Glutenlightgrani con glutine leggero e tollerabile
Header Image - Gluten Light
Gluten LightMagazine & Library
Gallery

Magazine

Grano monococco: perchè è così importante

by luciano

Riassunto delle principali caratteristiche del grano monococco che gli conferiscono grande potenzialità per essere utilizzato per la preparazione di prodotti da forno salati ma anche dolci per le persone che:
• sono geneticamente predisposte per la celiachia (1) (2) (3) (4) (5),
• debbono tenere sotto controllo l’indice glicemico (6),
• sensibili al glutine non celiache, reintroducono il glutine dopo la sua esclusione (7),
• hanno difficoltà con la digestione del glutine (8).
• sono sensibili alle ATI -amylase trypsina inibitors-. (9)
Da sottolineare, anche, le elevate qualità nutrizionali del grano monococco (10).

(1)- Immunogenicity of monococcum wheat in celiac patients
………..omissis. “Conclusions: Our data show that the monococcum lines Monlis and ID331 activate the CD T cell response and suggest that these lines are toxic for celiac patients. However, ID331 is likely to be less effective in inducing CD because of its inability to activate the innate immune pathways”. Immunogenicity of monococcum wheat in celiac patients. Carmen Gianfrani et altri. Am J Clin Nutr 2012;96:1339–45.

(2) ………omissis. “D’altra parte, tenuto conto che l’incidenza e la gravità della celiachia dipende dalla quantità e dalla nocività delle prolamine e che alcuni genotipi di grano monococco hanno una elevata qualità panificatoria accoppiata con assenza di citotossicità e ridotta immunogenicità, è atteso che l’uso delle farine di monococco nella dieta della popolazione generale, all’interno della quale si trova una elevata percentuale di individui predisposti geneticamente alla celiachia ma non ancora celiaci, possa contribuire a contenere la diffusione di questa forma di intolleranza alimentare. Ciò lascia pensare che il grano monococco, riportato recentemente in coltivazione in Italia dai ricercatori del Consiglio per la Ricerca e la sperimentazione in Agricoltura (CRA) di Roma e San Angelo Lodigiano, potrà svolgere un ruolo importante nella prevenzione della celiachia, sia direttamente sotto forma di pane e pasta sia indirettamente come specie modello per lo studio del ruolo dell’immunità innata nell’insorgenza della celiachia”. Le nuove frontiere delle tecnologie alimentari e la celiachia Norberto Pogna, Laura Gazza (2013).

(3)-Extensive in vitro gastrointestinal digestion markedly reduces the immune-toxicity of Triticum monococcum wheat: Implication for celiac disease
Carmen Gianfrani, Alessandra Camarca, Giuseppe Mazzarella, Luigia Di Stasio, Nicola Giardullo, Pasquale Ferranti, Gianluca Picariello, Vera Rotondi Aufiero, Stefania Picascia, Riccardo Troncone, Norberto Pogna, Salvatore Auricchio
and Gianfranco Mamone. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2015, 00, 1–11
Scope: The ancient diploid Triticum monococcum is of special interest as a candidate low-toxic wheat species for celiac disease patients. Here, we investigated how an in vitro gastro-intestinal digestion, affected the immune toxic properties of gliadin from diploid compared to hexaploid wheat.
Method and results: Gliadins from Triticum monococcum, and Triticum aestivum cultivars were digested using either a partial proteolysis with pepsin-chymotrypsin, or an extensive degradation that used gastrointestinal enzymes including the brush border membrane enzymes. The immune stimulatory properties of the digested samples were investigated on T-cell lines and jejunal biopsies from celiac disease patients. The T-cell response profile to the Triticum mono coccum gliadin was comparable to that obtained with Triticum aestivum gliadin after the partial pepsin-chymotrypsin digestion. In contrast, the extensive gastrointestinal hydrolysis drastically reduced the immune stimulatory properties of Triticum monococcum gliadin. MS-based analy- sis showed that several Triticum monococcum peptides, including known T-cell epitopes, were degraded during the gastrointestinal treatment, whereas many of Triticum aestivum gliadin survived the gastrointestinal digestion.
Conclusion: he pattern of Triticum monococcum gliadin proteins is sufficiently different from those of common hexaploid wheat to determine a lower toxicity in celiac disease patients following in vitro simulation of human digestion.

