Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30945370›Full record

ArticleClinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology2019

Milk processing increases the allergenicity of cow's milk-Preclinical evidence supported by a human proof-of-concept provocation pilot.

Suzanne Abbring, Daniel Kusche, Thomas C Roos, Mara A P Diks, Gert Hols, Johan Garssen, Ton Baars, Betty C A M van Esch

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Intestinal uptake regulates T cell responses to dietary antigens.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Effects of Food Processing on Allergenicity.Current allergy and asthma reports · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Suzanne AbbringDivision of Pharmacology, Faculty of Science, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6530-561X
Daniel KuscheSection of Organic Farming and Cropping Systems, Faculty of Organic Agricultural Sciences, University of Kassel, Witzenhausen, Germany.
Thomas C RoosÄrztehaus am Kreiskrankenhaus, Wittmund, Germany.
Mara A P DiksDivision of Pharmacology, Faculty of Science, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Gert HolsDanone Nutricia Research, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Johan GarssenDivision of Pharmacology, Faculty of Science, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ton BaarsResearch Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), Frick, Switzerland.
Betty C A M van EschDivision of Pharmacology, Faculty of Science, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Utrecht University · NLDanone (Netherlands) · NLForschungsinstitut für Biologischen Landbau · CHUniversity of Kassel · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral studies demonstrated the adverse effect of milk processing on the allergy-protective capacity of raw cow's milk. Whether milk processing also affects the allergenicity of raw milk is hardly investigated.

objectiveTo assess the allergenicity of raw (unprocessed) and processed cow's milk in a murine model for food allergy as well as in cow's milk allergic children.

methodsC3H/HeOuJ mice were either sensitized to whole milk (raw cow's milk, heated raw cow's milk or shop milk [store-bought milk]) and challenged with cow's milk protein or they were sensitized and challenged to whey proteins (native or heated). Acute allergic symptoms, mast cell degranulation, allergen-specific IgE levels and cytokine concentrations were determined upon challenge. Cow's milk allergic children were tested in an oral provocation pilot with organic raw and conventional shop milk.

resultsMice sensitized to raw milk showed fewer acute allergic symptoms upon intradermal challenge than mice sensitized to processed milk. The acute allergic skin response was low (103 ± 8.5 µm vs 195 ± 17.7 µm for heated raw milk, P < 0.0001 and vs 149 ± 13.6 µm for shop milk, P = 0.0316), and there were no anaphylactic shock symptoms and no anaphylactic shock-induced drop in body temperature. Moreover, allergen-specific IgE levels and Th2 cytokines were significantly lower in raw milk sensitized mice. Interestingly, the reduced sensitizing capacity was preserved in the isolated native whey protein fraction of raw milk. Besides, native whey protein challenge diminished allergic symptoms in mice sensitized to heated whey proteins. In an oral provocation pilot, cow's milk allergic children tolerated raw milk up to 50 mL, whereas they only tolerated 8.6 ± 5.3 mL shop milk (P = 0.0078). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study demonstrates that raw (unprocessed) cow's milk and native whey proteins have a lower allergenicity than their processed counterparts. The preclinical evidence in combination with the human proof-of-concept provocation pilot provides evidence that milk processing negatively influences the allergenicity of milk.

Indexed as

Food HandlingAcute DiseaseAnimalsCattleFemaleHumansMiceMilkMilk HypersensitivityPilot ProjectsProof of Concept StudyWhey ProteinsWhey Proteinsallergenicitycow's milkcow's milk allergic childrenmilk processingmouse modeloral provocation pilotVorzugsmilch

Identifiers

PMID30945370
PMCPMC6849791
OpenAlexW2925350567

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.