Study identifies levels at which five foods may trigger allergic reactions

 

For people with food allergies, vague warnings on food products - such as "may contain nuts" - can be confusing; is the product safe to consume or not? In a new study, researchers claim to have identified the levels at which five common food allergens - peanut, hazelnut, celery, fish and shrimp - cause a reaction in only 10% of people who are allergic to them.

The research team - led by Prof. Clare Mills of the Institute of Inflammation and Repair at the University of Manchester in the UK - says they hope the findings will lead to improved allergy warnings on food products.
Approximately 15 million people in the US have food allergies, with children accounting for around 6 million of these cases. Around 90% of food allergies are caused by eight foods: milk, eggs, fish, crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat and soybeans. Peanuts are the most common trigger of food-allergic reactions in the US.
The Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2004 states that the eight primary food allergens must be clearly labeled in simple terms on food products, either through an allergen statement or in the ingredient list.
For food products that accidentally contain traces of allergens - due to being made in a factory that handles the allergens, for example - precautionary warnings may be applied to labels. But this precautionary labeling is neither consistent nor regulated.
Prof. Mills notes that food allergy sufferers have varying levels of tolerance to allergens, and inconsistent precautionary labeling may lead to confusion and risk taking among consumers.
"What we wanted was to find a level of allergen which would only produce a reaction in the most sensitive 10% of people," Prof. Mills explains. "This sort of data can then be used to apply a consistent level of warning to food products."

1.6-10.1 mg of hazelnut, peanut or celery protein needed to trigger allergic reaction

For their study, published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, the researchers analyzed data from 436 people who were allergic to peanuts, hazelnuts, celery, fish or shrimp.
All subjects were drawn from the EuroPrevall project - a scheme that aims to assess the underlying risk factors associated with food allergies and their epidemiology across the European population.
Each participant was required to take part in a food challenge, which involved consuming small doses of the food they were allergic to while researchers monitored their reactions.
In the 10% of participants who were most sensitive to food allergens, the team found that between 1.6-10.1 mg of hazelnut, peanut and celery protein needed to be consumed to trigger an allergic reaction, while 27.3 mg of fish and 2.5 g of shrimp protein were required to produce a response.
The team says they hope these findings will better inform food allergy sufferers of the allergen doses that may trigger a reaction, as well as contribute to improved food product labeling. Prof. Mills adds:

"What we'd like to see are warnings which tell people with allergies to avoid certain products completely or just apply to those who are most sensitive."

In August 2014, Medical News Today reported on a study by researchers from the Johns Hopkins Children's Center in Baltimore, MD, which suggested children who live in inner-city areas may be more likely to develop food allergies.

 

Mold in the home: how big a health problem is it?

For many people, January is a cold and damp month. During the winter, activities at home can lead to increased humidity and moisture indoors and, unfortunately, this can lead to the growth of mold. 

Walls, clothes, books, toys and even CDs - nothing is sacred when it comes to mold growth. Its seemingly insidious growth can turn prized possessions into musty, moist sadness that only look fit for the garbage.
But for all its corrupting menace, to what extent should we be worried about mold when it invades our homes? If these are the effects that it can have on our possessions, what effects can it have on our bodies?
In this spotlight feature, we take a look at precisely what mold is, what causes it to grow, whether it is bad for our health and, if so, what can be done to stop it.

What is mold?

Molds are a form of fungus. There are many different molds and they can be found both indoors and outdoors. Molds spread through the production of spores, which are present in all indoor environments and cannot be removed from them - spores are capable of surviving in harsh conditions that otherwise prevent the normal mold growth.
Molds grow best in moist, warm and humid environments - easily created in the home during the winter. When mold spores land on a damp spot they can begin to grow, digesting the material they are growing on as they do so. Molds are capable of growing on a variety of different surfaces, including fabric, paper and wood.
Common indoor molds include:

• Alternaria - found in damp places indoors, such as showers or under leaky sinks
• Aspergillus - often found indoors growing on dust, powdery food items and building materials, such as drywall
• Cladosporium - capable of growing in cool areas as well as warm ones. It is typically found on fabrics and wood surfaces
• Penicillium - typically found on materials that have been damaged by water and often has a blue or green appearance.

