Current Allergy and Asthma Reports

, Volume 6, Issue 2, pp 153–159 | Cite as

Novel foods to treat food allergy and gastrointestinal infection

Abstract

The gastrointestinal tract communicates directly with the external environment. Necessary nutrients must be absorbed and commensal bacteria tolerated, and foreign proteins, antigens, and pathogens must be simultaneously excluded or destroyed. Immaturity or disruption of the mucosal immune defenses increases vulnerability to food allergy, intolerance, and infectious disease. Diseases resulting from ingested foreign proteins and organisms are increasing and cause morbidity and mortality worldwide. There is no specific treatment for food allergy other than avoidance. Vaccination for infectious disease is limited by the cost and logistics of distribution and administration, particularly in developing countries. Novel strategies are being explored to modulate the gut mucosal immune system by altering protein expression in food. Crops are being developed to remove deleterious allergens to prevent immunogenic exposure while preserving nutritional quality. Local food plants that express protein fragments of pathogens might provide an effective means to stimulate gut mucosal immunity while increasing vaccine accessibility.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Mayer L: Mucosal immunity. Pediatrics 2003, 111:1595–1600.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kagan RS: Food allergy: an overview. Environ Health Perspect 2003, 111:223–225.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Castro GA, Arntzen CJ: Immunophysiology of the gut: a research frontier for integrative studies of the common mucosal immune system. Am J Physiol 1993, 265:G599-G610.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Langridge WHR: Edible vaccines. Sci Am 2000, 283:66–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sicherer SH, Sampson HA, Burks AW: Peanut and soy allergy: a clinical and therapeutic dilemma. Allergy 2000, 55:515–521.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bannon GA, Shin D, Maleki S, et al.: Tertiary structure and biophysical properties of a major peanut allergen, implications for the production of a hypoallergenic protein. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 1999, 118:315–316.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rabjohn P, West CM, Connaughton C, et al.: Modification of peanut allergen Ara h 3:effects on IgE binding and Tcell stimulation. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2002, 128:15–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burks AW Jr, Brooks JR, Sampson HA: Allergenicity of major component proteins of soybean determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and immunoblotting in children with atopic dermatitis and positive soy challenges. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1988, 81:1135–1142.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ogawa T, Bando N, Tsuji H, et al.: Investigation of the IgEbinding proteins in soybeans by immunoblotting with the sera of the soybean-sensitive patients with atopic dermatitis. J Nutr Sci Vitaminol 1991, 37:555–565.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herman EM, Helm RM, Jung R, Kinney AJ: Genetic modification removes an immunodominant allergen from soybean. Plant Physiol 2003, 132:36–43. This study describes a complete knockout of the major soybean allergen, P34/Gly m Bd 30K, which was confirmed with analysis of sera samples from soybean-sensitive individuals. The study demonstrates the feasibility of specifically suppressing an endogenous allergen without changing plant agronomics or composition.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Suszkiw J: Researchers develop first hypoallergenic soybean. ARS National Program (#302) http://www.nps. ars.usda.gov. Accessed September 2002.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lemaux PG: Advances in technology for cereal breeding. Biotechnology Symposium. UC Davis. http://ucbiotech/ talks/crops/advances.html. Accessed August 29, 2000.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Matsumoto T: Mitigation of the action of wheat allergen by acidic oxidative potential water. Allergy 2002, 57:926–930.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Harder B: Target: celiac disease. Therapies aimed to complement or replace the gluten-free diet. Science News 2003, 163:392–393.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Buchanan B: Plant research briefing papers: Dr. Bob Buchanan explains how his research using plant biotechnology is removing allergens from existing foods. October 6, 1999 Statement. American Society of Plant Biologists 2003. http://www.aspb.org/publicaffairs/briefing/ buchanan.cfm. Accessed August 15, 2003.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Palosuo K: Update on wheat hypersensitivity. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2003, 3:205–209.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sicherer S: Clinical aspects of gastrointestinal food allergy in childhood. Pediatrics 2003, 111:1609–1616.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Palosuo K, Alenius H, Varjonen E, et al.: A novel wheat gliadin as a cause of exercise-induced anaphylaxis. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1999, 103:912–917.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Williamson D, Marsh MN: Celiac disease. Mol Biotechnol 2002, 22:293–299.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Benahmed M, Mention J-J, Matysiak-Budnikk T, et al.: Celiac disease: a future without gluten-free diet? Gastroenterology 2003, 125:1264–1267.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    MacDonald WC, Brandborg LL, Flick AI, et al.: Studies of celiac sprue. IV. The response of the whole length of the small bowel to a gluten-free diet. Gastroenterology 1964, 47:573–589.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Celiac disease. NIH Publication No. 03-4269; http:// digestive.niddkk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/celiac/index.htm. July 2003. Accessed September 12, 2003.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Iughetti L, Bulgarelli S, Forese S, et al.: Endocrine aspects of celiac disease. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab 2003, 16:805–818.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Battais F, Pineau F, Popineau Y, et al.: Food allergy to wheat:identification of immunoglobulin E and immunoglobulin G-binding proteins with sequential extracts and purified proteins from wheat flour. Clin Exp Allergy 2003, 33:962–970.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vader LW, Stepniak DT, Bunnik EM, et al.: Characterization of cereal toxicity for celiac disease patients based on protein homology in grains. Gastroenterology 2003, 125:1105–1113. This study identifies novel T-cell stimulatory sequences in barley and rye on the basis of T-cell cross-reactivity with gluten proteins, factors that may explain the toxicity of these cereals for patients with celiac disease. Targeted mutagenesis induced subtle changes in gluten genes, which eliminated stimulation in some T-cell clones. These results suggest that subsets of celiac patients may benefit from such targeted mutagenesis or that further genetic manipulations may result in detoxified wheat for a broader range of patients (see Benahmed et al. [20] for further comment).