title: Analyzing pepsin degradation assay conditions used for allergenicity assessments to ensure that pepsin susceptible and pepsin resistant dietary proteins are distinguishable.
abstract: The susceptibility of a dietary protein to proteolytic degradation by digestive enzymes, such as gastric pepsin, provides information on the likelihood of systemic exposure to a structurally intact and biologically active macromolecule, thus informing on the safety of proteins for human and animal consumption. Therefore, the purpose of standardized in vitro degradation studies that are performed during protein safety assessments is to distinguish whether proteins of interest are susceptible or resistant to pepsin degradation via a study design that enables study-to-study comparison. Attempting to assess pepsin degradation under a wide-range of possible physiological conditions poses a problem because of the lack of robust and consistent data collected under a large-range of sub-optimal conditions, which undermines the needs to harmonize in vitro degradation conditions. This report systematically compares the effects of pH, incubation time, and pepsin-to-substrate protein ratio on the relative degradation of five dietary proteins: three pepsin susceptible proteins [ribulose 1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase-oxygenase (Rubisco), horseradish peroxidase (HRP), hemoglobin (Hb)], and two pepsin resistant proteins [lipid transfer protein (LTP) and soybean trypsin inhibitor (STI)]. The results indicate that proteins susceptible to pepsin degradation are readily distinguishable from pepsin-resistant proteins when the reaction conditions are within the well-characterized optima for pepsin. The current standardized in vitro pepsin resistant assay with low pH and high pepsin-to-substrate ratio fits this purpose. Using non-optimal pH and/or pepsin-to-substrate protein ratios resulted in susceptible proteins no longer being reliably degraded by this stomach enzyme, which compromises the ability of this in vitro assay to distinguish between resistant and susceptible proteins and, therefore, no longer providing useful data to an overall weight-of-evidence approach to assessing safety of proteins.
authors.affiliation: Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
authors.forename: Rong
authors.identifier: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7198-7784
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.affiliation: Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
authors.forename: Thomas C
authors.initials: TC
authors.lastname: Edrington
authors.affiliation: Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
authors.forename: S Bradley
authors.initials: SB
authors.lastname: Storrs
authors.affiliation: Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
authors.forename: Kathleen S
authors.initials: KS
authors.lastname: Crowley
authors.affiliation: Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
authors.forename: Jason M
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Ward
authors.affiliation: Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
authors.forename: Thomas C
authors.initials: TC
authors.lastname: Lee
authors.affiliation: Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
authors.forename: Zi L
authors.initials: ZL
authors.lastname: Liu
authors.affiliation: Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
authors.forename: Bin
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Li
authors.affiliation: Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
authors.forename: Kevin C
authors.initials: KC
authors.lastname: Glenn
mesh_terms: D004044:Dietary Proteins / Q000737:chemistry* / Q000276:immunology; D059022:Food Safety; D006863:Hydrogen-Ion Concentration; D010434:Pepsin A / Q000737:chemistry*; D013997:Time Factors
chemical_list: D004044:Dietary Proteins; D010434:Pepsin A