Approaches to risk assessment in food allergy: Report from a workshop ‘‘developing a framework for assessing the risk from allergenic foods”

2009 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 480-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.B. Madsen ◽  
S. Hattersley ◽  
J. Buck ◽  
S.M. Gendel ◽  
G.F. Houben ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
2013 ◽  
Vol 62 ◽  
pp. 485-491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin C. Remington ◽  
Steve L. Taylor ◽  
David B. Marx ◽  
Barbara J. Petersen ◽  
Joseph L. Baumert

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kitty Verhoeckx ◽  
Katrine Lindholm Bøgh ◽  
Anne Constable ◽  
Michelle M. Epstein ◽  
Karin Hoffmann Sommergruber ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 91-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
René R W Crevel ◽  
Stefan Ronsmans ◽  
Cyril F M Marsaux ◽  
Diána Bánáti

Abstract The International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Europe Food Allergy Task Force was founded in response to early public concerns about the growing impact of food allergies almost coincidentally with the publication of the 1995 Food and Agriculture Organization-World Health Organization Technical Consultation on Food Allergies. In line with ILSI principles aimed to foster collaboration between stakeholders to promote consensus on science-based approaches to food safety and nutrition, the task force has played a central role since then in the development of risk assessment for food allergens. This ranged from consideration of the criteria to be applied to identifying allergens of public health concern through methodologies to determine the relationship between dose and the proportion of allergic individuals reacting, as well as the nature of the observed responses. The task force also promoted the application of novel, probabilistic risk assessment methods to better delineate the impact of benchmarks, such as reference doses, and actively participated in major European food allergy projects, such as EUROPREVALL, the European Union (EU)-funded project “The prevalence, cost and basis of food allergy across Europe;” and iFAAM, “Integrated approaches to food allergen and allergy risk management,” also an EU-funded project. Over the years, the task force’s work has evolved as answers to initial questions raised further issues: Its current work program includes a review of analytical methods and how different ones can best be deployed given their strengths and limitations. Another activity, which has just commenced, aims to develop a framework for stakeholders to achieve consensus on acceptable risk.


Allergy ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 56 (s67) ◽  
pp. 94-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. W. R. Crevel
Keyword(s):  

2018 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J Walker ◽  
M Hazel Gowland ◽  
John Points

Abstract The U.K. food and grocery market is highly significant financially and dominated by 10 retailers within a regulated and extremely economically competitive environment. We summarize the approach of U.K. retailers to allergen risk assessment (RA) and risk management (RM) within the U.K. legal framework and explore public visibility of retailers’ allergen policies. RA and RM of allergens appear effective in curtailing retail-triggered severe food allergy reactions. However, allergen recalls remain high, precautionary allergen labeling (PAL) remains an area of confusion, and there is no consistent Web-based provision of information for consumers who have allergies. Resolution of PAL awaits an agreed-on threshold framework, but a key challenge is to engage with patients and gain their trust rather than thrust education at them. It would be helpful for retailers to publish their allergen RA and RM policies. A target should be agreed on between government and retailers for a reduction in the proliferation of PAL wording variants by a given date within the next 3 years. A further hurdle is potentially flawed allergen analysis—development of reference methods and reference materials are acknowledged needs. Laboratories should report allergen results in an informative manner, communicating uncertainty and caveats. Ideally a laboratory representative would be included on any incident control team. Efforts must continue to standardize preparedness for protecting and defending food and drink from deliberate attack.


Allergy ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 73 (8) ◽  
pp. 1609-1621 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Flores Kim ◽  
N. McCleary ◽  
B. I. Nwaru ◽  
A. Stoddart ◽  
A. Sheikh

2014 ◽  
Vol 105 (1) ◽  
pp. 72
Author(s):  
S M Risenga ◽  
M Kriel ◽  
S Karabus ◽  
A I Manjra ◽  
C L Gray ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
J.C. Ribeiro ◽  
B. Sousa-Pinto ◽  
J. Fonseca ◽  
S. Caldas Fonseca ◽  
L.M. Cunha

Edible insects are a unique food source, requiring extensive allergenic risk assessment before its safe introduction in the food market. In a recent systematic review, crustacean allergic subjects were identified as a risk group due to cross-reactivity mainly mediated by tropomyosin and arginine kinase. Immunologic co-sensitisation to house dust mites (HDM) was also demonstrated, but its clinical significance and molecular mechanisms were unclear. Furthermore, case reports of food allergy to insects were also analysed but lack of contextual information hindered the analysis. The main goal of this review is to provide an update of new information regarding food allergy caused by insects, covering relevant topics considering the guidelines for allergic risk assessment in novel foods. Newly published studies have further confirmed the role of tropomyosin as a cross-reactive allergen between edible insects and crustaceans, although there are some questions regarding the immunoglobulin E (IgE)-reactivity of this allergen in mealworm species. Furthermore, only specific treatments (enzymatic hydrolysis combined with thermal treatments) were able to eliminate IgE-reactivity of edible insects. Primary sensitisation (e.g. to Tenebrio molitor) has also been shown to be an important pathway for the development of food allergies, with responsible allergens being dependent on the route of sensitisation. However, more studies are necessary to better understand the potential of primary sensitisation causing cross-reactivity with other insect species, crustaceans or HDM. The clinical significance and molecular mechanisms involved in cross-reactivity between edible insects and HDM are still unclear, and a major focus should be given to better understand which allergens cause co-sensitisations between HDM and edible insects and what is the risk of HDM-only allergic subjects consuming edible insects. Contextual information about the reported cases of allergic reactions to insects have further demonstrated that insect-rearing workers and subjects with allergic diseases (in particular, food allergy to crustaceans) are the major risk groups.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document