16 research outputs found

    Association Between Early Amino Acid Intake and Full-Scale IQ at Age 5 Years Among Infants Born at Less Than 30 Weeks’ Gestation

    No full text
    International audienceImportance An international expert committee recently revised its recommendations on amino acid intake for very preterm infants, suggesting that more than 3.50 g/kg/d should be administered only to preterm infants in clinical trials. However, the optimal amino acid intake during the first week after birth in these infants is unknown.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between early amino acid intake and cognitive outcomes at age 5 years.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsUsing the EPIPAGE-2 (Epidemiologic Study on Small-for-Gestational-Age Children—Follow-up at Five and a Half Years) cohort, a nationwide prospective population-based cohort study conducted at 63 neonatal intensive care units in France, a propensity score–matched analysis was performed comparing infants born at less than 30 weeks’ gestation who had high amino acid intake (3.51-4.50 g/kg/d) at 7 days after birth with infants who did not. Participants were recruited between April 1 and December 31, 2011, and followed up from September 1, 2016, to December 31, 2017. Full-scale IQ (FSIQ) was assessed at age 5 years. A confirmatory analysis used neonatal intensive care unit preference for high early amino acid intake as an instrumental variable to account for unmeasured confounding. Statistical analysis was performed from January 15 to May 15, 2021.ExposuresAmino acid intake at 7 days after birth.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary outcome was an FSIQ score greater than −1 SD (ie, ≄93 points) at age 5 years. A complementary analysis was performed to explore the association between amino acid intake at day 7 as a continuous variable and FSIQ score at age 5 years. Data from cerebral magnetic resonance imaging at term were available for a subgroup of preterm infants who participated in the EPIRMEX (Cerebral Abnormalities Detected by MRI, Realized at the Age of Term and the Emergence of Executive Functions) ancillary study.ResultsAmong 1789 preterm infants (929 boys [51.9%]; mean [SD] gestational age, 27.17 [1.50] weeks) with data available to determine exposure to amino acid intake of 3.51 to 4.50 g/kg/d at 7 days after birth, 938 infants were exposed, and 851 infants were not; 717 infants from each group could be paired. The primary outcome was known in 396 of 646 exposed infants and 379 of 644 nonexposed infants who were alive at age 5 years and was observed more frequently among exposed vs nonexposed infants (243 infants [61.4%] vs 206 infants [54.4%], respectively; odds ratio [OR], 1.33 [95% CI, 1.00-1.71]; absolute risk increase in events [ie, the likelihood of having an FSIQ score >−1 SD at age 5 years] per 100 infants, 7.01 [95% CI, 0.06-13.87]; P = .048). In the matched cohort, correlation was found between amino acid intake per 1.00 g/kg/d at day 7 and FSIQ score at age 5 years (n = 775; ÎČ = 2.43 per 1-point increase in FSIQ; 95% CI, 0.27-4.59; P = .03), white matter area (n = 134; ÎČ = 144 per mm2; 95% CI, 3-285 per mm2; P = .045), anisotropy of the corpus callosum (n = 50; ÎČ = 0.018; 95% CI, 0.016-0.021; P < .001), left superior longitudinal fasciculus (n = 42; ÎČ = 0.018; 95% CI, 0.010-0.025; P < .001), and right superior longitudinal fasciculus (n = 42; ÎČ = 0.014 [95% CI, 0.005-0.024; P = .003) based on magnetic resonance imaging at term. Confirmatory and sensitivity analyses confirmed these results. For example, the adjusted OR for the association between the exposure and the primary outcome was 1.30 (95% CI, 1.16-1.46) using the instrumental variable approach among 978 participants in the overall cohort, and the adjusted OR was 1.35 (95% CI, 1.05-1.75) using multiple imputations among 1290 participants in the matched cohort.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, high amino acid intake at 7 days after birth was associated with an increased likelihood of an FSIQ score greater than −1 SD at age 5 years. Well-designed randomized studies with long-term follow-up are needed to confirm the benefit of this nutritional approach

    Mobilisation de la FRB par les pouvoirs publics français sur les liens entre Covid-19 et biodiversité

