment methodologies that have been used to derive individual and population thresholds for selected allergenic foods. The present opinion relates to immunoglobulin (Ig)E-and non-IgE-mediated food allergy, to coeliac disease and to adverse reactions to sulphites in food, and it does not address non-immune-mediated adverse reactions to food. For each food ingredient or substance listed in Annex IIIa, it includes information on the prevalence of food allergy in unselected populations, on proteins identified as food allergens, on cross-reactivities, on the effects of food processing on the allergenicity of foods and ingredients, on methods for the detection of allergens and allergenic foods, and on doses observed to trigger adverse reactions in sensitive individuals.Immune-mediated adverse reactions to foods manifest with clinical signs and symptoms of variable severity and duration, which may affect different organs and systems. Anaphylactic reactions to food are IgE mediated and may occur at any age. Non-IgE-mediated food allergy includes a wide range of diseases, including protein-induced enterocolitis and eosinophilic oesophagitis.A careful family and clinical history are the basis for diagnosis of food allergy. Food diaries, skin prick tests (SPTs), allergen-specific IgE measurements, food elimination diets and food challenges are part of the standard protocol for the diagnosis of food allergy. A positive SPT indicates sensitisation to the tested food, but it is not diagnostic of food allergy. Allergen-specific serum IgE antibodies similarly denote sensitisation to a particular food, but they are not diagnostic without a clinical history or food challenge. The use of atopy patch tests for the diagnosis of food allergy is controversial. Other available tests have no current role in the diagnosis of food allergy. Diag...

show abstract

Section: The Bench Mark Dose Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four studies (Hourihane et al, 1997;Wensing Marjolein et al, 2002;Lewis et al, 2005;Flinterman et al, 2006a) were specifically designed to assess LOAEL doses and provide accurate information on the doses tested (Taylor et al, 2009b).…”

Section: Minimum (Observed) Eliciting Dosesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific Opinion on the evaluation of allergenic foods and food ingredients for labelling purposes

Products¹

2014

EFS2

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, appropriate GAP and GMP may help to reduce the use of broad labeling such as " may contain " or " made in a factory that processes peanuts and tree nuts " and will enhance the capacity of the food industry to more accurately indicate the level of contamination likely to be present in their food products as well as increase their capacity to produce food products that are truly " free from " peanuts and tree nuts. Additionally, new research studies on threshold dose determination for peanuts and tree nuts such as that conducted by Taylor et al [155] will be useful to establish guidelines for the industry.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Processing Foods without Peanuts and Tree Nuts

Rajamohamed

Boye

2010

Allergen Management in the Food Industry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Recently, this approach has been applied to published challenge data on peanut [12] . Dose distribution modeling helps to characterize the response to allergens and can be used in a deterministic risk assessment.…”

Section: Risk Characterizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Clearly, the actual threshold will depend on the criteria used to defi ne a response, with a continuing debate about whether only independently observable ( " objective " ) signs should be considered, or whether symptoms reported by the patient but not capable of independent verifi cation ( " subjective " ) should be taken into account. There is also a debate about how both the threshold (no effect level) and the LOAEL should be derived from the challenge results, but application of the statistical technique known as interval censoring survival analysis (ICSA) can overcome this issue [12] . Threshold studies are performed by titrated food challenges with increasing doses applied at intervals of usually 15 -30 minutes, chosen mainly for reasons of practicality.…”

Section: Challenges and Limitations In The Establishment Of Med S (Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk Assessment for Food Allergy

Crevel¹

2010

Allergen Management in the Food Industry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Threshold Dose for Peanut: A Risk Characterization Based Upon Published Results from Challenges of Peanut-Allergic Individuals

Cited by 15 publications

References 0 publications

Scientific Opinion on the evaluation of allergenic foods and food ingredients for labelling purposes

Scientific Opinion on the evaluation of allergenic foods and food ingredients for labelling purposes

Processing Foods without Peanuts and Tree Nuts

Risk Assessment for Food Allergy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About