(4) …….omissis. “Abstract. A growing interest in developing new strategies for preventing coeliac disease has motivated efforts to identify cereals with null or reduced toxicity. In the current study, we investigate the biological effects of ID331 Triticum monococcum gliadin-derived peptides in human Caco-2 intestinal epithelial cells. Triticum aestivum gliadin derived peptides were employed as a positive control. The effects on epithelial permeability, zonulin release, viability, and cytoskeleton reorganization were investigated. Our findings confirmed that ID331 gliadin did not enhance permeability and did not induce zonulin release, cytotoxicity or cytoskeleton reorganization of Caco-2 cell monolayers. We also demonstrated that ID331 ω-gliadin and its derived peptide ω(105–123) exerted a protective action, mitigating the injury of Triticum aestivum gliadin on cell viability and cytoskeleton reorganization. These results may represent a new opportunity for the future development of innovative strategies to reduce gluten toxicity in the diet of patients with gluten intolerance”. Protective effects of ID331 Triticum monococcum gliadin on in vitro models of the intestinal epithelium. Giuseppe Jacomino et altri 2016.

L’effetto della digestione e della digeribilità sull’allergenicità degli alimenti (seconda parte)

by luciano

Estratto dal capitolo: “Digestione delle proteine: l’acido gastrico è fondamentale per un’adeguata digestione delle proteine e la prevenzione delle allergie alimentari
La digestione delle proteine- e quindi la maggior parte degli allergeni alimentari – inizia nello stomaco. Un basso pH è essenziale per l’attivazione dell’enzima pepsinogeno in pepsina [92]. Tuttavia, se vengono somministrati farmaci che sopprimono l’acido, il pH aumenta considerevolmente (ad esempio, fino a 5 con inibitori della pompa protonica, PPI). Come mostrato in molti precedenti esperimenti in vitro, la corretta digestione da parte della pepsina è ostacolata dall’aumento del pH (Figura 1), e questo vale per un certo numero di proteine alimentari, come la nocciola [93], il merluzzo bianco [94], il latte [ 95] e caseina (Figura 1).

(A) Digestion of proteins is hampered when pH increases. Proteins, as part of the daily diet, are digested at low pH and broken down into smaller fragments, whereas a higher pH blocks proper digestion. The resulting bigger fragments or proteins are more easily recognized by the immune system, leading to an increased risk for sensitization or allergic reactions. (B) Digestion of α-casein in vitro is hampered when pH increases. Casein was readily broken down by enzymatic digestion with pepsin at pH 2.0, but remained totally intact even after 2 h of incubation with enzyme at pH 5.0. M: molecular weight marker; -: empty lane; P: pepsin; 0: no incubation time, reaction stopped immediately; “: seconds; ‘: minutes; h: hour(s); Cas: casein.
It is clear that food intake per se changes the gastric pH, which can increase from a median fasting baseline value of pH 1 to pH 4.5 with ingestion of the meal [96]. The buffer capacity thereby depends on the food composition and meal constituents. However, this effect is transient, as ongoing acid production is responsible for a subsequent decrease of the pH, which returns to ca. pH 1 about 260 min after the start of the meal [96]. Applying acid-suppressing substances can disturb this process and induce a long-lasting elevation of the gastric pH up to 5.0 [97]. In a number of food animal models, the effect of this pH-elevation was shown in vivo, as feeding digestion-labile antigen under concomitant acid-suppression resulted in a clear Th2-response and allergy symptoms [98,99,100,101,102,103,104]. This acquired sensitization capacity was true for different proteins, like codfish, hazelnut or ovalbumin, and even oral drugs, in the mouse model [99] and also in humans [105]. Importantly, several types of acid-suppressing or -neutralizing medication, like base powder [106], sucralfate [102], H2-receptor blockers [107] and proton pump inhibitors [101] produced this effect. The outcome of the immune response may depend on timing of the anti-acid drug application in relation to food uptake, and on the dosage of the antigen [101,108]. Gastric acid suppression might further impact on intestinal pH levels and consequently on protein digestion in the intestine [109]. This assumption, however, requires further investigations in clinical settings.” “The Effect of Digestion and Digestibility on Allergenicity of Food Isabella Pali-Scholl, Eva Untersmayr, Martina Klems and Erika Jensen-Jarolim. Published: 21 August 2018 Nutrients.”

