4.7 Article

Maternal and Infant Factors Associated with Human Milk Oligosaccharides Concentrations According to Secretor and Lewis Phenotypes

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 11, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu11061358

关键词

human milk oligosaccharides; human milk composition; bioactive components; exclusive breastfeeding; Secretor phenotype; Lewis phenotype

资金

  1. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) [2014/13514-5]
  2. National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) [142327/2013-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Human milk oligosaccharides (HMOs) are multifunctional carbohydrates naturally present in human milk that act as prebiotics, prevent pathogen binding and infections, modulate the immune system and may support brain development in infants. HMOs composition is very individualized and differences in HMOs concentrations may affect the infant's health. HMOs variability can be partially explained by the activity of Secretor (Se) and Lewis (Le) genes in the mother, but non-genetic maternal factors may also be involved. In this cross-sectional, observational study, 78 single human milk samples ranging from 17 to 76 days postpartum (median: 32 days, IQR: 25-46 days) were collected from breastfeeding Brazilian women, analyzed for 16 representative HMOs by liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry and associations between maternal and infant factors with HMOs concentrations were investigated. HMOs concentrations presented a high variability even in women with the same SeLe phenotype and associations with maternal allergic disease, time postpartum and with infant's weight, weight gain and sex. Overall, we present unprecedented data on HMOs concentrations from breastfeeding Brazilian women and novel associations of maternal allergic disease and infant's sex with HMOs concentrations. Differences in HMOs composition attributed to maternal SeLe phenotype do not impact infant growth, but higher concentrations of specific HMOs may protect against excessive weight gain.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据