Molds take a variety of forms and textures, appearing as white, black, yellow, blue or green and often looking like a discoloration or stain to a surface. They can also have a velvety, fuzzy or rough appearance, depending on the type of mold and where it is growing.

How does mold get into our houses?

Large patches of damp, such as those caused by leaks, provide an ideal environment for mold growth.

Mold spores, invisible to the naked eye, can be found everywhere, both indoors and outdoors. Spores make their way into the home either through the air or after attaching to objects or people. Open windows, doorways and ventilation systems are all gateways through which spores can enter. Clothing, shoes and pets can all facilitate the arrival of mold within the home.
Mold will only grow if spores land somewhere that has the ideal conditions for growing - places with excessive moisture and a supply of suitable nutrients. If this does not happen, molds do not normally cause any problem at all.
Mold can often be found in areas where leakages and flooding have occurred and near windows where condensation builds up. Wet cellulose materials are most supportive of mold growth, including paper products, cardboard, ceiling tiles and wood products. Wallpaper, insulation materials and upholstery are other typical launchpads for mold growth.
Mold growth is usually noticeable - it is usually visible and often produces a musty odor.
The World Health Organization (WHO) report that 10-50% of indoor environments in Europe, North America, Australia, India and Japan are estimated to be affected by indoor dampness. This figure suggests that mold could be a highly prevalent issue in locations spread across the world.
In North America, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) state that "if mold is a problem in your home, you should clean up the mold promptly and fix the water problem." But do the EPA recommend dealing with mold swiftly because of the damage it can do to property? Or because of the damage it could do to health?

Potential effects of mold on health

"Mold exposure does not always present a health problem indoors," state the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). "However some people are sensitive to molds."
Meanwhile, the WHO say that a moldy environment is associated with and could worsen indoor air pollution - a risk factor for certain respiratory conditions:

"Excess moisture on almost all indoor materials leads to growth of microbes, such as mold, fungi and bacteria, which subsequently emit spores, cells, fragments and volatile organic compounds into indoor air. Moreover, dampness initiates chemical or biological degradation of materials, which also pollutes indoor air."

Molds can produce a number of substances that can be harmful. Allergens, irritants and mycotoxins - potentially toxic substances - can affect individuals who are particularly sensitive to them.
In particular, the EPA state that exposure to molds can irritate the eyes, lungs, nose, skin and throats of individuals, even if they do not have a mold allergy.
Mold allergies produce similar symptoms to other allergies to airborne substances affecting the upper respiratory tract, such as pollinosis. These include:

• Blocked/runny nose
• Itchy nose
• Itchy throat
• Sneezing
• Watery eyes.

In addition, people with a mold allergy that also have asthma are at an increased risk of having their asthma symptoms triggered by a moldy environment, according to the CDC.
However, Prof. Stephen Spiro, the deputy chairman of the British Lung Foundation in the UK, informed MNT that the presence of indoor mold can go further than simply exacerbating pre-existing conditions:

"Certain mold species can cause serious lung infections and scarring. For instance, in some asthmatics, inhaling the spores of a species of mold called aspergillus can lead to a condition called allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis, which can impact on the breathing."