L’effetto della digestione e della digeribilità sull’allergenicità degli alimenti (prima parte)

Approfondimenti
The Effect of Digestion and Digestibility on Allergenicity of Food

ATI inibitori enzimi ailasi e tripsina. Parte II

by luciano

Anti nutritional factors in cereals, especially amylase trypsin inhibitors, affecting digestibility.
“Anti nutritional factors (ANF) play an important role in cereals to protect against infestation and animal consumption. From an agronomic point of view these pest barriers are beneficial as the required pest control measures (chemical pesticides, storage facilities) is relatively limited.
From a health point of view a large group of ANF, the ATI are of special interest as they may impact digestion in multiple ways, e.g. they:
• can reduce digestibility of food directly by inhibition of enzymes from the digestive tract (human and microbiome; Weegels 1994),
• can increase the load of allergenic peptide presented to the small intestine, thus increasing the allergenic and inflammation reactions (Junker et al. 2012; Zevallos et al 2014)
• complexation behavior may strongly interact with the small intestine epithelium that can cause inflammation by itself (Zevallos et al 2014)
• are the not yet completely understood cause of Bakers asthma (asma), the major labour related allergy (Stobnicka and Górny, 2015)
• can increase the load of non digested peptides and carbohydrates especially of non-starch polysaccharides (FODMAPS) that are a major cause of Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) which affects 7% to 21% of the general population (Chey et al 2015)
• may impact the microbiome itself. This is not established in detail
From a food processing point of view ATI’s play a negative role as they inhibit enzymes that are added as processing aids for improved processing and bread quality. This reduces processing effectiveness and quality control of cereal based products. Understanding the role of ATI in cereals food processing and food digestion and mitigation of the negative effects is therefor of prime importance for food safety, security (1) and sustainability. An interesting way to mitigate the effect of ATI could be by altering its molecular structure that is stabilised by the large number of disulphide bonds (5-6 on ca. 14 kDa; Buchanan et al 1997)”. “https://www.wur.nl/en/Research-Results/Chair-groups/Agrotechnology-and-Food-Sciences/Laboratory-of-Food-Chemistry/Research/Themes/Technology-of-cereal-foods-digestibility.htm”
Note
(1). “food security” e la “food safety” possono essere considerate come le facce della stessa medaglia, due termini complementari che indicano, rispettivamente, la sicurezza economico-sociale di disporre di cibo a sufficienza per vivere (“food security”) e l’esigenza igienico-sanitaria di consumare cibo sano e acqua potabile (“food safety”).

ATI inibitori enzimi ailasi e tripsina. Parte I

L’effetto della digestione e della digeribilità sull’allergenicità degli alimenti (prima parte)

by luciano

“Riassunto: ….Omissis La digestione lungo il tratto gastrointestinale è essenziale per la disgregazione dei carboidrati e delle proteine ed è un prerequisito per un adeguato assorbimento nell’intestino dei loro componenti. La digestione e la digeribilità di carboidrati e proteine ​​influenzano quindi in modo critico il rischio di sviluppo di allergie alimentari. In questa recensione, mettiamo in evidenza l’influenza di amilasi, degli inibitori dell’acido gastrico e della tripsina, nonché della trasformazione degli alimenti nel contesto dell’allergenicità alimentare.
Omissis… .. Inoltre, la digestione e la digeribilità potrebbero determinare se le proteine ​​alimentari sono tollerate o diventano agenti sensibilizzanti. Questo aspetto è stato evidenziato dall’Agenzia europea per la sicurezza alimentare parere scientifico sulla valutazione dell’allergenicità delle proteine ​​alimentari e dei mangimi. Una maggiore resistenza alla digestione o alla sopravvivenza lungo il tratto digestivo sembra aumentare la capacità di sensibilizzazione di un componente alimentare e renderlo più immunogenico e / o allergenico. Sulla base di questo background scientifico, questo articolo di recensione evidenzia i fattori che influenzano la digestione e la digeribilità delle proteine.

