The Glycemic Response to Infant Formulas: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
cow’s milk protein-based formula
glycemic index
infant formula
lactose-free formula
soy protein-based formula
Journal
Nutrients
ISSN: 2072-6643
Titre abrégé: Nutrients
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101521595
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Mar 2022
03 Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
22
01
2022
revised:
26
02
2022
accepted:
01
03
2022
entrez:
10
3
2022
pubmed:
11
3
2022
medline:
15
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Commercial infant formulas attempt to imitate human milk's unique composition. However, lactose-free and milk protein-free formulas are often chosen due to medical reasons or personal preferences. The aim of this study was to determine the glycemic and insulinemic indices of a variety of infant formulas. We conducted a three-arm, randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Participants were 25-40-year-old healthy adults. Three commercial infant formulas (cow's milk protein-based ["standard"], soy protein-based, and lactose-free) were randomly given to each participant. Glycemic and insulinemic responses were determined and compared between the three formulas. Twenty subjects were enrolled (11 females/9 males, mean age 32.8 ± 2.9 years). No significant difference was found in the glycemic index between the three formulas (21.5, 29.1, and 21.5 for the standard, soy protein-based, and lactose-free formulas, respectively, Cow's milk protein-based, soy protein-based, and lactose-free formulas have a similar glycemic index. However, soy protein-based formula produced a significantly higher increase in postprandial glucose levels. The implication and biological significance of these results have yet to be determined.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Commercial infant formulas attempt to imitate human milk's unique composition. However, lactose-free and milk protein-free formulas are often chosen due to medical reasons or personal preferences. The aim of this study was to determine the glycemic and insulinemic indices of a variety of infant formulas.
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a three-arm, randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Participants were 25-40-year-old healthy adults. Three commercial infant formulas (cow's milk protein-based ["standard"], soy protein-based, and lactose-free) were randomly given to each participant. Glycemic and insulinemic responses were determined and compared between the three formulas.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Twenty subjects were enrolled (11 females/9 males, mean age 32.8 ± 2.9 years). No significant difference was found in the glycemic index between the three formulas (21.5, 29.1, and 21.5 for the standard, soy protein-based, and lactose-free formulas, respectively,
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Cow's milk protein-based, soy protein-based, and lactose-free formulas have a similar glycemic index. However, soy protein-based formula produced a significantly higher increase in postprandial glucose levels. The implication and biological significance of these results have yet to be determined.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35268039
pii: nu14051064
doi: 10.3390/nu14051064
pmc: PMC8912504
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Blood Glucose
0
Soybean Proteins
0
Lactose
J2B2A4N98G
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Am J Clin Nutr. 2000 May;71(5):1166-9
pubmed: 10799379
Nutr Res Rev. 2005 Jun;18(1):145-71
pubmed: 19079901
Pediatr Clin North Am. 1977 Feb;24(1):17-36
pubmed: 322057
Reprod Nutr Dev. 1983;23(2a):259-71
pubmed: 6844718
Br J Nutr. 2016 Oct;116(7):1216-1221
pubmed: 27609509
Nutrients. 2019 Mar 28;11(4):
pubmed: 30925689
Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2010 Sep;299(3):R711-22
pubmed: 20631295
Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Nov;80(5):1246-53
pubmed: 15531672
Acta Paediatr Scand. 1979 May;68(3):383-7
pubmed: 571665
Pediatrics. 2008 May;121(5):1062-8
pubmed: 18450914
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2001 Aug;74(2):217-32
pubmed: 11558467
Acta Paediatr. 2010 Feb;99(2):256-62
pubmed: 19886896
Am J Clin Nutr. 2007 Apr;85(4):996-1004
pubmed: 17413098
Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2012 Jan;15(1):71-7
pubmed: 22037013
Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 May;81(5):976-82
pubmed: 15883418
Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Jul;74(1):96-100
pubmed: 11451723
Lancet. 1997 Jul 5;350(9070):23-7
pubmed: 9217716
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 2006 Apr;42(4):352-61
pubmed: 16641572
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016 Aug 23;13(9):
pubmed: 27563917
Biochem Soc Trans. 2007 Nov;35(Pt 5):1180-6
pubmed: 17956307
Diabetes Care. 2001 Jul;24(7):1137-43
pubmed: 11423492
Arch Dis Child. 1978 Nov;53(11):913-5
pubmed: 569470
N Engl J Med. 2021 Apr 8;384(14):1312-1322
pubmed: 33626252
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1988 Mar-Apr;12(2):170-3
pubmed: 3361685
Pediatrics. 2005 Feb;115(2):496-506
pubmed: 15687461
Pediatr Med Chir. 2017 Jun 28;39(2):157
pubmed: 28673078
Nutrients. 2019 Nov 12;11(11):
pubmed: 31718111
J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 1983 May;2(2):288-94
pubmed: 6875753
Am J Clin Nutr. 2002 Aug;76(2):442-6
pubmed: 12145020
Pediatrics. 1978 Mar;61(3):502-3
pubmed: 565507
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2015 Aug;69(8):939-43
pubmed: 25804277
Am J Clin Nutr. 1981 Mar;34(3):362-6
pubmed: 6259925
JAMA. 1997 Feb 12;277(6):472-7
pubmed: 9020271
Lancet. 2007 Mar 17;369(9565):890-2
pubmed: 17368136