China 
Africa 
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Cinchona officinalis (Cinchona Tree) and Corylus avellana (Common Hazel)
Published in Azamal Husen, Herbs, Shrubs, and Trees of Potential Medicinal Benefits, 2022
Sawsan A. Oran, Arwa Rasem Althaher, Mohammad S. Mubarak
Hazelnuts are well-known for their distinct flavor and aroma. Fresh and roasted hazelnuts comprise ketones, aldehydes, pyrazines, alcohols, aromatic hydrocarbons, furans, pyrroles, terpenes, and acids (Alasalvar et al., 2003; Marzocchi et al., 2017; Cordero et al., 2019). Furthermore, among the various volatile compounds, 5-methyl-(E)-2-hepten-4-one (filbertone) has been identified as the primary odorant (nutty-roasty and hazelnut-like) of roasted hazelnuts.
Manufacturing food extracts
Published in Richard F. Lockey, Dennis K. Ledford, Allergens and Allergen Immunotherapy, 2020
Natalie A. David, Anusha Penumarti, Jay E. Slater
Tree nuts include almond, cashew, walnut, hazelnut, Brazil nut, pecan, and pistachio. Allergens in most tree nuts, including almond (amandin, Pru du 6) [76], walnut [77], hazelnut [78], Brazil nut [79], pecan [80], and pistachio (dry roasted) [81] nuts demonstrate antigenic stability following heating in in vitro studies, but binding to human IgE is reduced following heating for almond (lower molecular weight allergens) [76], cashew [82], and pistachio (steam roasted) [81] nuts. Boiled cashews and boiled pistachios have decreased basophil degranulation in vitro as well [83]. In a DBPCFC study, the allergenicity of roasted hazelnut is considerably reduced compared to raw hazelnut, but clinical symptoms are not reduced in all patients. Thus, roasted hazelnut cannot be reliably consumed by hazelnut-allergic patients [84]. In order to further evaluate the effects of heating on the allergenicity of other tree nuts, future studies using DBPCFCs are warranted.
Sublingual Immunotherapy for Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis, Allergic Asthma, Food Allergy, and Prevention of Allergic Diseases
Published in Richard F. Lockey, Dennis K. Ledford, Allergens and Allergen Immunotherapy, 2014
Moisés A. Calderón, Martin Penagos, Stephen R. Durham
The efficacy of oral immunotherapy and SLIT for food allergy has been evaluated [130]. In 2003, Mempel et al. [131] first described the case of a female patient successfully treated with a sublingual extract of kiwi after she presented with episodes of severe anaphylaxis associated with consumption of this fruit. Subsequently, several reports and case series have been published; however, to date, there are only four reported DB PC RCTs of SLIT for food allergy (Table 27.5). Enrique et al. [132] conducted a DB PC RCT for hazelnut allergy. Patients received an escalating dose of 2 × 10−11 to 66.25 mg of hazelnut, yielding a cumulative dose 119.51 mg or matched placebo. Efficacy was assessed by a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge (DB PC FC) after 8 to 12 weeks of treatment. The mean hazelnut quantity provoking symptoms increased from 2.29 to 11.56 g in the active group (p = 0.02) compared to 3.49 to 4.14 g in the placebo group Not Significant (NS) [132].
Association between nut consumption and cancer risk: a meta-analysis
Published in Nutrition and Cancer, 2022
Chang Cao, Xinyan Gan, Yan He, Shiqi Nong, Yonglin Su, Zheran Liu, Yu Zhang, Xiaolin Hu, Xingchen Peng
All prospective cohort studies concerning the relationship between nuts intake and cancer risk or mortality were assessed for eligibility. Candidate studies were included if they met the following criteria: 1) prospective cohort studies or case-cohort studies; 2) considered intake of total nuts (including peanuts and tree nuts), tree nuts (including almonds, Brazil nuts, cashews, hazelnuts, macadamia, pecans, pistachios, pine nuts, and walnuts), peanuts and peanut butter as exposure; 3) considered the risk of cancer or mortality as outcomes; 4) reported estimate of hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR) with the corresponding 95% CIs. If the same cases from the same cohort were reported in more than one study, only the most recent study or the study reporting the most cases was included. If articles included the cases from the same cohort but assessed different exposure or outcomes (e.g., different cancers), they were included in the meta-analysis and dose-response analysis.
Relationship Between Nut Consumption and Metabolic Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies
Published in Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 2019
Generally speaking, nuts were composed of almonds, walnuts, hazelnuts, peanuts, and pistachios (14). Since the components of nuts vary among varieties (14, 27), it is speculated that the biological effect of nuts on MetS may vary with variety. This was also the subject that the present study intended to investigate. However, only several studies specified the varieties of nuts as tree nuts and peanuts, so the various varieties could only be regarded as these two types. Surprisingly, the negative relationship between nut consumption and MetS was only found in tree nuts, but not in peanuts. Two speculations were given, as follows. First, the reliability of these results might be weakened since only a small number of studies were included (4 studies for tree nuts (12, 14, 15, 18) and 2 studies for peanuts (14, 15)). Second, the components in nuts were complicated. Some neglected substance in peanuts might run counter to the biological effect of ellagic acid and L-arginine. Of interest, although the results of subgroup analysis were accompanied by the limited number of studies and high heterogeneity (Table 2), the diagnostic criteria of MetS (NCEP-ATP III), geographical region (North America), sample size (< 5000), and exposure assessment (24-hour dietary recall) may still probably influence the relationship between nut consumption and MetS. As a consequence, more well-designed studies with detailed specifications of nut varieties are needed.
New pharmaceutical approaches for the treatment of food allergies
Published in Expert Opinion on Drug Delivery, 2018
Ana Brotons-Canto, Nekane Martín-Arbella, Carlos Gamazo, Juan M. Irache
In spite that there are few studies of SLIT, hopeful results for the treatment of patients with several common FA have been obtained, including peanut [59], milk [60], hazelnut [61], and peach [62] allergies. Regarding hazelnut allergy in adults, a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial showed that, after 5 months of treatment, SLIT increased the threshold of patients to this nut from 2.3 g to 11.6 g without allergic symptoms after an OFC [63]. In another interesting study with peanut allergic children, who underwent 6 months of dose escalation followed by 6 months of maintenance dosing, the treatment permitted to safely ingest 20 times more peanut protein compared to the placebo group. This fact was correlated with a decrease in skin prick test wheal size and decreased basophil responsiveness after stimulation with peanut. However, no changes were observed in the percentage of regulatory T cells, or IL-10 and IFN-γ production [59]. Moreover, SLIT treatment of peach allergic patients during 6 months increased up to ninefold their tolerability to the fruit [62].