New framework published by ILSI Threshold Working Group

With food allergens, both the nature and the severity of response to a given dose vary considerably within the susceptible subpopulation. This adds significant challenges to establishing threshold levels for safe consumption. The ILSI Research Foundation Threshold Working Group is examining methods for assessing dose-response and identifying safe levels of intake for food allergens, among other categories of bioactive agents.

The group is looking at ways to make better use of current data and methods to improve understanding of dose-response relationships, and ways of using this knowledge effectively when developing standards and regulations.

The group have recently published a paper that introduces the Key Events Dose-Response Framework (KEDRF). This framework is used to systematically examine key events that occur between the initial dose of a food allergen (or other bioactive agent) and the biological response of public health concern. The factors that influence the dose-response relationship and the causes of variability are also considered within this framework. The group propose that by utilising this evidence-based approach, which is founded on empirical observations, there is reduced reliance on assumptions and data extrapolation.

The paper serves to provide a detailed overview of the KEDRF process and rationale which sits behind it, including several schematics to depict the dose-response relationships. The group have published four companion papers that describe how the KEDRF may be applied to a range of bioactive agents, including food allergens, DNA-reactive and non DNA-reactive carcinogens, endocrine disruptors, microorganisms, and nutrients. The paper from this series that deals with food allergens is reviewed in this issue of the Allergen Bureau eNews.

This article may be freely downloaded from www.informaworld.com and used for research, teaching and private study purposes.

Reference: Julien et al. 2009. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. Vol 49 (8) pp. 682-689. DOI: 10.1080/10408390903110692