Document Detail


Meta-analysis of a partially hydrolysed 100%-whey infant formula vs. extensively hydrolysed infant formulas in the prevention of atopic dermatitis.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  20925453     Owner:  NLM     Status:  In-Process    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
OBJECTIVES: This study presents previously unpublished point and cumulative incidence rates and relative risks (RRs) for comparing a partially hydrolysed 100% whey-based infant formula, NAN-HA * (PHF-W) to extensively hydrolysed whey- (EHF-Whey) or casein-based (EHF-Casein) infant formulas in the prevention of atopic dermatitis (AD) in infants who cannot be breastfed exclusively. It also outlines methods to convert the above-mentioned data as well as data comparing PHF-W to cows' milk formula (SF) into inputs to be applied to a pharmacoeconomic model. * NAN-HA is a registered trade name of Nestlé SA, Switzerland.
METHODS: The incidence rates and RRs were obtained from a meta-analysis which analysed efficacy for PHF-W vs. EHF but did not present those. It took into consideration any relevant randomized controlled trial which compared the use of PHF-W with SF or EHF for the prevention of allergies. The primary outcomes of interest were the incidence, cumulative incidence and period prevalence of allergic manifestations and of AD in particular. Fifteen studies had been included for analysis of which six studies explored PHF-W vs. EHF. These results and PHF-W vs. SF data were adapted for inputs into a pharmacoeconomic model which used a spreadsheet decision-analytic economic model based on 3-month cycles to explore the cost-effectiveness of PHF-W vs. SF and EHF. Weights were applied to the incidence rates and RRs for each reported time period which were then adapted into 3-month indicators.
RESULTS: This meta-analysis for PHF-W (557 patients) vs. EHF-Whey (559 patients) yielded RR of 0.75 (0.54, 1.05) and 0.80 (0.63, 1.02) at 0-12 months and at 0-36 months, respectively. Corresponding RRs for PHF-W vs. EHF-Casein (580 patients) were 1.06 (0.74, 1.53) at 0-12 months and 1.13 (0.87, 1.47) at 0-36 months.
CONCLUSION: It appears that the efficacy of PHF-W falls within the range of that of both EHF formulas (whey and casein) and allows the application of these results in a pharmacoeconomic model.
Authors:
Michael Iskedjian; Hania Szajewska; Jörg Spieldenner; Bechara Farah; Jade Berbari
Related Documents :
11382663 - Flavor variety enhances food acceptance in formula-fed infants.
9635063 - The role of taurine in infant nutrition.
23420913 - Nidcap: a systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't     Date:  2010-10-06
Journal Detail:
Title:  Current medical research and opinion     Volume:  26     ISSN:  1473-4877     ISO Abbreviation:  Curr Med Res Opin     Publication Date:  2010 Nov 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2010-10-20     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  0351014     Medline TA:  Curr Med Res Opin     Country:  England    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  2599-606     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
PharmIdeas Research and Consulting Inc., Oakville, ON, Canada. miskedjian@pharmideas.com
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  The Personal Factors of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health in th...
Next Document:  Economic evaluation of a 100% whey-based, partially hydrolysed formula in the prevention of atopic d...