| 1. |
- Knip, Mikael, et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of Hydrolyzed Infant Formula vs Conventional Formula on Risk of Type 1 Diabetes The TRIGR Randomized Clinical Trial
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). - : AMER MEDICAL ASSOC. - 0098-7484 .- 1538-3598. ; 319:1, s. 38-48
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- IMPORTANCE Early exposure to complex dietary proteins may increase the risk of type 1 diabetes in children with genetic disease susceptibility. There are no intact proteins in extensively hydrolyzed formulas. OBJECTIVE To test the hypothesis that weaning to an extensively hydrolyzed formula decreases the cumulative incidence of type 1 diabetes in young children. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS An international double-blind randomized clinical trial of 2159 infants with human leukocyte antigen-conferred disease susceptibility and a first-degree relative with type 1 diabetes recruited from May 2002 to January 2007 in 78 study centers in 15 countries; 1081 were randomized to be weaned to the extensively hydrolyzed casein formula and 1078 to a conventional formula. The follow-up of the participants ended on February 28, 2017. INTERVENTIONS The participants received either a casein hydrolysate or a conventional adapted cows milk formula supplemented with 20% of the casein hydrolysate. The minimum duration of study formula exposure was 60 days by 6 to 8 months of age. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary outcome was type 1 diabetes diagnosed according to World Health Organization criteria. Secondary outcomes included age at diabetes diagnosis and safety (adverse events). RESULTS Among 2159 newborn infants (1021 female [47.3%]) who were randomized, 1744 (80.8%) completed the trial. The participants were observed for a median of 11.5 years (quartile [Q] 1-Q3, 10.2-12.8). The absolute risk of type 1 diabetes was 8.4% among those randomized to the casein hydrolysate (n = 91) vs 7.6% among those randomized to the conventional formula (n = 82) (difference, 0.8%[95% CI, -1.6% to 3.2%]). The hazard ratio for type 1 diabetes adjusted for human leukocyte antigen risk group, duration of breastfeeding, duration of study formula consumption, sex, and region while treating study center as a random effect was 1.1 (95% CI, 0.8 to 1.5; P = .46). The median age at diagnosis of type 1 diabetes was similar in the 2 groups (6.0 years [Q1-Q3, 3.1-8.9] vs 5.8 years [Q1-Q3, 2.6-9.1]; difference, 0.2 years [95% CI, -0.9 to 1.2]). Upper respiratory infections were the most common adverse event reported (frequency, 0.48 events/year in the hydrolysate group and 0.50 events/year in the control group). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among infants at risk for type 1 diabetes, weaning to a hydrolyzed formula compared with a conventional formula did not reduce the cumulative incidence of type 1 diabetes after median follow-up for 11.5 years. These findings do not support a need to revise the dietary recommendations for infants at risk for type 1 diabetes.
|
|
| 2. |
- Knip, Mikael, et al.
(författare)
-
Hydrolyzed infant formula and early β-cell autoimmunity : a randomized clinical trial.
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 0098-7484 .- 1538-3598. ; 311:22, s. 2279-2287
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- IMPORTANCE: The disease process leading to clinical type 1 diabetes often starts during the first years of life. Early exposure to complex dietary proteins may increase the risk of β-cell autoimmunity in children at genetic risk for type 1 diabetes. Extensively hydrolyzed formulas do not contain intact proteins.OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that weaning to an extensively hydrolyzed formula decreases the cumulative incidence of diabetes-associated autoantibodies in young children.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A double-blind randomized clinical trial of 2159 infants with HLA-conferred disease susceptibility and a first-degree relative with type 1 diabetes recruited from May 2002 to January 2007 in 78 study centers in 15 countries; 1078 were randomized to be weaned to the extensively hydrolyzed casein formula and 1081 were randomized to be weaned to a conventional cows' milk-based formula. The participants were observed to April 16, 2013.INTERVENTIONS: The participants received either a casein hydrolysate or a conventional cows' milk formula supplemented with 20% of the casein hydrolysate.MAIN OUTCOMES: AND MEASURES: Primary outcome was positivity for at least 2 diabetes-associated autoantibodies out of 4 analyzed. Autoantibodies to insulin, glutamic acid decarboxylase, and the insulinoma-associated-2 (IA-2) molecule were analyzed using radiobinding assays and islet cell antibodies with immunofluorescence during a median observation period of 7.0 years (mean, 6.3 years).RESULTS: The absolute risk of positivity for 2 or more islet autoantibodies was 13.4% among those randomized to the casein hydrolysate formula (n = 139) vs 11.4% among those randomized to the conventional formula (n = 117). The unadjusted hazard ratio for positivity for 2 or more autoantibodies among those randomized to be weaned to the casein hydrolysate was 1.21 (95% CI, 0.94-1.54), compared with those randomized to the conventional formula, while the hazard ratio adjusted for HLA risk, duration of breastfeeding, vitamin D use, study formula duration and consumption, and region was 1.23 (95% CI, 0.96-1.58). There were no clinically significant differences in the rate of reported adverse events between the 2 groups.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among infants at risk for type 1 diabetes, the use of a hydrolyzed formula, when compared with a conventional formula, did not reduce the incidence of diabetes-associated autoantibodies after 7 years. These findings do not support a benefit from hydrolyzed formula. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00179777.