Individuals whose immune and respiratory systems are already weakened by chronic conditions would appear to be more susceptible to adverse effects from indoor mold. Prof. Spiro also told MNT that among patients with certain blood disorders, inhaling mold could even lead to fatal complications.
Although more conclusive evidence is required, the CDC report that some research suggests there could be an association between indoor exposure to mold and the development of respiratory conditions in otherwise healthy people.
In 2004, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) reported that there was enough evidence to connect indoor mold with the development of upper respiratory tract problems in healthy people, and some evidence suggesting the same in healthy children.
More recently, the CDC state that exposure to mold early in a child's life could be associated with the development of asthma. However, this theory is opposed by the hygiene hypothesis.
The WHO's guidelines for indoor air quality explain the hygiene hypothesis - the theory that growing up in a hygienic environment can increase the risk of a person developing allergies. Several studies have found evidence supporting the hygiene hypothesis, but evidence so far has been mixed.
As a result, the WHO conclude that there is "sufficient evidence of an association between indoor dampness-related factors and a wide range of respiratory health effects," including asthma, respiratory infections, coughing, wheezing and dyspnea.
While heavy exposure to indoor mold could plausibly play a causal role in the development of these health conditions, the WHO state that such an association has yet to be established conclusively.

Protection and prevention

Condensation on windows often leads to mold growth. Reducing humidity levels indoors or increasing ventilation can prevent it from occurring.

Despite the inconclusive nature of current research, the CDC and EPA recommend that any mold growth should be dealt with promptly.
Both organizations state that controlling moisture is most crucial to preventing mold from growing indoors. Acting quickly in the event of a leak or spillage is important, and drying areas within 48 hours of exposure to excess moisture should ensure that mold will not grow.
The level of humidity within the home is another important factor. Although it may not be immediately apparent, a high level of moisture in the air will promote mold growth. Condensation on windows is often a sign that humidity is high within a room.
Increasing ventilation by opening windows or using an extractor fan reduces the level of moisture in the air. Humidity can also be reduced in specific rooms by avoiding moisture-producing activities in them, such as drying clothes or using kerosene heaters.
When cleaning mold from hard surfaces, commercial products, soap and water or a heavily-diluted bleach solution can be used. Always dry surfaces that have been cleaned thoroughly to prevent mold from growing back.
Be wary of porous materials that have been affected by molds, such as fabric or wood. Mold can infiltrate these materials, may be impossible to remove completely and could potentially grow back if the conditions are right. In many cases, it may be best to get rid of items such as these that have been affected for a long period.
Patches of mold that are larger than 3 ft by 3 ft may be best tackled by professional mold cleaning experts.
If you are worried by any potential exposure to mold or you believe that you are having associated health problems, it is recommended that you contact a health service provider.

Tidy house, tidy mind

While evidence is inconclusive overall as to the extent that mold can affect health, there appears to be enough evidence available to suggest that people should be wary of it.
Even if it is the case that mold does not cause health problems, as some studies have suggested, the presence of mold indoors is indicative of a damp environment, which is known to be hazardous to health.
The impetus for getting rid of mold from the home is also much greater if the health of affected individuals is in any way compromised by chronic lung conditions or immune system impairment.
It may just be a case of reassurance, that having a home free of mold equals having a mind free of doubt and worry. Patches of odorous toxic-looking black mold can seem intimidating, and while it is possible that these might not be harmful to everyone, there is nothing like a clean, airy and dry room to instill confidence about one's health.

 

New genes discovered associated with asthma and allergies

Scientists at Imperial College London in the UK have discovered over 30 new genes that predispose individuals to both asthma and allergies such as eczema and hay fever.

The study, published in Nature, took 10 years to complete and involved researchers based in the UK, US, Canada and Sweden. Their findings could be used to develop new treatments for these diseases, as well as help calculate which patients will respond best to currently-used treatments.
"The genes we identified represent new potential drug targets for allergic diseases as well as biomarkers that may predict which patients will respond to existing expensive therapies," says Prof. Miriam Moffatt, one of the study's authors.
Asthma is a widespread condition, affecting 8% of adults in the US - around 18.7 million people - according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
For the study, the researchers decided to investigate epigenetic changes - those influencing the activity of genes, rather than changes affecting the genetic code itself. With this approach, the team could pinpoint genes regulating an antibody associated with the triggering of allergic reactions.

