SynthesisMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Allergenicity Assessment of Plant-Derived Sweet Proteins-In Silico, In Vitro, In Vivo, and Clinical Approach: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Plant-derived sweet proteins are promising low-calorie natural sweeteners that may reduce dietary sugar intake and prevent non-communicable diseases. Although seven have been identified-thaumatin, miraculin, monellin, mabinlin, brazzein, pentadin, and curculin (neoculin)-only thaumatin is currently approved as a food additive. The development of others requires comprehensive safety assessments, particularly regarding allergenicity. This systematic review aims to investigate and synthesize allergenicity assessment methods (in silico, in vitro, in vivo, and clinical) applied to these seven sweet proteins. The literature searches were conducted following PRISMA guidelines across Scopus, PubMed, and Wiley Online Library databases, up to 30 November 2025, with no time restrictions. The risk of bias in selected studies was evaluated using GRADE. After the selection process, 14 out of 2634 studies met the inclusion criteria. Thaumatin, miraculin, monellin, and brazzein emerged as the most extensively studied proteins. In silico approaches (sequence and structural homology) and in vitro assays (digestibility and cell-based methods) were the most commonly employed methods. In contrast, in vivo studies (animal models) and clinical evaluations (skin prick tests, oral food challenges) were rarely reported. Allergenicity studies on pentadin, mabinlin, and curculin (neoculin) are limited, indicating a research gap that requires further study to support regulatory approval and consumer acceptance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.