Evaluation of biotechnology-derived novel proteins for the risk of food-allergic potential: advances in the development of animal models and future challenges

Applications of Mouse Models to the Study of Food Allergy

Mouse models of allergic disease offer numerous advantages when compared to the models of other animals. However, selection of appropriate mouse models is critical to advance the field of food allergy by revealing mechanisms of allergy and for testing novel therapeutic approaches. All current mouse models for food allergy have weaknesses that may limit their applicability to human disease. Aspects such as the genetic predisposition to allergy or tolerance from the strain of mouse used, allergen dose, route of exposure (oral, intranasal, intraperitoneal, or epicutaneous), damage of the epithelial barrier, use of adjuvants, food matrix effects, or composition of the microbiota should be considered prior to the selection of a specific murine model and contemplated according to the intended purpose of the study. This chapter reviews our current knowledge on the application of mouse models to food allergy research and the variables that may influence the successful development of each type of model.

Reduction of the histamine content and immunoreactivity of parvalbumin inDecapterus maruadsiby a Maillard reaction combined with pressure treatment

The aim of this study was to develop an effective method for decreasing the content of histamine and the immunoreactivity of parvalbumin inDecapterus maruadsi.

Development and characterization of an effective food allergy model in Brown Norway rats

BACKGROUND

Food allergy (FA) is an adverse health effect produced by the exposure to a given food. Currently, there is no optimal animal model of FA for the screening of immunotherapies or for testing the allergenicity of new foods.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to develop an effective and rapid model of FA in Brown Norway rats. In order to establish biomarkers of FA in rat, we compared the immune response and the anaphylactic shock obtained in this model with those achieved with only intraperitoneal immunization.

METHODS

Rats received an intraperitoneal injection of ovalbumin (OVA) with alum and toxin from Bordetella pertussis, and 14 days later, OVA by oral route daily for three weeks (FA group). A group of rats receiving only the i.p. injection (IP group) were also tested. Serum anti-OVA IgE, IgG1, IgG2a, IgG2b and IgA antibodies were quantified throughout the study. After an oral challenge, body temperature, intestinal permeability, motor activity, and mast cell protease II (RMCP-II) levels were determined. At the end of the study, anti-OVA intestinal IgA, spleen cytokine production, lymphocyte composition of Peyer's patches and mesenteric lymph nodes, and gene expression in the small intestine were quantified.

RESULTS

Serum OVA-specific IgG1, IgG2a and IgG2b concentrations rose with the i.p. immunization but were highly augmented after the oral OVA administration. Anti-OVA IgE increased twofold during the first week of oral OVA gavage. The anaphylaxis in both IP and FA groups decreased body temperature and motor activity, whereas intestinal permeability increased. Interestingly, the FA group showed a much higher RMCP II serum protein and intestinal mRNA expression.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show both an effective and relatively rapid model of FA assessed by means of specific antibody titres and the high production of RMCP-II and its intestinal gene expression.

Allergic reactions compared between BN and Wistar rats after oral exposure to ovalbumin

There is currently no validated animal model for evaluating the potential allergenicity of food proteins. This study aimed to compare the allergic reactions between BN and Wistar rats after oral exposure to ovalbumin (OVA) by studying immune responses and clinical manifestations. Female BN and Wistar rats were orally exposed to OVA on days 1 and 14, and thereafter daily from day 15 to day 42. Sera and plasma were screened for OVA-specific antibodies and histamine. On day 49, all the OVA-sensitized animals were orally challenged with OVA before blood pressure was measured. One day later (on day 50), histopathology and differential cell counts were performed. The results indicate that oral exposure of BN rats to OVA yielded IgE, IgG, and IgG(2a) antibody responses that were generally of higher levels than those observed in Wistar rats (p < 0.05). However, the Wistar rats presented with more serious clinical manifestations and histopathologic changes that could have serious implications for any OVA-induced anaphylaxis. The studies here proved that OVA-sensitized BN and Wistar rats evinced different immune responses and clinical manifestations; these outcomes suggested that the two rat strains might differ in their immunologic mechanisms of allergy and that there was no correlation between immune responses and the severity of clinical symptoms. To be clear, the data from these studies should be viewed as 'preliminary', as only a single protein allergen was examined. Accordingly, further studies are needed to compare the allergic reactions between BN and Wistar rats by using purified strong-, weak-, and non-allergenic proteins based on the experiments reported here.

Effective induction of oral anaphylaxis to ovalbumin in mice sensitized by feeding of the antigen with aid of oil emulsion and salicylate

It is important to evaluate the ability of novel proteins in food crops and products to elicit potentially harmful immunologic responses, including allergic hypersensitivity. We developed a novel mouse model of food allergy involving an oral challenge of a protein antigen after feeding of the antigen in combination with modulating factors often ingested in daily life, namely, dietary oil emulsion and salicylate. In the model, BALB/c mice were sensitized orally for three weeks with ovalbumin (OVA) in linoleic acid/lecithin emulsion, followed immediately by intraperitoneal injection of sodium salicylate. At the end of the sensitization, the incidence of mice positive for serum OVA-specific IgG1 but not IgE had significantly increased in the combined-sensitization group. After the 3-week sensitization, a single or double oral challenge with OVA effectively and significantly caused severe anaphylaxis, as compared with the groups sensitized with OVA in the emulsion or the vehicle alone. Moderate increase of plasma histamine and intestinal abnormality in histology was found only in the combined-sensitization group. Anaphylaxis symptoms in the sensitized mice were induced more by oral challenge than by intravenous challenge, suggesting a critical role for the mucosal system. This is the first model for successful induction of oral anaphylaxis in mice sensitized by feeding of food protein without adjuvant. It will be useful to elucidate the mechanism of food allergy and to detect modulating factors of oral allergy at sensitization using this model, which simulates real life conditions.