Infant formulas containing hydrolysed protein for prevention of allergic disease.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Osborn DA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6517017 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6464507 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6481394 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether feeding infants with hydrolysed formula reduces their risk of allergic or autoimmune disease.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis, as part of a series of systematic reviews commissioned by the UK Food Standards Agency to inform guidelines on infant feeding. Two authors selected studies by consensus, independently extracted data, and assessed the quality of included studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.Data sourcesMedline, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, and LILACS searched between January 1946 and April 2015.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesProspective intervention trials of hydrolysed cows' milk formula compared with another hydrolysed formula, human breast milk, or a standard cows' milk formula, which reported on allergic or autoimmune disease or allergic sensitisation.Results37 eligible intervention trials of hydrolysed formula were identified, including over 19,000 participants. There was evidence of conflict of interest and high or unclear risk of bias in most studies of allergic outcomes and evidence of publication bias for studies of eczema and wheeze. Overall there was no consistent evidence that partially or extensively hydrolysed formulas reduce risk of allergic or autoimmune outcomes in infants at high pre-existing risk of these outcomes. Odds ratios for eczema at age 0-4, compared with standard cows' milk formula, were 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.07; I(2)=30%) for partially hydrolysed formula; 0.55 (0.28 to 1.09; I(2)=74%) for extensively hydrolysed casein based formula; and 1.12 (0.88 to 1.42; I(2)=0%) for extensively hydrolysed whey based formula. There was no evidence to support the health claim approved by the US Food and Drug Administration that a partially hydrolysed formula could reduce the risk of eczema nor the conclusion of the Cochrane review that hydrolysed formula could allergy to cows' milk.ConclusionThese findings do not support current guidelines that recommend the use of hydrolysed formula to prevent allergic disease in high risk infants.Review registrationPROSPERO CRD42013004252.
| S-EPMC4783517 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Infant formulas have historically been developed based on providing macronutrients at intake concentrations approximately matching the composition of human milk. In most countries, targets of 1.4-1.5 g of protein/dL and 20 kcal/oz (67-68 kcal/dL) have been set as the protein and energy concentrations for formulas during the first year of life, although this may be an overestimation of these contents. Recent introduction of lower-protein and -energy formulas in full-term infants led us to systematically review the literature for its effects on growth. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, our inclusion criteria were studies that enrolled healthy full-term infants and evaluated lower-protein or lower-energy formula, reported anthropometric outcomes including weight and length, and followed infants for at least 6 mo. Six studies were eligible for inclusion. These studies varied in the content of nutrients provided in the intervention and control groups, by additional dietary components in the study groups, and the timing and length of the intervention, which limit their usefulness for interpreting newly introduced lower-protein and -energy formulas in the United States. These studies suggest adequate growth during infancy and early childhood with infant formulas with concentrations of protein and energy slightly below historical standards in the United States. Further long-term research is needed to assess the impact of the use of lower-protein and/or lower-energy products, especially for nutritionally at-risk populations such as preterm infants and infants who are born small for gestational age.
| S-EPMC4352176 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The evaluation of secondary parameters of a prospective, randomised, controlled, multicentre intervention trial aimed to analyse gastrointestinal tolerance of an infant formula manufactured from extensively hydrolysed whey protein (eHF) compared to intact cow's milk protein (control formula, CF) in healthy term infants. Infants ≤ 25 days of age, who were exclusively formula-fed, were randomised to receive eHF or CF for at least three months up to 120 days of age. An exclusively breastfed reference group (BF) was included for descriptive comparison. Infants' gastrointestinal tolerance was evaluated based on stool parameters, the Amsterdam Infant Stool Scale (AISS), the Infant Gastrointestinal Symptom Questionnaire (IGSQ), and sleeping patterns. Of 359 infants included, 297 randomised (eHF: n = 149, CF: n = 148) and 41 BF infants completed the study per protocol. All tolerance parameters were comparable between eHF and CF. Stool was predominantly soft and yellow in colour. Stool was more frequently green in eHF than CF. BF infants had more frequent stools, which were mainly watery or soft and yellow, and comparable IGSQ scores (descriptive). Irrespective of group, all gastrointestinal and sleep parameters showed signs of maturation with increasing age. In conclusion, eHF showed gastrointestinal tolerance as good as CF in healthy infants. Both formulae were well-tolerated.
| S-EPMC10647512 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) is children's most common food allergy. Therapeutic infant formulas for CMPA lead to symptom-free and potentially benefit early tolerance induction and reducing the allergic march in non-breastfed babies. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of CMPA management with different therapeutic infant formulas in Thailand, which may reflect situations in developing countries throughout Asia. An analytic decision model was developed to simulate the occurrence of eczema, urticaria, asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis, or being symptom-free in infants with CMPA over 36 months. Extensively hydrolyzed casein formula with added probiotic Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus (previously Lactobacillus rhamnosus) strain GG (EHCF+LGG), extensively hydrolyzed whey formula (EHWF), soy protein-based formula (SPF), and amino acid formula (AAF) were compared from the healthcare payer perspective. The results from a prospective cohort study were used for comparative effectiveness measures, while local experts were interviewed to estimate the healthcare resource used in the management of CMPA. The costs of healthcare resources were obtained from standard, publicly available sources. The direct medical cost of CMPA management was lowest for EHCF+LGG (USD 1,720), followed by SPF (USD 2,090), EHWF (USD 2,791), and AAF (USD 7,881). Compared with other formulas, EHCF+LGG was expected to save USD 370 (SPF), USD 1,071 (EHWF), and USD 6,161 (AAF) in the total cost of CMPA management over 36 months. In conclusion, EHCF+LGG was the most cost-effective strategy for managing non-breastfed infants with CMPA. This strategy was associated with more children developing immune tolerance to cow's milk and being symptom-free, contributing to overall cost-saving potential.
