Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36483186›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in allergy2022

Suspected gut barrier disruptors and development of food allergy: Adjuvant effects and early immune responses.

Elena Klåpbakken Drønen, Ellen Namork, Hubert Dirven, Unni Cecilie Nygaard

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in allergy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Elena Klåpbakken DrønenDepartment for Chemical Toxicology, Division for Climate and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Ellen NamorkDepartment for Chemical Toxicology, Division for Climate and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Hubert DirvenDepartment for Chemical Toxicology, Division for Climate and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Unni Cecilie NygaardDepartment for Chemical Toxicology, Division for Climate and Health, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Norwegian Institute of Public Health · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Food allergy is an increasing public health challenge worldwide. It has recently been hypothesized that the increase in exposure to intestinal epithelial barrier-damaging biological and chemical agents contribute to this development. In animal models, exposure to adjuvants with a food allergen has been shown to promote sensitization and development of food allergy, and barrier disrupting capacities have been suggested to be one mechanism of adjuvant action. Here, we investigated how gut barrier disrupting compounds affected food allergy development in a mouse model of peanut allergy. Sensitization and clinical peanut allergy in C3H/HEOuJ mice were assessed after repeated oral exposure to peanut extract together with cholera toxin (CT; positive control), the mycotoxin deoxynivalenol (DON), house dust mite (HDM) or the pesticide glyphosate (GLY). In addition, we investigated early effects 4 to 48 h after a single exposure to the compounds by assessing markers of intestinal barrier permeability, alarmin production, intestinal epithelial responses, and local immune responses. CT and DON exerted adjuvant effects on peanut allergy development assessed as clinical anaphylaxis in mice. Early markers were affected only by DON, observed as increased IL-33 (interleukin 33) and thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) alarmin production in intestines and IL-33 receptor ST2 in serum. DON also induced an inflammatory immune response in lymph node cells stimulated with lipopolysaccharide (LPS). HDM and GLY did not clearly promote clinical food allergy and affected few of the early markers at the doses tested. In conclusion, oral exposure to CT and DON promoted development of clinical anaphylaxis in the peanut allergy mouse model. DON, but not CT, affected the early markers measured in this study, indicating that DON and CT have different modes of action at the early stages of peanut sensitization.

Indexed as

barrier disruptorscholera toxindeoxynivalenolfood allergyglyphosatehouse dust miteoralpeanut

Identifiers

PMID36483186
PMCPMC9723362
OpenAlexW4309717439

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.