Search EFSA Journal
Refine your search
Type
All article types
Special Issue Item
Journal Editorial
Scientific opinions of Scientific/Scientific Panel
Opinion of the Scientific Committee/Scientific Panel
Statement of the Scientific Committee/Scientific Panel
Guidance of the Scientific Committee/Scientific Panel
Other scientific outputs of EFSA
Statement of EFSA
Guidance of EFSA
Conclusion on pesticides
Reasoned opinion on pesticide
Scientific report of EFSA
Technical Report
Subject
All subjects
Animal health & welfare
Biological hazards
Biological monitoring
Contaminants
Dietary & chemical monitoring
Emerging risks
Feed
Food Ingredients and Packaging
GMO
Nutrition
Pesticides
Plant health
Assessment and methodological support
Scientific Committee
Scientific cooperation
Article ID
Digital Object ID
Sort by:
Publication date
Relevance

Scientific Opinion related to a notification from the Oenological Products and Practices International Association (OENOPPIA) on lysozyme from hen’s egg to be used in the manufacture of wine as an anti-microbial stabilizer/additive pursuant to Article 6, paragraph 11 of Directive 2000/13/EC – for permanent exemption from labelling

EFSA Journal 2011;9(10):2386 [11 pp.]. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2386
  EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) Panel Members Carlo Agostoni, Jean-Louis Bresson, Susan Fairweather-Tait, Albert Flynn, Ines Golly, Hannu Korhonen, Pagona Lagiou, Martinus Løvik, Rosangela Marchelli, Ambroise Martin, Bevan Moseley, Monika Neuhäuser-Berthold, Hildegard Przyrembel, Seppo Salminen, Yolanda Sanz, Sean (J.J.) Strain, Stephan Strobel, Inge Tetens, Daniel Tomé, Hendrik van Loveren and Hans Verhagen. Acknowledgment The Panel wishes to thank the members of the Working Group on Allergy: Pagona Lagiou, Martinus Løvik, Rosangela Marchelli, Martin Stern, Stephan Strobel, Hendrik van Loveren, Jean Michel Wal for the preparatory work on this scientific opinion. Contact nda@efsa.europa.eu
Type: Opinion of the Scientific Committee/Scientific Panel On request from: European Commission Question number: EFSA-Q-2011-00833 Adopted: 15 September 2011 Published: 06 October 2011 Affiliation: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Parma, Italy
Abstract

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion related to a notification from the Oenological Products and Practices International Association (OENOPPIA) on lysozyme from hen's egg used in the manufacture of wine as an anti-microbial stabilizer/additive pursuant to Article 6, paragraph 11 of Directive 2000/13/EC – for permanent exemption from labelling. Allergic sensitisation against lysozyme is common among egg allergic individuals. In winemaking, lysozyme is used for the control of lactic acid bacteria, and it is considered essential to obtain consistent and high quality. Lysozyme can be used at different stages of wine production and at different doses, and no steps are taken specifically to remove lysozyme from wine. In the studies provided by the applicant, lysozyme was detected in some of the lysozyme-treated wines under the proposed conditions of use. The applicant estimated lysozyme content in white wines with and without bentonite treatment, and in red wines without bentonite treatment. Residual amounts of lysozyme considered sufficient to trigger allergic reactions in susceptible individuals have been demonstrated in wines treated with lysozyme, and a number of clinical reports (including one double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge with lysozyme) described clinical allergic reactions to lysozyme. The Panel concludes that wines treated with lysozyme may trigger adverse allergic reactions in susceptible individuals under the conditions of use proposed by the applicant.

© European Food Safety Authority, 2011

Summary

Following a request from the European Commission, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies (NDA) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion related to a notification from Oenological Products and Practices International Association (OENOPPIA) on lysozyme from hen‟s egg used in the manufacture of wine as an anti-microbial stabilizer/additive pursuant to Article 6, paragraph 11 of Directive 2000/13/EC – for permanent exemption from labelling.

Prevalence of allergy to egg proteins has been reported to be around 0.3 % in adults. Taking into account that egg allergic individuals can react to lysozyme and lysozyme-containing foods, it is appropriate for the Panel to assess the likelihood of adverse reactions in allergic individuals consuming products where lysozyme has been added during the manufacturing process.

In winemaking, lysozyme is used for the control of lactic acid bacteria. Lysozyme is allowed for use in food manufacturing (cheese and wine) in EU countries, and must follow purity specifications set forth in European legislation. The purity of only one commercial product was described in the application.

Lysozyme can be used at different stages of wine production and at different doses, and no steps are taken specifically to remove lysozyme from wine. In the studies provided by the applicant, lysozyme was detected in some of the lysozyme-treated wines under the proposed conditions of use.

The applicant stated that lysozyme is the weakest allergen among the four major egg white proteins and indicated a frequency of sensitisation to lysozyme among egg allergic subjects of 15 %, as compared to 53 % for ovotransferrin and 32 % for ovomucoid and ovalbumin. The Panel notes that IgE anti-lysozyme antibodies as markers of sensitisation have been found more often in other studies e.g. in 35 %, 53 %, and 100 % of egg allergic consumers.

The applicant cited two human studies in egg-allergic individuals undergoing skin prick testing with lysozyme-treated wines. The Panel notes that the results from these studies are consistent with the analytical findings of significant residual amounts of lysozyme in treated wines but provide no information about the clinical reactivity of egg-allergic individuals to wines treated with lysozyme when consumed orally.

The applicant acknowledged that lysozyme residues are present in lysozyme-treated wines and that lysozyme is a sensitizer. However, the applicant proposed that oral consumption of lysozyme may not elicit clinical allergic reactions in egg-allergic individuals. The Panel notes that reports (including one double-blind placebo-controlled food challenge, DBPCFC) of allergic reactions to lysozyme and lysozyme-containing foods among egg-allergic individuals are available in the literature, and that results from a clinical study on lysozyme-containing cheese do not allow conclusions about the safety of lysozyme consumption in clinically egg allergic individuals.

The Panel took into account that allergic sensitisation to lysozyme is common among egg allergic individuals, that residual amounts of lysozyme considered sufficient to trigger allergic reactions in susceptible individuals have been demonstrated in wines treated with lysozyme, and that a number of clinical reports (including one DBPCFC with lysozyme) described clinical allergic reactions to lysozyme.

The Panel concludes that wines treated with lysozyme may trigger adverse allergic reactions in susceptible individuals under the conditions of use proposed by the applicant.

Keywords

Wine, anti-microbial stabilizer, lysozyme, food allergy