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Buchanan BB, Adamidi C, Lozano RM, et al.: Thioredoxinlinked mitigation of allergic responses to wheat. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997, 94:5372–5377. Using a canine model system, the wheat allergic response was mitigated through reduction of intramolecular disulfide bonds by thioredoxin. This strategy may be applicable to other food allergens containing intramolecular disulfide bonds.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Barbeau WE, Novascone A, Elgert KD: Is celiac disease due to molecular mimicry between gliadin peptide-HLA class II molecule-T cell interactions and those of some unidenti fied superantigen? Mol Immunol 1997, 34:535–541.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Richter L, Kipp PB: Transgenic plants as edible vaccines. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol 1999, 240:159–176.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    James C, Krattiger AF: Global Review of the Field Testing and Commercialization of Transgenic Plants, 1986–1995: The First Decade of Crop Biotechnology. Ithaca, NY:ISAAA Briefs; 1996:1.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    May GD, Afza R, Mason HS, et al.: Generation of transgenic banana (Musa actiminata) plants via Agrobacteriummediated transformation. BIO TECH 1995, 13:486–492.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kapusta J, Modelska A, Pniewski T, et al.: Oral immunization of human with transgenic lettuce expressing hepatitis B surface antigen. Adv Exp Med Biol 2001, 495:299–303.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Moffat AS: Crop engineering goes south. Science 1999, 285:370–371.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Clendennen SK, May GD: Differential gene expression in ripening banana fruit. Plant Physiol 1997, 115:463–469.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Washam C: Biotechnology creating edible vaccines. Ann Intern Med 1997, 127:499.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kong Q, Richter L, Yang YF, et al.: Oral immunization with hepatitis B surface antigen expressed in transgenic plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2001, 98:11539–11544.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    World Health Organization: The World Health Report 1998 executive summary:life in the 21st century: a vision for all. http://www.who.int/whr/2001/archives/1998/ index.htm. Accessed April 12, 2002.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Black RE, Brown KH, Becker S, et al.: Longitudinal studies of infectious disease and physical growth in rural Bangladesh. II. Incidence of diarrhea and association with known pathogens. Am J Epidemiol 1982, 115:315–324.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Guerrant RL, Kirchhoff LV, Shields DS, et al.: Prospective study of diarrheal illness in Northeastern Brazil: patterns of disease, nutritional impact, etiologies, and risk factors. J Infect Dis 1983, 148:986–997.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Koletzki D, Zankl A, Gelderblom H, et al.: Mosaic hepatitis B virus core particles allow insertion of extended foreign protein segments. J Gen Virol 1997, 70:2049–2053.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Mason HS, Lam DM, Arntzen CJ: Expression of hepatitis B surface antigen in transgenic plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1992, 89:11745–11749.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tsarev S, Tsareva T, Emerson S, et al.: ELISA for antibody to hepatitis E virus (HEV) based on complete openended reading frame-2 protein expressed in insect cells: identification of HEV infection in primates. J Infect Dis 1993, 168:369–378.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ball JM, Hardy MK, Conner ME, et al.: Recombinant Norwalk virus-like particles as an oral vaccine. Arch Virol 1996, 12(Suppl):243–2491.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Crawford SE, Labbe M, Cohen J, et al.: Characterization of virus-like particles produced by the expression of rotavirus capsid proteins in insect cells. J Virol 1994, 68:5945–5952.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Thanavala Y, Yang Y-F, Lyons P, et al.: Immunogenictiy of transgenic plant-derived hepatitis B surface antigen. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1995, 92:3358–3361.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mason HS, Haq TA, Clements JD, et al.: Edible vaccine protects mice against Escherichia coli heat-labile enterotoxin (LT); potatoes expressing a synthetic LT-B gene. Vaccine 1998, 16:1336–1343.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Tacket CO, Mason HS, Lonsonky G, et al.: Immunogenicity in humans of a recombinant bacterial antigen delivered in a transgenic potato. Nat Med 1998, 4:607–609. This study demonstrates that humans can develop a serum and/or mucosal immune response to an antigen delivered in an edible transgenic plant, which may provide a basis for developing safe and inexpensive vaccines.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Yu J, Langridge HR: A plant-based multicomponent vaccine protects mice from enteric diseases. Nat Biotechnol 2001, 19:548–552.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Frenck RW Jr, Clemens J: Helicobacter in the developing world. Microbes Infect 2003, 5:705–713.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Svennerholm A-M, Quiding-Jarbrink M: Priming and expression of immune responses in the gastric mucosa. Microbes Infect 2003, 5:731–739.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Svennerholm A-M: Prospects for a mucosally administered vaccine against Helicobacter pylori. Vaccine 2003, 21:347–353.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Spencer RC: Bacillus anthracis. J Clin Path 2003, 56:182–186.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Aziz MA, Singh S, Kumar PA, et al.: Expression of protective antigen in transgenic plants: a step towards edible vaccine against anthrax. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2002, 299:345–351.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Sussman H: Spinach makes a safer anthrax vaccine. Drug Discovery Today 2003, 8:428–430.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Perr HA: Children and genetically engineered food: potentials and problems. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2002, 35:475–486. This is the first comprehensive summary of risks and benefits of genetically engineered foods to human health with particular emphasis on children. Benefits discussed include nutritionally enhanced crops, designer oils from oilseed crops to decrease disease risk, and edible vaccines. Safety issues, such as regulation, allergenicity, and altered gene expression in plants, bacteria, and humans, are addressed.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Evolving Foods and Children’s Health, Division of Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology, and NutritionCalifornia Pacific Medical CenterSan FranciscoUSA

Personalised recommendations