User login
Findings on the use of hydrolyzed formula in place of standard cows’ milk formula to prevent allergy in high-risk infants do not support current guidelines, according to Dr. Robert J Boyle of Imperial College London and his associates.
A review and meta-analysis were performed on 28 randomized control trials, 6 quasirandomized trials, and 3 controlled clinical trials describing allergic or autoimmune outcomes, with more than 19,000 participants. Among 13 studies reporting on the risk of food allergy, no significant difference was found in the risk of any food allergy with partially hydrolyzed formula (risk ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-3.80) and extensively hydrolyzed formula (RR, 0.86; CI, 0.26-2.82), compared with standard formula at age 0-4 years, and for extensively hydrolyzed formula at age 5-14 years.
The review also examined and found no significant evidence favoring the use of hydrolyzed formula in place of standard cows’ milk formula to avert the risk of eczema, wheeze, allergic rhinitis, or type 1 diabetes mellitus.
The researchers suggest that guidelines be updated and revised to reflect these new findings.
“We found no consistent evidence to support the current recommendations and found evidence of publication bias, methodological biases, and conflict of interest in those studies reporting allergic outcomes,” Dr. Boyle and his associates concluded. “We suggest that any future trials on hydrolyzed formula should be prospectively registered, independently funded, and include adequate oversight to ensure that they do not negatively impact on breastfeeding in study participants”.
Read the full study at the British Medical Journal (doi: 10.1136/bmj.i974)
Findings on the use of hydrolyzed formula in place of standard cows’ milk formula to prevent allergy in high-risk infants do not support current guidelines, according to Dr. Robert J Boyle of Imperial College London and his associates.
A review and meta-analysis were performed on 28 randomized control trials, 6 quasirandomized trials, and 3 controlled clinical trials describing allergic or autoimmune outcomes, with more than 19,000 participants. Among 13 studies reporting on the risk of food allergy, no significant difference was found in the risk of any food allergy with partially hydrolyzed formula (risk ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-3.80) and extensively hydrolyzed formula (RR, 0.86; CI, 0.26-2.82), compared with standard formula at age 0-4 years, and for extensively hydrolyzed formula at age 5-14 years.
The review also examined and found no significant evidence favoring the use of hydrolyzed formula in place of standard cows’ milk formula to avert the risk of eczema, wheeze, allergic rhinitis, or type 1 diabetes mellitus.
The researchers suggest that guidelines be updated and revised to reflect these new findings.
“We found no consistent evidence to support the current recommendations and found evidence of publication bias, methodological biases, and conflict of interest in those studies reporting allergic outcomes,” Dr. Boyle and his associates concluded. “We suggest that any future trials on hydrolyzed formula should be prospectively registered, independently funded, and include adequate oversight to ensure that they do not negatively impact on breastfeeding in study participants”.
Read the full study at the British Medical Journal (doi: 10.1136/bmj.i974)
Findings on the use of hydrolyzed formula in place of standard cows’ milk formula to prevent allergy in high-risk infants do not support current guidelines, according to Dr. Robert J Boyle of Imperial College London and his associates.
A review and meta-analysis were performed on 28 randomized control trials, 6 quasirandomized trials, and 3 controlled clinical trials describing allergic or autoimmune outcomes, with more than 19,000 participants. Among 13 studies reporting on the risk of food allergy, no significant difference was found in the risk of any food allergy with partially hydrolyzed formula (risk ratio, 1.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-3.80) and extensively hydrolyzed formula (RR, 0.86; CI, 0.26-2.82), compared with standard formula at age 0-4 years, and for extensively hydrolyzed formula at age 5-14 years.
The review also examined and found no significant evidence favoring the use of hydrolyzed formula in place of standard cows’ milk formula to avert the risk of eczema, wheeze, allergic rhinitis, or type 1 diabetes mellitus.
The researchers suggest that guidelines be updated and revised to reflect these new findings.
“We found no consistent evidence to support the current recommendations and found evidence of publication bias, methodological biases, and conflict of interest in those studies reporting allergic outcomes,” Dr. Boyle and his associates concluded. “We suggest that any future trials on hydrolyzed formula should be prospectively registered, independently funded, and include adequate oversight to ensure that they do not negatively impact on breastfeeding in study participants”.
Read the full study at the British Medical Journal (doi: 10.1136/bmj.i974)
FROM BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL
