From PLoS website: In general, dietary antigens are tolerated by the gut associated immune system. Impairment of this so-called oral tolerance is a serious health risk. We have previously shown that activation of the ligand-dependent transcription factor aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR) by the environmental pollutant 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) affects both oral tolerance and food allergy. In this study, we determine whether a common plant-derived, dietary AhR-ligand modulates oral tolerance as well. We therefore fed mice with indole-3-carbinole (I3C), an AhR ligand that is abundant in cruciferous plants. We show that several I3C metabolites were detectable in the serum after feeding, including the high-affinity ligand 3,3´-diindolylmethane (DIM). I3C feeding robustly induced the AhR-target gene CYP4501A1 in the intestine; I3C feeding also induced the aldh1 gene, whose product catalyzes the formation of retinoic acid (RA), an inducer of regulatory T cells. We then measured parameters indicating oral tolerance and severity of peanut-induced food allergy. In contrast to the tolerance-breaking effect of TCDD, feeding mice with chow containing 2 g/kg I3C lowered the serum anti-ovalbumin IgG1 response in an experimental oral tolerance protocol. Moreover, I3C feeding attenuated symptoms of peanut allergy. In conclusion, the dietary compound I3C can positively influence a vital immune function of the gut.
MULTIFILE
From the publisher: "Background: The introduction of whole new foods in a population may lead to sensitization and food allergy. This constitutes a potential public health problem and a challenge to risk assessors and managers as the existing understanding of the pathophysiological processes and the currently available biological tools for prediction of the risk for food allergy development and the severity of the reaction are not sufficient. There is a substantial body of in vivo and in vitro data describing molecular and cellular events potentially involved in food sensitization. However, these events have not been organized in a sequence of related events that is plausible to result in sensitization, and useful to challenge current hypotheses. The aim of this manuscript was to collect and structure the current mechanistic understanding of sensitization induction to food proteins by applying the concept of adverse outcome pathway (AOP). Main body: The proposed AOP for food sensitization is based on information on molecular and cellular mechanisms and pathways evidenced to be involved in sensitization by food and food proteins and uses the AOPs for chemical skin sensitization and respiratory sensitization induction as templates. Available mechanistic data on protein respiratory sensitization were included to fill out gaps in the understanding of how proteins may affect cells, cell-cell interactions and tissue homeostasis. Analysis revealed several key events (KE) and biomarkers that may have potential use in testing and assessment of proteins for their sensitizing potential. Conclusion: The application of the AOP concept to structure mechanistic in vivo and in vitro knowledge has made it possible to identify a number of methods, each addressing a specific KE, that provide information about the food allergenic potential of new proteins. When applied in the context of an integrated strategy these methods may reduce, if not replace, current animal testing approaches. The proposed AOP will be shared at the www.aopwiki.org platform to expand the mechanistic data, improve the confidence in each of the proposed KE and key event relations (KERs), and allow for the identification of new, or refinement of established KE and KERs." Authors: Jolanda H. M. van BilsenEmail author, Edyta Sienkiewicz-Szłapka, Daniel Lozano-Ojalvo, Linette E. M. Willemsen, Celia M. Antunes, Elena Molina, Joost J. Smit, Barbara Wróblewska, Harry J. Wichers, Edward F. Knol, Gregory S. Ladics, Raymond H. H. Pieters, Sandra Denery-Papini, Yvonne M. Vissers, Simona L. Bavaro, Colette Larré, Kitty C. M. Verhoeckx and Erwin L. Roggen
LINK
From Pubmed: " BACKGROUND: Antigen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) is a promising therapeutic approach for both cow's milk allergy (CMA) and peanut allergy (PNA), but needs optimization in terms of efficacy and safety. AIM: Compare oral immunotherapy (OIT) and subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT) in murine models for CMA and PNA and determine the dose of allergen needed to effectively modify parameters of allergy. METHODS: Female C3H/HeOuJ mice were sensitized intragastrically (i.g.) to whey or peanut extract with cholera toxin. Mice were treated orally (5 times/week) or subcutaneously (3 times/week) for three consecutive weeks. Hereafter, the acute allergic skin response, anaphylactic shock symptoms and body temperature were measured upon intradermal (i.d.) and intraperitoneal (i.p.) challenge, and mast cell degranulation was measured upon i.g. challenge. Allergen-specific IgE, IgG1 and IgG2a were measured in serum at different time points. Single cell suspensions derived from lymph organs were stimulated with allergen to induce cytokine production and T cell phenotypes were assessed using flow cytometry. RESULTS: Both OIT and SCIT decreased clinically related signs upon challenge in the CMA and PNA model. Interestingly, a rise in allergen-specific IgE was observed during immunotherapy, hereafter, treated mice were protected against the increase in IgE caused by allergen challenge. Allergen-specific IgG1 and IgG2a increased due to both types of AIT. In the CMA model, SCIT and OIT reduced the percentage of activated Th2 cells and increased the percentage of activated Th1 cells in the spleen. OIT increased the percentage of regulatory T cells (Tregs) and activated Th2 cells in the MLN. Th2 cytokines IL-5, IL-13 and IL-10 were reduced after OIT, but not after SCIT. In the PNA model, no differences were observed in percentages of T cell subsets. SCIT induced Th2 cytokines IL-5 and IL-10, whereas OIT had no effect. CONCLUSION: We have shown clinical protection against allergic manifestations after OIT and SCIT in a CMA and PNA model. Although similar allergen-specific antibody patterns were observed, differences in T cell and cytokine responses were shown. Whether these findings are related to a different mechanism of AIT in CMA and PNA needs to be elucidated."
MULTIFILE
