Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35762305›Full record

ArticleGM crops & food2022

Slow alignment of GMO allergenicity regulations with science on protein digestibility.

Rod A Herman, John X Q Zhang, Jason M Roper

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in GM crops & food, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rod A HermanRegulatory and Stewardship, Corteva Agriscience, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2201-1048
John X Q ZhangRegulatory and Stewardship, Corteva Agriscience, Johnston, Iowa, USA.
Jason M RoperRegulatory and Stewardship, Corteva Agriscience, Newark Delaware, USA.
Corteva (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current science on food allergy supports the dual allergen exposure hypothesis where sensitization to allergenic proteins is favored by dermal and inhalation exposure, and tolerization against allergy is favored by exposure in the gut. This hypothesis is bolstered by the epidemiological evidence showing that regions where children are exposed early in life to allergenic foods have lower rates of allergy. This led medical experts to replace the previous recommendation to exclude commonly allergenic foods from the diets of young children with the current recommendation that such foods be introduced to children early in life. Past beliefs that lowering gut exposure would reduce the likelihood that a protein would be allergenic led regulators and risk assessors to consider digestively stable proteins to be of greater allergenic risk. This resulted in international guidance and government regulations for newly expressed proteins in genetically engineered crops that aligned with this belief. Despite empirical results showing that allergens are no more digestively stable than non-allergens, and that gut exposure favors tolerization over sensitization, regulations have not come into alignment with the current science prompting developers to continue to engineer proteins for increased digestibility. In some rare cases, this could potentially increase sensitization risk.

Indexed as

AllergensFood HypersensitivityGenetic EngineeringHumansPlants, Genetically ModifiedProteinsAllergensProteinsDermaldigestibilitydual allergen exposure hypothesiselicitationgenetically engineered cropsinhalationmedical expertsoralsensitizationupdated regulation

Identifiers

PMID35762305
PMCPMC9245576
OpenAlexW4283658978

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.