Regulating immunoglobin E

Prof. William Cookson, another of the study's authors, explains that their pioneering epigenetic approach allowed them to gain insights that traditional genetics could not provide:

"It isn't just the genetic code that can influence disease and DNA sequencing can only take you so far. Our study shows that modifications on top of the DNA that control how genes are read may be even more important."

The antibody in question is called immunoglobin E (IgE). Although its involvement in triggering allergic responses was already known, researchers did not know which genes were responsible for regulating its activities.
"Asthma, atopic dermatitis (eczema) and hay fever are IgE-related diseases that are increasing in prevalence and are a major source of disability," write the authors. "Therapies directed against IgE can alleviate hay fever and allergic asthma."
White blood cells from a total of 355 participants with asthma were analyzed. The researchers assessed whether levels of methylation - a process in which genes are rendered inactive through the attachment of methyl molecules to their DNA - were associated with the level of IgE in the blood.
Strong associations were seen between IgE and low levels of methylation in 34 genes. These genes are far more active in people with asthma, leading to the production of greater quantities of IgE that help trigger the symptoms of the disease.

Results could lead to a more efficient deployment of current treatment methods

These findings were also checked against additional volunteers from Wales with either high or low levels of IgE in their bloodstreams and another 160 participants from Québec, Canada, with doctor-diagnosed asthma.
A number of the newly-identified genes had been demonstrated to encode proteins produced by a specific type of white blood cell - eosinophils - known to promote inflammation in the airways of people with asthma. The study authors state that these genes activate eosinophils, leading to asthma symptoms.
The discovery of a new way in which eosinophils are activated means that doctors may be able to identify which asthma patients will respond to therapies that neutralize these white blood cells. At present, these therapies are expensive and only work for some people with the condition.
Funding for the study came from the Wellcome Trust, the Freemasons' Grand Charity and the Québec Government.
Recently, Medical News Today reported on a mouse study finding that the development of asthma could be prevented with low concentrations of a psychedelic drug.

 

Breastfeeding may influence immune system development in early life

 

A series of studies set to be presented at the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology's Annual Meeting in Houston, TX, claim an infant's immune system development and susceptibility to asthma and allergies may be influenced by a number of factors that shape what bacteria is in their gut, such as gestational age at birth, breastfeeding and delivery by Cesarean section.

The research team, including Dr. Christine Cole Johnson, chair of the Department of Public Health Sciences at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit, MI, says the findings further support the "hygiene hypothesis" - the idea that early childhood exposure to pathogens affects later-life risk of disease.
"For years now, we've always thought that a sterile environment was not good for babies. Our research shows why. Exposure to these micro-organisms, or bacteria, in the first few months after birth actually help stimulate the immune system," says Dr. Johnson.
"The immune system is designed to be exposed to bacteria on a grand scale," she adds. "If you minimize those exposures, the immune system won't develop optimally."
Other studies have supported this claim. In June 2014, for example, Medical News Today reported on a study published in the journal Allergy and Clinical Immunology, in which researchers found exposing babies to bacteria and allergens in the first year of life may reduce the risk of allergies, wheezing and asthma later in life.

Breastfed babies 'at lower risk of pet-related allergies'

