Pediatric allergy and immunology : official publication of the European Society of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology · 2021
Effect of extensively hydrolyzed casein vs. conventional formula on the risk of asthma and allergies: The TRIGR randomized clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Virtanen Suvi M, Cuthbertson David, Couluris Marisa, Savilahti Erkki, Knip Mikael, Krischer Jeffrey P, TRIGR Investigators
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The role of hydrolyzed infant formulas in the prevention of asthma and allergies remains inconsistent. We tested whether extensively hydrolyzed casein formula compared to conventional cow's milk-based formula prevented asthma, allergic rhinitis, or atopic eczema.
METHODS: In the randomized double-blind Trial to Reduce IDDM in Genetically at Risk (TRIGR), comparing extensively hydrolyzed to standard cow's milk-based infant formula during the first 6-8 months of life, we assessed the effect of the intervention on the incidence of asthma, allergic rhinitis, and eczema when the children were 9- to 11-years old. The asthma, allergic rhinitis, and eczema occurrence was assessed using online standardized and validated ISAAC questionnaire. Of the 1106 children who participated in this Ancillary study, 560 had been randomized to the experimental (extensively hydrolyzed casein formula) and 546 to the control arm (cow's milk-based formula).
RESULTS: The risk of persistent asthma, allergic rhinitis, or atopic eczema did not differ by treatment, the hazard ratios (95% CI) being 1.00 (0.66-1.52), 0.95 (0.66-1.38), and 0.89 (0.70-1.15), respectively, in the intention-to-treat analysis. Neither were there any differences in the per-protocol analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Extensively hydrolyzed casein formula did not protect from asthma, rhinitis, or eczema in this population carrying genetic risk for type 1 diabetes.
METHODS: In the randomized double-blind Trial to Reduce IDDM in Genetically at Risk (TRIGR), comparing extensively hydrolyzed to standard cow's milk-based infant formula during the first 6-8 months of life, we assessed the effect of the intervention on the incidence of asthma, allergic rhinitis, and eczema when the children were 9- to 11-years old. The asthma, allergic rhinitis, and eczema occurrence was assessed using online standardized and validated ISAAC questionnaire. Of the 1106 children who participated in this Ancillary study, 560 had been randomized to the experimental (extensively hydrolyzed casein formula) and 546 to the control arm (cow's milk-based formula).
RESULTS: The risk of persistent asthma, allergic rhinitis, or atopic eczema did not differ by treatment, the hazard ratios (95% CI) being 1.00 (0.66-1.52), 0.95 (0.66-1.38), and 0.89 (0.70-1.15), respectively, in the intention-to-treat analysis. Neither were there any differences in the per-protocol analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Extensively hydrolyzed casein formula did not protect from asthma, rhinitis, or eczema in this population carrying genetic risk for type 1 diabetes.