4.7 Article

In vivo methods for testing allergenicity show that high hydrostatic pressure hydrolysates of β-lactoglobulin are immunologically inert

期刊

JOURNAL OF DAIRY SCIENCE
卷 95, 期 2, 页码 541-548

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.3168/jds.2011-4646

关键词

beta-lactoglobulin; high-pressure hydrolysates; hypoallergenic; animal model

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry for Science and Innovation (MICIIN), Spain [AGL2008-01740]
  2. Comunidad de Madrid (CAM), Spain [P2009/AGR-1469]
  3. MICIIN [2007-00063]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The major milk allergen beta-lactoglobulin (beta-LG) exhibits an enhanced susceptibility to proteolysis under high hydrostatic pressure and this may be an efficient method to produce hypoallergenic hydrolysates. The aim of this work was to evaluate the in vivo allergenicity of 3 beta-LG hydrolysates produced under atmospheric pressure or high-pressure conditions. Hydrolysates were chosen based on previous experiments that showed that they provide a complete removal of intact beta-LG but differed in vitro IgE-binding properties that could be traced to the peptide pattern. The ability to trigger systemic anaphylaxis was assessed using C3H/HeJ mice orally sensitized to beta-LG. Outcome measures included symptom score, body temperature, serum mouse mast cell protease 1 (mMCP-1), and quantification of circulating basophils. Mast cell degranulation in vivo was assessed by passive cutaneous anaphylaxis. The 3 tested hydrolysates showed an abrogated allergenicity as revealed by the absence of anaphylactic symptoms and a decrease in body temperature. We demonstrated that the peptides present in the hydrolysates had lost their ability to cross-link 2 human IgE antibodies to induce mast cell degranulation, thus indicating that most of the peptides formed retain just one relevant IgE-binding epitope. The orally sensitized mouse model is a useful tool to address the in vivo allergenicity of novel milk formulas and demonstrates the safety of hydrolysates produced under high-pressure conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据