Estratto dallo studio:

Digestion of Carbohydrates: Amylase Action Critical for Starch Digestion and Microbiome

……..Omissis. Starch is digested by specific enzymes, i.e., amylases, which cleave the α-1,4-glucosidic bond of its major compound amylose, as well as the α-1,6-glucosidic bond of the second major constituent, amylopectin [15].

….. Omissis. In humans, α-amylase is a product of the exocrine pancreas. Animal models suggest that microbial amylases could be supplied in pancreas insufficiency [18]. It is not known whether this will be linked to a risk for sensitization, but α-amylase per se when inhaled is a well-known occupational allergen. In baker’s asthma associated with the flour processing industry, allergenic amylase derives from contaminating fungi [19]. In mammals, amylase is also secreted into the saliva. Its role in starch digestion has been questioned due to its low amount relative to the overall amylase activity [20]. However, in vitro studies strongly propose that salivary amylolytic activity hydrolyzes up to 80% of bread starch in the first 30 min of gastric digestion, independent of acidification by the gastric juices [21]. This critically affects the quality of remnants reaching the intestine, which will affect the composition of the microflora (discussed below).

………Omissis. The amylase action on rapidly digestible starch (RDS) renders smaller products, like disaccharides and trisaccharides [25]. These are then further hydrolyzed to glucose by other enzymes, such as α-glucosidase in the small intestine [26]. However, both amylase and α-glucosidase may act synergistically. Some compounds represent slow-digestible starch (SDS), or resistant starch (RS) as larger leftovers, which persist the gastrointestinal transit to a large degree. Usually, resulting levels of malto-oligosaccharide indicate the degree of granular starch breakdown. The starch breakdown by amylases is largely influenced by the composition of the food processing and matrix composition. Cooking has been shown to enhance the amylase breakdown of starch [27], which also depended on the individual α-amylase activity. Flavonoids are important plant constituents, which interfere with amylase activity by hydrophobic interaction in the food matrix or by formation of covalent bonds during cooking or in gastric juice, and therefore impair starch digestion [28]. This opens up potential intervention strategies in diabetic patients to decrease the fermentation speed of starch and thereby inhibit an undesired fast release of glucose. Starch may also form complexes with lipids in the food matrix, e.g., complex formation with palm oil interfered with the digestion of rice starches [29]. Interestingly, some fresh food may neutralize amylases by proteolysis. Kiwi contains actinidin, a cysteine proteinase, which specifically attacks amylase and thereby may inhibit starch digestion [30]. This may affect the presentation of allergenic epitopes in the food matrix. Amylase in the duodenum also plays a key role in the breakdown of gluten and may therefore modulate its pathophysiologic role in celiac disease [31]. While starch forms complexes with gluten during baking of bread, amylase resolves them and makes gluten accessible for thorough protein digestion. Wheat on the other hand contains anti-enzymes, such as the ATIs (amylase-trypsin inhibitors) with a role in non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) [32]. Nutritional ATIs additionally stimulate the innate immune reaction via TLR4 [32] and thereby exacerbate allergic inflammation not only in the intestine, but also in the airways in mouse models [33,34]. It is hypothesized that industrial food processing contributes to the increased numbers of non-celiac gluten/wheat sensitivity by stabilizing e.g., starch-gluten complexes, thereby bypassing the salivary and pancreatic enzymes, leaving the digestion to mucosal amylases [35]”. “The Effect of Digestion and Digestibility on Allergenicity of Food Isabella Pali-Scholl, Eva Untersmayr, Martina Klems and Erika Jensen-Jarolim. Published: 21 August 2018 Nutrients.”