Research on Peanut Allergies Cure Raises Fresh Safety Questions

Photo: Georgina Palmer / Istock

related articles

Over the weekend, headlines rocked the food allergy world that a cure for the peanut allergy was in the pipeline.

The Centers for Disease Control recently reported a 265% increase in the number of hospitalizations related to food allergic reactions, highlighting the urgent need to address the health risks and health spending associated with this life threatening condition. Dr. Wesley Burks of Duke University was ushered onto the media stage with a hero's welcome as he promised the "possibility of a cure" within the next few years.

In a study paid for in part by the Gerber Foundation and the Robins Family Foundation, 33 children were given daily doses of a synthetically derived peanut powder.

According to Dr. Burks' press release from Duke University, four children tolerated the treatment so well that they are now able to consume peanuts. However, according to an insightful piece by Tara Parker Pope in the New York Times, four children had such severe reactions to the treatment that they had to drop out of the study.

In the $17 million study, a peanut powder synthetically derived in a laboratory and patented by Wesley A. Burks and a handful of doctors is fed to children under strict medical supervision.

(By the way, you may remember the sponsoring Robins Family Foundation as having been founded by A.H. Robins, whose drug and medical device company filed for bankruptcy in the 1908s due to mass litigation over the Dalkon Shield, an allegedly faulty IUD product. Robins reportedly "in a rush to beat competitors purchased the Dalkon Shield without conducting any meaningful independent research on the new IUD, which was marketed by investors as the best contraceptive device on the market".)

According to the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Burks et al. (Hugh Sampson, Monsanto's Gary Bannon and others) are listed as inventors of the nut material used in the recent study, US Patent 6486311 - Peanut allergens and methods, issued in November 2002. Burks' patented invention is being tested on children after approval for this study was obtained from the Human Use Advisory Committee at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences.

According to filings with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the "peanuts" being used on the children are derived in the laboratory using the following method:

"Three commercial lots of Southeastern Runners peanuts (Arachis hypogaea), medium grade, from the 1979 crop (North Carolina State University) were used in this study. The peanuts were stored in the freezer at -18° C until they were roasted. The three lots were combined in equal proportions and blended before defatting. The defatting process (defatted with hexane after roasting for 13 to 16 minutes at 163° C. to 177° C.) was done in the laboratory of Dr. Clyde Young (North Carolina State University). The powdered crude peanut was extracted in 1 mol/L NaCl, 20 mmol/L sodium phosphate (pH 7.0)1 and 8 mol/L urea for 4 hours at 4° C. The extract was clarified by centrifugation at 20,000 g for 60 minutes at 4° C. The total protein determination was done by the bicinchoninic acid method (Pierce Laboratories, Rockville, Ill.)."

The serum pool and patient serum samples were diluted (1:20 vol/vol) and dispensed into individual wells in the lower portion of the plate. After incubation for 1 hour at 37° C. and washing, biotinylated, affinity-purified goat anti-human IgE (KPL, Gaithersburg, Md.) (1:1000 vol/vol bovine serum albumin) was added to all wells. Plates were incubated for 1 hour at 37° C. and washed, and 100 _l horseradish peroxidase-avidin conjugate (Vector Laboratories, Burlingame, Calif.) was added for 5 minutes. After washing, the plates were developed by the addition of a citrate buffer containing O-phenylenediamine (Sigma Chemical Co.). The reaction was stopped by the addition of 100 _l 2N hydrochloric acid to each well, and absorbance was read at 490 nm (Bio-Rad Microplate reader model 450; Bio-Rad Laboratories Diagnostic Group, Hercules, Calif.).

In the current headlines, it is unclear if the Burks' studies refer to this patented invention (assigned to the Mount Sinai School of Medicine and the University of Arkansas) or to a more recent invention by Burks et al., US Patent 6835824 - Peanut allergens and methods, issued in December of 2004 that does not disclose the assignee of the invention to whom the financial rewards and royalties would accrue should the patent prove lucrative as a vaccine or for the invention's intended uses in the market place as outlined by Burks et al. below:

"The principle object of the present invention is the provision of a monoclonal antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for peanut allergen. Another object of the present invention is the isolation and purification of peanut allergens. A still further object of the present invention is the provision of peanut allergen antigens and monoclonal antibodies having specificity for a selected peanut allergen antigen. Yet another object of the present invention is the provision of hybridomas which produce monoclonal antibodies specific for peanut allergen.

Still yet another object of the present invention is the provision of a two-site monoclonal antibody based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay that can be used to detect and determine the concentration of a specific peanut allergen such as Ara h I in a food product or food processing and producing equipment or materials.

Another object of the present invention is the provision of a process for producing monoclonal antibodies specific to a selected peanut allergen, hybridoma cell lines which produce such monoclonal antibodies, and an immunoassay which utilizes the monoclonal antibodies for detecting the presence and concentration of a selected peanut allergen. And, still yet another object of the present invention is the provision of a monoclonal antibody based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay which does not contain human blood derivatives or radioactively labeled antibodies."

Given increases in the number of hospitalizations related to food allergic reactions, there is an urgent need to address the issue, and Burks' patented invention deserves the accolades that it is receiving.

However, as these doctors, industry funded scientists and researchers engage 33 of our children in a study in which four children successfully built up immunity while four children had to drop out due to extreme allergic reactions to these synthetically derived "peanuts" (while this was not disclosed in Dr. Burks' press release out of Duke University , it was responsibly revealed in the New York Times), it would be beneficial to learn what the long term consequences might be of exposing our children to these synthetic proteins in the form of food products or a vaccine and if any consideration or analysis has been given to these consequences?

The hormone rBGH was introduced into our milk supply back in 1994 before being fully evaluated for long term health consequences (recent studies have pointed to associated higher levels of IGF-1 in dairy products produced with synthetic growth hormones, and that has been linked to breast, prostate and colon cancers). There has even been a revision to the rBGH position statement by the American Cancer Society. So we should consider the health implications, liabilities and costs associated with exposing our children to yet another novel protein and synthetic substance before the long term health consequences have been evaluated.

And as beneficial as this patented "cure" may initially seem to children, their families, the food industry and vaccine manufacturers, it would be interesting to see the cost-benefit analysis and the evaluation that Burks et al. conducted on the liabilities associated with his invention.

Robyn O'Brien is the founder of AllergyKids, which is working to help people protect the health of their families.

Also by Robyn O'Brien:
Heavy Metal in Our Daily Bread?
Mother's Conservative Beliefs Challenged When Her Kids Get Sick
Allergies, Asthma and Autism: How Did Our Children Get So Sick?
Concerned Mother's Blueprint for Change: Small Steps to Kids' Health

The Daily Green's Community News section is a forum for our audience to get the word out about issues that matter to them, enlist support, get help and advice, celebrate successes or share humor. The best submissions are personal (why I started this venture) short and to the point (400 words or so) and written in a style that speaks directly to the audience as peers (not like an ad or press release). E-mail submissions to news@thedailygreen.com and include "community news" in the subject line. Photos are also welcome, provided the submitter has rights to publish the image. Be sure to include credit and caption information.

Submissions to The Daily Green are subject to our Privacy and Terms of Use policies.

COMMENTS ()