| S-EPMC10281430 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cow's milk-based infant formulas are the most common substitute to mother's milk in infancy when breastfeeding is impossible or insufficient, as cow's milk is a globally available source of mammalian proteins with high nutritional value. However, cow's milk allergy (CMA) is the most prevalent type of food allergy among infants, affecting up to 3.8% of small children. Hypoallergenic infant formulas based on hydrolysed cow's milk proteins are commercially available for the management of CMA. Yet, there is a growing demand for more options for infant feeding, both in general but especially for the prevention and management of CMA. Milk from other mammalian sources than the cow, such as goat, sheep, camel, donkey, and horse, has received some attention in the last decade due to the different protein composition profile and protein amino acid sequences, resulting in a potentially low cross-reactivity with cow's milk proteins. Recently, proteins from plant sources, such as potato, lentil, chickpeas, quinoa, in addition to soy and rice, have gained increased interest due to their climate friendly and vegan status as well as potential lower allergenicity. In this review, we provide an overview of current and potential future infant formulas and their relevance in CMA prevention and management.
| S-EPMC8997926 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We aimed to demonstrate that healthy term infants experience noninferior growth with infant formula manufactured from extensively hydrolysed whey protein (eHF) compared to intact cow's milk protein (control formula, CF). This prospective, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, controlled, multicentre trial included healthy term infants who were exclusively formula-fed. Infants ≤ 25 days of age received eHF or CF for at least three months up to 120 days of age, with a follow-up until 180 days of age. A reference group included exclusively breastfed infants (BF). Of 318 infants randomised, 297 (148 CF, 149 eHF) completed the study per protocol. Weight gain up to 120 days of age was noninferior (margin -3.0 g/day) in eHF (28.95 (95% CI: 27.21; 30.68) g/day) compared to CF (28.85 (95% CI: 27.10; 30.61) g/day) with a difference in means of 0.09 g/day and a lower limit of the one-sided 97.5% CI of -0.86 g/day (p < 0.0001 for noninferiority testing). Weight gain remained comparable during follow-up. Further anthropometric parameters did not differ between the infant formula groups throughout the study. Growth was comparable in BF. No relevant safety issues were observed. To conclude, eHF meets infant requirements for adequate growth during the first six months of life and can be considered safe and suitable.
| S-EPMC10146495 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Little research has focused on infant developmental effects, other than growth, of formulas that differ substantially in the form of protein. To examine development of infants fed formulas differing in free amino acid content, we randomized 0.5-month-old infants (n = 79) to either a control group who fed only cow milk formula (CMF) during the first 8 months (CMF8), or to one of two experimental groups: one experimental group fed extensively protein hydrolyzed formula (EHF) for 1-3 months during first 4.5 months (EHF1-3) of life, and the other fed EHF for 8 months (EHF8). The Mullen Scales of Early Learning were administered monthly from 1.5 to 8.5 months to assess fine (FM) and gross (GM) motor control, receptive (RL) and expressive (EL) language, visual reception (VR), and an early learning composite (ELC). Across the 5.5-8.5-month time period, when compared to CMF8 infants, GM scores in EHF1-3 infants averaged 1.5 points higher (95 % CI 0.1, 3.0) and in EHF8 infants 2.2 points higher (95 % CI 0.3, 4.0). Similarly, VR scores averaged 1.9 points higher (95 % CI 0.1, 3.8) in EHF1-3 infants and 2.2 points higher (95 % CI -0.2, 4.5) in EHF8 infants. EHF8 infants' RL scores averaged 1.8 points lower (95 % CI 0.1, 3.6) than CMF8 infants. These data suggest that the form of protein in infant formula may impact cognitive development and that the higher free amino acid content in breast milk may be a contributing factor to the differential cognitive development between breastfed and CMF-fed infants.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00994747.
| S-EPMC4754137 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We recently discovered that infants randomly assigned to a formula high in free amino acids (extensive protein hydrolysate formula; ePHF) during infancy consumed less formula to satiation and gained less weight than did infants fed an isocaloric formula low in free amino acids (cow milk formula; CMF).Because ePHF and CMF differ markedly in concentrations of free glutamate, we tested the hypothesis that the higher glutamate concentrations in ePHF promote satiation and satiety.In this counterbalanced, within-subject study, infants <4 mo of age (n = 30) visited our laboratory for 3 sets of 2 consecutive infant-led formula meals over 3 test days. Infants were fed 1 of 3 isocaloric formulas during each first meal: CMF, ePHF, or CMF with added free glutamate to approximate concentrations in ePHF (CMF+glu). When infants signaled hunger again, they were fed a second meal of CMF. From these data, we calculated satiety ratios for each of the 3 formulas by dividing the intermeal interval by the amount of formula consumed during that particular first meal.Infants consumed significantly less CMF+glu (P < 0.02) and ePHF (P < 0.04) than CMF during the first meals. They also showed greater levels of satiety after consuming CMF+glu or ePHF: satiety ratios for CMF+glu (P < 0.03) and ePHF (P < 0.05) were significantly higher than for CMF.These findings suggest a role of free glutamate in infant intake regulation and call into question the claim that formula feeding impairs infants' abilities to self regulate energy intake.
| S-EPMC3302362 | biostudies-literature