In this latest research - consisting of six studies - Dr. Johnson and colleagues set out to determine whether maternal or birth factors, as well as breastfeeding, affect the composition of gut bacteria - or the gut microbiome - in infants, and whether these compositions influence their risk of developing allergies or asthma.
In addition, the team assessed whether specific compositions of gut bacteria influenced the development of regulatory T cells (Treg) - white blood cells that regulate the immune system.
To reach their findings, the researchers analyzed data from the Wayne County Health, Environment, Allergy and Asthma Longitudinal Study (WHEALS), which investigates how environmental and biological factors influence the development of allergies and asthma in early life.
The researchers analyzed stool samples collected from babies at 1 and 6 months following birth.
The results of their analysis revealed that a mother's race/ethnicity, an infant's gestational age at birth, prenatal and postnatal tobacco smoke exposure, the presence of pets in the home and whether a baby was born via Cesarean section or vaginal delivery influenced an infant's gut microbiome composition.
They also found that babies who were breastfed at 1 and 6 months had specific gut microbiome compositions, compared with babies who were not breastfed, which the researchers say may affect immune system development. In addition, babies who were breastfed at 1 month were at lower risk of pet-related allergies.
The researchers also identified a specific gut microbiome composition among children with asthma who experienced flare-ups or night-time coughing within the first year of life.
What is more, they found - for the first time - that an infant's gut microbiome composition was associated with levels of Treg cells.
Commenting on their findings, Dr. Johnson says:

"The research is telling us that exposure to a higher and more diverse burden of environmental bacteria and specific patterns of gut bacteria appear to boost the immune system's protection against allergies and asthma."

In May 2014, MNT reported on a Danish study in which researchers claim longer breastfeeding duration is associated with higher levels of "friendly" gut bacteria in infants.

 

'Fewer allergies among children in dishwasher-free homes'

 

The preliminary findings of an observational study suggest that children in families who wash their dishes by hand, rather than in a dishwasher, develop fewer allergies. 

The study results - published in the journal Pediatrics - support the currently popular "hygiene hypothesis."
According to proponents of the hygiene hypothesis, children in developed countries grow up in an over-sanitized world, where detergents and relatively little exposure to animals prevent our immune systems from becoming acquainted with and building up an immunity against common bacteria. Consequently, the theory suggests, the immune system misfires when it encounters these microorganisms, leading to allergies, eczema and asthma.
Previously, the allergists behind the new study, from the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, found that if parents suck their baby's pacifier it may reduce the child's risk of developing allergies. The researchers thought this reduced risk was caused by a change to babies' microbiomes following exposure to their parents' saliva.
For the new study, the Gothenburg team surveyed the parents of 1,029 children aged 7-8 years who lived in two regions of Sweden. The parents answered questions on their children's allergies and whether they had asthma or eczema, and provided information on how the family washes their dishes and how often they eat fermented or farm-fresh foods.
The data from the questionnaires show that children from families that hand-washed their dishes had lower rates of allergies than children from families who used a dishwasher. The kids from families who did not use a dishwasher also had significantly lower rates of eczema and slightly lower rates of asthma and hay fever than their dishwasher-owning peers.
Children who ate more fermented or farm-fresh foods also exhibited lower rates of allergies. The children with the lowest rates of allergies in the study were those whose families both hand-washed their dishes and ate a lot of food that came directly from farms.
Previous studies have shown that dishwashers are much more effective at removing bacteria than washing by hand, which means that families are exposed to a greater range of bacteria when eating from hand-washed crockery and cutlery.

Results are 'interesting,' but more research is needed

A linked commentary from physicians at the University of California-San Francisco (UCSF) says that while the results are interesting, it is too soon to put them into practical use. The physicians state that more research is needed to explain how lifestyle choices, dishwasher use and children's exposure to microbes influence risk of developing allergies and related diseases.
The UCSF researchers say that according to the hygiene hypothesis, the greatest protective effect on the immune system occurs before infants reach 6 months of age. However, this creates problems for the findings of the study, because babies this young would have very limited exposure to hand-washed dishes and utensils - especially if they were breastfed.
Other potential confounding factors that may have affected the study's results include housing, socioeconomic status and immigration status, all of which are linked with allergy risk.
In contrast to the suggestions made by the new study that dishwashers over-sanitize our living environments, a 2011 study published in the British Mycological Society journal Fungal Biology found that 62% of tested dishwashers contained potentially pathogenic fungi on their door seals.
Last week, Medical News Today looked at a study published in the British Journal of Dermatology, which found that incidence of work-related dermatitis among health workers in the UK had increased four-fold following a national campaign against superbugs that required hospital workers to wash their hands more frequently with soap.

