evidence for health effects of what we eat how to
play

Evidence for health effects of what we eat: how to integrate - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Evidence for health effects of what we eat: how to integrate findings from intervention and observational studies? Prof Pieter van 't Veer, PhD Division of Human Nutrition Wageningen University Carla Dullemeijer, Olga W Souverein, Esme L


  1. Evidence for health effects of what we eat: how to integrate findings from intervention and observational studies? Prof Pieter van 't Veer, PhD Division of Human Nutrition Wageningen University Carla Dullemeijer, Olga W Souverein, Esmée L Doets, Hilko van der Voet, Janneke P van Wijngaarden, Waldo J de Boer, Maria Plada, Rosalie AM Dhonukshe-Rutten, Paulette in `t Veld, Adrienne EJM Cavelaars, Lisette CPGM de Groot

  2. Domain of this presentation • Knowledge of health effects of what we eat (somehow) integrated in reference values • Nutrient reference values serve as tools for evaluating usual intake of individuals / populations, to provide advice / propose policies • Focus on deriving nutrient reference values • EURRECA NoE (2007-12): micronutrients

  3. Reference values for populations and individuals ANR, EAR (Estimated Average Requirement) A daily nutrient level estimated to meet the requirements of half the healthy individuals in a particular life stage and gender group. RDA, RDI, INL 97.5 (Recom- mended Dietary Intake) Biological variation: susceptibility The average daily dietary intake level that is sufficient to meet the nutrient requirements of nearly all (97–98 per cent) healthy individuals in a particular life stage and gender group. *source: FNB:IOMFood and Nutrition Board: Institute King et al. 2007 of Medicine DRI process

  4. Nutritional adequacy – the health criterion (Gibney) Criterion of adequacy / health criterion determined by the level of intake that � Prevents deficiency symptoms Traditional � Optimizes body stores of a nutrient � Optimizes some biochemical or physiological function Physiological / nutritional approach � Minimizes a risk factor for chronic disease Epidemiology / public health perspective � Minimizes the incidence of disease (From Introduction to Human Nutrition, Gibney et al;(ed))

  5. Methodological scope of presentation (data from Eurreca on B12 preliminary & for illustration) Three “dimensions” of studies on requirements � Two concepts Dose response Balance � Two applications Individual Population � Two study designs Intervention Observational

  6. Study concept: “Dose-response” & “balance” On each point on the line, a steady state Dose-response (balance) is assumed. data from one How to construct the subject line? Health criterion Normal function (physiological Symptoms, adverse effects requirement) Required intake (micro)nutrient intake

  7. Dose-response: individ. requirements & popul. ref. intake P 97.5 P 2.5 Marker of ‘status’ Health criterion value (physiological requirement) Distribution of required Q1: Given an intake agreed value for the health criterion, how much should a (population of) individual(s) eat Intake required to attain to attain that level of status marker value? ANR SD req

  8. Balance approach (“in = out”): example vit. B 12 Sum of losses (faeces, urine, skin, …., periods) + need for growth (fetus, child, pregnancy, lactation, ..) ANR ≡ Bioavailability Factor � Health criterion • Netherlands: Maintenance liver stores B 12 > 500 � g • France: Compensation of losses via bile • USA: maintenance haematological status in pernicious anaemia patients (stable Hb, normal MCV & normal reticulocyte response) � Bioavailability factor • All countries, assessed by faecal excretion, whole body counting � Add CV=10% to allow for variation of ANR between subjects

  9. Methodological scope of presentation (data from Eurreca on B12 preliminary & for illustration) Three “dimensions” of studies on requirements � Two concepts Dose response Balance � Two applications Individual Population � Two study designs Intervention Observational

  10. Study design: Evidence pyramid (strength of...) Evidence integrated per study type in pyramid (meta- & pooled analyses) Intervention studies, � RCT-principle (“causality”) (e.g., Cochrane approach) Observational studies “epidemiology” To be (e.g. WCRF global report diet & cancer) inserted � Prospective cohort (-nested case control) � Case control studies (in dynamic population) � Cross-sectional studies (“descriptive”) � Ecological studies (“aggregate”)

  11. Methods relevant to assess requirements (Gibney) � Deprivation studies (‘depletion-repletion’; haem.status PA) � Radioactive tracer studies (‘turnover’, ‘bioavailability’) � Balance studies (input = loss in dynamic steady state) � Factorial meth. ( Σ losses + needs for growth: bile losses) � Tissue levels (e.g. liver stores of vitamin B12) � Biochem markers (serum/plasma B12, holoTC) � Biological markers (early, interm, late endp., e.g. MMA) � Animal experiments (all) (From Introduction to Human Nutrition, Gibney et al;(ed))