|
|
| 3. |
- Watts, Nick, et al.
(författare)
-
The Lancet Countdown on health and climate change : from 25 years of inaction to a global transformation for public health
- 2018
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - : Elsevier. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 391:10120, s. 581-630
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Lancet Countdown tracks progress on health and climate change and provides an independent assessment of the health effects of climate change, the implementation of the Paris Agreement, 1 and the health implications of these actions. It follows on from the work of the 2015 Lancet Commission on Health and Climate Change, 2 which concluded that anthropogenic climate change threatens to undermine the past 50 years of gains in public health, and conversely, that a comprehensive response to climate change could be "the greatest global health opportunity of the 21st century". The Lancet Countdown is a collaboration between 24 academic institutions and intergovernmental organisations based in every continent and with representation from a wide range of disciplines. The collaboration includes climate scientists, ecologists, economists, engineers, experts in energy, food, and transport systems, geographers, mathematicians, social and political scientists, public health professionals, and doctors. It reports annual indicators across five sections: climate change impacts, exposures, and vulnerability; adaptation planning and resilience for health; mitigation actions and health co-benefits; economics and finance; and public and political engagement. The key messages from the 40 indicators in the Lancet Countdown's 2017 report are summarised below.
|
|
| 4. |
- Wennberg, Patrik, et al.
(författare)
-
Acute effects of breaking up prolonged sitting on fatigue and cognition : a pilot study
- 2016
-
Ingår i: BMJ Open. - : BMJ. - 2044-6055. ; 6:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives: To compare the acute effects of uninterrupted sitting with sitting interrupted by brief bouts of light-intensity walking on self-reported fatigue, cognition, neuroendocrine biomarkers and cardiometabolic risk markers in overweight/obese adults.Design: Randomised two-condition crossover trial.Setting: Laboratory study conducted in Melbourne, Australia.Participants: 19 overweight/obese adults (45–75 years).Interventions: After an initial 2 h period seated, participants consumed a meal-replacement beverage and completed (on 2 days separated by a 6-day washout period) each condition over the next 5 h: uninterrupted sitting (sedentary condition) or sitting with 3 min bouts of light-intensity walking every 30 min (active condition).Primary outcome measures: Self-reported fatigue, executive function and episodic memory at 0 h, 4 h and 7 h.Secondary outcome measures: Neuroendocrine biomarkers and cardiometabolic risk markers (blood collections at 0 h, 4 h and 7 h, blood pressure and heart rate measured hourly and interstitial glucose measured using a continuous glucose monitoring system).Results: During the active condition, fatigue levels were lower at 4 h (−13.32 (95% CI −23.48 to −3.16)) and at 7 h (−10.73 (95% CI −20.89 to −0.58)) compared to the sedentary condition. Heart rate was higher at 4 h (4.47 (95% CI 8.37 to 0.58)) and at 7 h (4.32 (95% CI 8.21 to 0.42)) during the active condition compared to the sedentary condition. There were no significant differences between conditions by time for other variables. In the sedentary condition, changes in fatigue scores over time correlated with a decrease in heart rate and plasma dihydroxyphenylalanine (DOPA) and an increase in plasma dihydroxyphenylglycol (DHPG).Conclusions: Interrupting prolonged sitting with light-intensity walking breaks may be an effective fatigue countermeasure acutely. Fatigue levels corresponded with the heart rate and neuroendocrine biomarker changes in uninterrupted sitting in this pilot study. Further research is needed to identify potential implications, particularly for the occupational health context.
|
|