 

Eating peanuts during infancy may protect against allergy

 

A new study involving over 600 children suggests if babies start eating peanut products regularly and frequently before the age of 11 months, there is a very good chance that those at high risk of peanut allergy will not develop it.

The new study - the first trial to show that consumption of a food is an effective strategy to prevent allergy to it - appears to contradict the idea that children should avoid eating peanuts so they do not develop peanut allergy.
The rate of food allergy has climbed steadily in recent decades. Peanut allergy affects 1-3% of children in the US, Western Europe and Australia, and evidence has emerged that it is also beginning to affect children in Asia and Africa.
Allergy to peanuts develops early in life. Once it develops, it is rarely outgrown and there is no cure. Those most at risk are children with a family history of peanut allergy, who have eczema or are allergic to eggs.
A severe reaction to peanuts is a potentially fatal condition called anaphylaxic shock. The continual threat of this places a heavy burden on the sufferers and their families, who have to be constantly vigilant about the food their children are eating at home and elsewhere.

Israeli children eat peanuts early in life and have lower rates of allergy

Now a clinical trial led by King's College London in the UK and supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health in the US, found that introducing ​peanut products into the diets of infants at high risk of developing peanut allergy was safe and resulted in an over 80% percent reduction in the subsequent development of the allergy.
A report on the findings was presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology in Houston, TX, on Monday and is published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
Trial leader Gideon Lack, a professor and head of the Department of Paediatric Allergy at King's College London, and colleagues decided to carry out the study - called Learning Early About Peanut Allergy (LEAP) - after observing that Jewish children brought up in Israel have lower rates of peanut allergy than Jewish children of similar ancestry brought up in the UK.
Unlike children in the UK, children in Israel are frequently fed peanut-containing products early in life.
The purpose of the LEAP trial was to test the idea that the very low rates of peanut allergy in Israeli children may be due to the fact they start eating peanut products in high quantities early in life.
LEAP is a randomized controlled trial that enrolled 640 babies aged 4-11 months and their families through a London hospital. The children were assessed as having a high risk of developing peanut allergy because they either had eczema or egg allergy.

Trial results show over 80% reduction in the rate of peanut allergy

For the trial, the babies were randomly assigned to one of two groups. In one group, the families of the babies were asked to give their infants peanut-containing products three times a week or more. The other group was asked to avoid giving their babies peanut-containing foods until they were 5 years old.
The researchers checked how well the families followed these requests via questionnaires and also by testing peanut levels in their homes.
Ninety-eight percent of the children completed the study and were assessed at age 5.
The results show that less than 1% of the children who were given peanut products and who completed the study in line with the protocol, developed peanut allergy by the age of 5, compared with 17.3% of those who avoided peanut products in that time.
Even if you count all the children enrolled on the study - including the 13 of the 319 randomized to eat peanuts but who could not tolerate it from the start - the analysis shows there appears to be a powerful protective effect from introducing peanut consumption early in life.
The overall rate of allergy in the children who were given peanut products was 3.2% compared with 17.2% in the avoidance group. This translates to an over 80% reduction in the rate of peanut allergy.
The researchers note that in the peanut group, early introduction of the food was well tolerated and safe.
Importantly, the children were not given whole peanuts - because of the risk of choking - they were given a baked snack containing 50% peanuts and fortified with vitamins and iron that is popular in Israel.
The authors conclude that:
"The early introduction of peanuts significantly decreased the frequency of the development of peanut allergy among children at high risk for this allergy and modulated immune responses to peanuts."

Results question the idea that food should be avoided early in life to prevent allergy

For many years, public health guidelines and the advice of pediatricians and allergy experts was we should avoid giving babies products like peanuts that might trigger allergies.
Prof. Lack says:

 

"This is an important clinical development and contravenes previous guidelines. Whilst these were withdrawn in 2008 in the UK and US, our study suggests that new guidelines may be needed to reduce the rate of peanut allergy in our children."