  12. Cross-tab “pyramid” by “data for requirements” Methodology Interven- Prosp. Case- Cross- Eco- (Gibney) tion cohort control section logical Depletion-repletion + (no ran- dom alloc) Radio-active tracers + Balance studies + Factorial methods + Tissue levels + Biochemical markers + (RCT) + Biological markers + (RCT) + Animal experiments + (RCT) Red: Mainly used in setting reference values (data limited) Box: Seldomly used (plenty of data available) � OPPORTUNITY!! NB: “Nutritional status” subjects in RCT <represent. than X-sectional

  13. Study methods by “concept” and “design” Study concept Intervention design Observational design (manipulates the exposure) (assesses the exposure) Balance Depletion-repletion Radioactive tracers (whole i.e. input = output (under (quasi experimental) body count) steady state condition) Factorial methods (faeces, skin, etc) Tissue levels (liver) Independent Example B 12 Maintenance haematological Biliary stores > 500ug (NL) approaches � status in pernicious anaemia Biliary losses (FR) patients (stable Hb, normal Same results MCV & normal reticulocyte (ANRs)? response) (US) Dose-response RCT, using supplements, Cross-sectional studies, between intake and enriched foods, whole diets intake by dietary outcome (after reaching assessment Same markers, different steady state condition) designs: How to integrate? Examples B 12 Relation to serum/plasma vitB 12 levels, methylmalonic acid (MMA), serum/plasma holo-transcobalamin (holoTC)

  14. Evidence base “balance approach” (B 12 ) Method Refs, yr N total , sex Pop, remarks Conclusions Healthy subjects daily loss of total Whole body 6 13 body pool = 0.15% counting 1960-68 male (SE=0.01%) healthy, cholecyst- biliary loss roughly Bile losses 6 38 ectomised, post- estimated as 1.4 1956-91 mixed, not operative, with(hout) ug/day specified pernicious anaemia pernicious anaemia At 1.4 ug/day 4/7 Maintenance 1 7 patients subjects reached a haematological 1958 sex not normal status specified haematological status ≈ 75 Healthy subjects. BF = 50% Bioavailability 11 Foods raw/cooked, range 5-65% 1959-01 mixed, most high/low B12 content High dose: less unspecified

  15. Current estimates of ANR: error in estimates � Netherlands • ANR = (minimum liver store) x (loss by whole body counting) / BF. • ANR = (>500ug) * (0.15%) / (50%) = 2 ug/d • CV(estimate) ≈ 7% / ≈ 10% � totals ≈ 12% � France • ANR = (biliary loss & account for reabsorption via IF) / BF = 2 ug/d • CV(estimate) ≈ 30% (4 papers) / ≈ 10%, totals ≈ 32% � USA • ANR = B12/day required to just restore normal haematological status in PA patients = 1.40 (3 out of 7 normalized) • “median” of 7 data points, very imprecise, CV = ?? � Conclusion • Liver size, bile loss, IF-binding considered fixed (“known”) • Between-study variation is usually large (ignored) • Formula’s not consistent (Fr, NL) • Errors are lower limits: total error in estimate ANR is large!

  16. Search strategy Eurreca NoE (example vit B12) � “Wide” (sensitive) search • vitamin B 12 , “biomarkers”, “health outcomes” • Aimed at associations “intake” – “status” – “health” (I-S-H) � Selection process • 5913 papers, screened for in/exclusion criteria • 903 full text papers screened for in/exclusion • 84 full text papers screened for I-S, I-H, S-H dose response data � Results • I/S-H: Cognition (19), Osteoporosis (10), Neurologic disease (7), Anemia (2) • I-S: 28 RCT, 21 observational studies (37 and 20 estimates)

  17. Extended evidence base, incl. RCT & X-sectional Method Refs, yr N total , sex Pop, remarks Conclusions Healthy subjects daily loss of total Whole body 6 13 body pool = 0.15% counting 1960-68 male (SE=0.01%) healthy, cholecyst- biliary loss roughly Bile losses 6 38 ectomised, post- estimated as 1.4 1956-91 mixed, not operative, with(hout) ug/day specified pernicious anaemia pernicious anaemia At 1.4 ug/day 4/7 Maintenance 1 7 patients subjects reached a haematological 1958 sex not normal haemato- status specified logical status ≈ 75 Healthy subjects. BF = 50% Bioavailability 11 Foods raw/cooked, range 5-65% 1959-01 mixed, most high/low B12 content High dose: less unspecified 24 multivit capsules ? RCTs serum/ 37 3398 13 diet / enriched food Until now, not used plasma B12 conc. (21-217) dose 2.1 – 1000ug 17 X-sectional, 17 ? X-section serum/ 20 12,570 baseline from cohort Until now, not used plasma conc. (64-2999)

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend