Literature DB >> 15041142

A multi-laboratory evaluation of a common in vitro pepsin digestion assay protocol used in assessing the safety of novel proteins.

K Thomas1, M Aalbers, G A Bannon, M Bartels, R J Dearman, D J Esdaile, T J Fu, C M Glatt, N Hadfield, C Hatzos, S L Hefle, J R Heylings, R E Goodman, B Henry, C Herouet, M Holsapple, G S Ladics, T D Landry, S C MacIntosh, E A Rice, L S Privalle, H Y Steiner, R Teshima, R Van Ree, M Woolhiser, J Zawodny.   

Abstract

Rationale. Evaluation of the potential allergenicity of proteins derived from genetically modified foods has involved a weight of evidence approach that incorporates an evaluation of protein digestibility in pepsin. Currently, there is no standardized protocol to assess the digestibility of proteins using simulated gastric fluid. Potential variations in assay parameters include: pH, pepsin purity, pepsin to target protein ratio, target protein purity, and method of detection. The objective was to assess the digestibility of a common set of proteins in nine independent laboratories to determine the reproducibility of the assay when performed using a common protocol. Methods. A single lot of each test protein and pepsin was obtained and distributed to each laboratory. The test proteins consisted of Ara h 2 (a peanut conglutin-like protein), beta-lactoglobulin, bovine serum albumin, concanavalin A, horseradish peroxidase, ovalbumin, ovomucoid, phosphinothricin acetyltransferase, ribulose diphosphate carboxylase, and soybean trypsin inhibitor. A ratio of 10U of pepsin activity/microg test protein was selected for all tests (3:1 pepsin to protein, w:w). Digestions were performed at pH 1.2 and 2.0, with sampling at 0.5, 2, 5, 10, 20, 30, and 60min. Protein digestibility was assessed from stained gels following SDS-PAGE of digestion samples and controls. Results. Results were relatively consistent across laboratories for the full-length proteins. The identification of proteolytic fragments was less consistent, being affected by different fixation and staining methods. Overall, assay pH did not influence the time to disappearance of the full-length protein or protein fragments, however, results across laboratories were more consistent at pH 1.2 (91% agreement) than pH 2.0 (77%). Conclusions. These data demonstrate that this common protocol for evaluating the in vitro digestibility of proteins is reproducible and yields consistent results when performed using the same proteins at different laboratories.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15041142     DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2003.11.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol        ISSN: 0273-2300            Impact factor:   3.271


  29 in total

1.  Digestion of starch in a dynamic small intestinal model.

Authors:  M R Jaime-Fonseca; O Gouseti; P J Fryer; M S J Wickham; S Bakalis
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2015-12-19       Impact factor: 5.614

Review 2.  A comprehensive review of legume allergy.

Authors:  Alok Kumar Verma; Sandeep Kumar; Mukul Das; Premendra D Dwivedi
Journal:  Clin Rev Allergy Immunol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 8.667

3.  Denaturation and Oxidative Stability of Hemp Seed (Cannabis sativa L.) Protein Isolate as Affected by Heat Treatment.

Authors:  Vassilios Raikos; Garry Duthie; Viren Ranawana
Journal:  Plant Foods Hum Nutr       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 3.921

4.  Next-generation protein-rich potato expressing the seed protein gene AmA1 is a result of proteome rebalancing in transgenic tuber.

Authors:  Subhra Chakraborty; Niranjan Chakraborty; Lalit Agrawal; Sudip Ghosh; Kanika Narula; Shubhendu Shekhar; Prakash S Naik; P C Pande; Swarup Kumar Chakrborti; Asis Datta
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-09-20       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 5.  Suggested improvements for the allergenicity assessment of genetically modified plants used in foods.

Authors:  Richard E Goodman; Afua O Tetteh
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 4.806

Review 6.  Digestion assays in allergenicity assessment of transgenic proteins.

Authors:  Rod A Herman; Nicholas P Storer; Yong Gao
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 9.031

Review 7.  The food and environmental safety of Bt crops.

Authors:  Michael S Koch; Jason M Ward; Steven L Levine; James A Baum; John L Vicini; Bruce G Hammond
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 5.753

8.  Should digestion assays be used to estimate persistence of potential allergens in tests for safety of novel food proteins?

Authors:  Santiago Schnell; Rod A Herman
Journal:  Clin Mol Allergy       Date:  2009-01-15

9.  EVALLER: a web server for in silico assessment of potential protein allergenicity.

Authors:  Alvaro Martinez Barrio; Daniel Soeria-Atmadja; Anders Nistér; Mats G Gustafsson; Ulf Hammerling; Erik Bongcam-Rudloff
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2007-05-30       Impact factor: 16.971

10.  In vitro evaluation of digestive and endolysosomal enzymes to cleave CML-modified Ara h 1 peptides.

Authors:  Christopher P Mattison; Jens Dinter; Matthew J Berberich; Si-Yin Chung; Shawndrika S Reed; Sylvie Le Gall; Casey C Grimm
Journal:  Food Sci Nutr       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 2.863

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.