The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Scientific Opinion on the assessment of allergenicity of GM plants and microorganisms and derived food and feed
Open accessAbstract
Abstract The weight‐of‐evidence, case‐by‐case approach is considered the most appropriate way of assessing the allergenicity of genetically modified (GM) food and feed. This scientific opinion discusses various aspects to increase the strength and accuracy of this approach, including the latest developments pertaining to clinical aspects of allergic reactions, structural aspects of GM food and feed and in silico approaches, as well as IgE binding studies and cell‐based methods, profiling techniques and animal models. In this context, conclusions and recommendations are provided to update and complement current risk assessment strategies for the allergenicity assessment of newly expressed protein(s) and whole GM food and feed. In summary, it is recommended that with regard to the search for sequence homology and structural similarities, the local alignment method with a known allergen with a threshold of 35% sequence identity over a window of at least 80 amino acids is considered a minimal requirement. When IgE binding tests are considered necessary, e.g. when there is sequence homology and/or structure similarity with known allergens, the use of individual sera from allergic individuals rather than pooled sera is recommended. In addition to the pepsin resistance test, it is recommended that the resistance to digestion of the newly expressed proteins is evaluated using other in vitro digestibility tests mimicking physiological conditions of humans. Finally, when the recipient of the introduced gene is allergenic, in order to compare the allergenicty of the whole GM plant with that of its appropriate comparator(s), it is recommended that relevant characterised endogenous allergens are included in the comparative compositional analysis of the GM plant and its appropriate comparator(s). Proposals for the use of additional testing that may improve the weight‐of‐evidence approach and suggestions for further evaluation of new promising methods that are as yet in an early phase of development are also addressed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Basic local alignment search tool
Altschul, S. F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E. W., & Lipman, D. J. (1990) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1006/jmbi.1990.9999 · Cited by 98,669
Control of Regulatory T Cell Development by the Transcription Factor Foxp3
Hori, S., Nomura, T., & Sakaguchi, S. (2003) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1079490 · Cited by 8,187
Quantitative analysis of complex protein mixtures using isotope-coded affinity tags
Gygi, S. P., Rist, B., Gerber, S. A., Turecek, F., Gelb, M. H., & Aebersold, R. (1999) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/13690 · Cited by 4,683
The lipocalin protein family: structure and function
FLOWER, D. R. (1996) · Biochemical Journal · doi:10.1042/bj3180001 · Cited by 1,679
Cetuximab-Induced Anaphylaxis and IgE Specific for Galactose-α-1,3-Galactose
Chung, C. H., Mirakhur, B., Chan, E., Le, Q.-T., Berlin, J., Morse, M., Murphy, B. A., Satinover, S. M., Hosen, J., Mauro, D., et al. (2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa074943 · Cited by 1,521
Effects of protein aggregates: An immunologic perspective
Rosenberg, A. S. (2006) · The AAPS Journal · doi:10.1208/aapsj080359 · Cited by 1,355
Towards an understanding of the adjuvant action of aluminium
Marrack, P., McKee, A. S., & Munks, M. W. (2009) · Nature Reviews Immunology · doi:10.1038/nri2510 · Cited by 887
Sicherer, S. H., & Sampson, H. A. (2006) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2005.05.048 · Cited by 647
Fu, T.-J., Abbott, U. R., & Hatzos, C. (2002) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf020599h · Cited by 403
The Role of Protein Glycosylation in Allergy
Altmann, F. (2007) · International Archives of Allergy and Immunology · doi:10.1159/000096114 · Cited by 393
Molecular properties of food allergens
Breiteneder, H., & Mills, E. N. C. (2005) · Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology · doi:10.1016/j.jaci.2004.10.022 · Cited by 359
Greenbaum, J. A., Andersen, P. H., Blythe, M., Bui, H., Cachau, R. E., Crowe, J., Davies, M., Kolaskar, A. S., Lund, O., Morrison, S., et al. (2007) · Journal of Molecular Recognition · doi:10.1002/jmr.815 · Cited by 244
Local production of IgG, IgA and IgE antibodies in grass pollen hay fever
Platts-Mills, T. A. E. (1979) · The Journal of Immunology · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.122.6.2218 · Cited by 211
N- and O-linked oligosaccharides of allergenic glycoproteins
Fötisch, K., & Vieths*, S. (2001) · Glycoconjugate Journal · doi:10.1023/a:1014860030380 · Cited by 118
Cited by
Guidance on the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants
(GMO), E. P. O. G. M. O. (2010) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1879 · Cited by 428
Toxicological evaluation of proteins introduced into food crops
Hammond, B., Kough, J., Herouet-Guicheney, C., Jez, J. M., & on behalf of the ILSI International Food Biotechnology Committee Task Force on the Use of Mammalian Toxicology Studies in the Safety Assessment of GM Foods (2013) · Critical Reviews in Toxicology · doi:10.3109/10408444.2013.842956 · Cited by 110
Devos, Y., Aguilera, J., Diveki, Z., Gomes, A., Liu, Y., Paoletti, C., du Jardin, P., Herman, L., Perry, J. N., & Waigmann, E. (2014) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-013-9741-4 · Cited by 95
Precup, G., Marini, E., Zakidou, P., Beneventi, E., Consuelo, C., Fernández-Fraguas, C., Garcia Ruiz, E., Laganaro, M., Magani, M., Mech, A., et al. (2024) · Frontiers in Nutrition · doi:10.3389/fnut.2024.1390734 · Cited by 62
(GMO), E. P. O. G. M. O. (2011) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2480 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Panel), E. P. O. G. M. O. (.
- Venue
- EFSA Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2010-07
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1700
- ISSN
- 1831-4732 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2994635097
- Cited by
- 608
- References
- 14
- FWCI
- 21.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- Licence
- doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1 (tdm, 1888 d)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