He also notes that the study did not include babies showing early strong signs of peanut allergy so they cannot say whether early peanut consumption would be a safe or effective allergy-prevention strategy in this group. He advises:
"Parents of infants and young children with eczema and/or egg allergy should consult with an Allergist, Paediatrician, or their General Practitioner prior to feeding them peanut products."
The researchers are continuing with the trial. One of the questions the further investigation is exploring is whether the protection against peanut allergy is sustained or whether it depends on continuing to consume peanuts, as co-investigator and first author of the study, Dr. George Du Toit explains:
"The next stage of our work, the LEAP-On study, will continue to monitor those children who consumed peanut to see if they remain protected against allergy even if they stop consuming peanut for 12 months."
Dr. Du Toit is consultant in Paediatric Allergy at Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust and honorary senior lecturer at King's College London.
Meanwhile, Medical News Today recently learned of a study that suggests dishwashers may make children more prone to allergies. In the journal Pediatrics, researchers report the preliminary findings of an observational study where they found families who wash their dishes by hand, rather than in a dishwasher, have children with fewer allergies.

Scientists identify key protein in immune response to allergies and worms

Researchers have found a new way that the body controls inflammation when it is responding to parasitic worm infections or during allergy reactions like asthma attacks.

The researchers - led by a team from The University of Manchester in the UK - report their work in the journal Nature Communication.
They believe their findings will lead to new treatments for controlling inflammation during worm infections and allergic reactions like asthma.
Senior author Andrew MacDonald - professor in the department of life sciences and also of the Manchester Collaborative Centre for Inflammation Research - says:
"With billions of people affected by both allergies and worm infections around the world it is vital that we develop better methods of treatment."
He explains that he and his colleagues are working in this area because despite the devastating global impact of worm infections and allergies, there are no effective vaccines or refined treatments, and our understanding of the cell types and mediators that control our inflammation and immune response to them is limited.
For their study, the researchers focused on dendritic cells - one of the first responders to worms or allergens. Dendritic cells recognize the type of infection and switch on the appropriate inflammation response by activating a particular subset of helper T cells.
However, while we know this much, the underlying biology of the recognition and response to worms and allergens is still somewhat of a mystery. For example, how do the dendritic cells activate the helper T cells?

Mbd2 protein plays key role in dendritic cell response to worms and allergens

To explore the question of how dendritic cells activate the helper T cells, the Manchester team studied dendritic cells in culture and in mice as they reacted to parasitic worms and lung allergens such as house dust mites.
They found that a protein called Mbd2 plays a key role - when they removed it from the dendritic cells they behaved very differently and could not activate the helper T cells.
The researchers also discovered how Mbd2 regulates dendritic cell genes. It alters gene expression without changing underlying DNA sequences, a process known as "epigenetic" control.
In their paper, they highlight how in recent years it has become clear that epigenetic mechanisms play an important role in regulating many aspects of T cell generation and function.
Prof. MacDonald summarizes the results and implications of the study:

"For the first time we have identified that this protein is a key controller of dendritic cells during inflammation against parasitic worms or allergens. It's an important step, as all inflammation is not identical, and scientists try to understand which specific cells and chemicals are more important in the body's response to particular infections."

He explains that in the past, drugs have tended to take a broad approach, tackling all aspects of a disease rather than targeting any specific one. Studies like theirs, mean that:
"In the future it might be possible to create medicines that control the inflammation caused specifically by an allergy or a parasitic worm, rather than by a virus such as a common cold."
Prof. MacDonald also notes that it is important to tackle the inflammation that these conditions cause, because we know that they can develop into longer-term diseases such as asthma.
In February 2015, Medical News Today reported how researchers from Imperial College London, UK, discovered 30 new genes tied to asthma and allergies. Their study also focused on epigenetic influences as opposed to DNA alterations.