    No full text
    AUTRE = Experts sollicitĂ©sThe major public health, economic and social crisis resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic raises many questions as to its origin, its dynamics and the mechanisms that explain it. This pandemic also raises questions about the future: on the implication of environmental issues in this type of phenomenon, and on the conditions that would have allowed to, if not prevent, then at least better anticipate this crisis and reduce its impact, in order to be better prepared in the future. Decision-making structures, governments and ministries confronted with widely divergent views and opinions, particularly on the link between Covid-19 and the biodiversity crisis, have turned to research organizations for answers to the following questions:‱ How is the current health crisis related to wildlife? What role did wild species play in the emergence of this pandemic?‱ What is the link between this type of crisis, biodiversity loss and the destruction of natural habitats? Can we draw a parallel between the damage done to biodiversity and the increase in zoonotic diseases, which are a source of epidemics and even pandemics?‱ What is the link between this type of crisis, food production and transportation systems (for humans, livestock, agricultural products)? Can certain agricultural and food production systems, or the increasing rate of international transport, directly or indirectly facilitate the evolution of an emerging infectious disease into an epidemic and ultimately into a pandemic?The relevant ministries and research institutions of the AllEnvi alliance (The National Alliance for Environmental Research) have entrusted the FRB (The French Foundation for Biodiversity Research) and its Scientific Council with the task of giving the biodiversity science community's perspective on the current crisis, and on the relationship between zoonotic diseases, biodiversity and ecosystem services.This report had three objectives:‱ identify the issues for which there is consensus in the scientific community (including regarding the questions raised by the different departments);‱ outline the issues that remain open to question, because of dissensus within the research community or gaps in the scientific knowledge;‱ deliver messages to decision makers; make science-based recommendations for actions or options of measures that could be taken, in order to assist public decision-making.La crise sanitaire, Ă©conomique et sociale associĂ©e Ă  la pandĂ©mie Covid-19 soulĂšve de nombreuses questions sur son origine, sa dynamique et les mĂ©canismes qui l’expliquent. Elle pose aussi la question des Ă©ventuelles crises futures, de l’implication des enjeux environnementaux dans ce type de phĂ©nomĂšnes et des conditions qui auraient permis, sinon de l’empĂȘcher, du moins de mieux l’anticiper et d’en rĂ©duire les consĂ©quences, pour mieux se prĂ©munir lors d’une prochaine crise similaire. Les structures dĂ©cisionnelles, gouvernement et ministĂšres se trouvant confrontĂ©es Ă  la multiplicitĂ© des opinions et avis, relatifs notamment aux liens entre Covid-19 et crise de la biodiversitĂ©, se sont tournĂ©es vers les organismes de recherche en vue d’obtenir leur Ă©clairage sur les points principaux suivants :‱ Quels sont les liens de la crise sanitaire actuelle avec la faune sauvage : quel rĂŽle un ou plusieurs Ă©lĂ©ments de la faune sauvage ont-ils jouĂ© dans l’initiation de la pandĂ©mie ?‱ Quels sont les liens de ce type de crise avec l’érosion de la biodiversitĂ© et la destruction des milieux naturels : peut-on mettre en parallĂšle les atteintes Ă  la biodiversitĂ© et la multiplication de zoonoses, sources d’épidĂ©mies, voire de pandĂ©mies ?‱ Quels sont les liens de ce type de crise avec les systĂšmes de production alimentaire et les transports (humains, animaux d’élevage, produits agricoles) ? Certains systĂšmes de production agricoles et alimentaires peuvent-ils faciliter directement, ou indirectement, le passage d’une zoonose Ă  une Ă©pidĂ©mie puis Ă  une pandĂ©mie, en tenant compte aussi de la rapiditĂ© et de l’intensitĂ© des transports internationaux ?Les ministĂšres concernĂ©s et les organismes de recherche membres de l’alliance AllEnvi, ont confiĂ© Ă  la FRB et Ă  son Conseil scientifique, Ă©largi Ă  des experts extĂ©rieurs, le soin d’apporter les Ă©clairages de la communautĂ© des sciences de la biodiversitĂ© sur la question des relations entre zoonose et Ă©tat et dynamique de la biodiversitĂ© et des services Ă©cosystĂ©miques.Trois attendus ont Ă©tĂ© mis en avant :‱ identifier les questions dont les rĂ©ponses font consensus au sein de la communautĂ© scientifique (y compris les trois questions soulevĂ©es par les ministĂšres) ;‱ exposer les points qui restent des questions ouvertes du fait de dissensus au sein de la communautĂ© de recherche ou de lacunes de connaissance scientifiques ;‱ proposer des messages aux dĂ©cideurs, s’accorder sur, et transmettre, des prĂ©conisations d’actions ou des options de mesures Ă  prendre, fondĂ©es sur la science en appui Ă  la dĂ©cision publique

    The Link Between Covid-19 and Biodiversity: A Report Commissioned by the French Public Authorities

    No full text
    La crise sanitaire, Ă©conomique et sociale associĂ©e Ă  la pandĂ©mie Covid-19 soulĂšve de nombreuses questions sur son origine, sa dynamique et les mĂ©canismes qui l’expliquent. Elle pose aussi la question des Ă©ventuelles crises futures, de l’implication des enjeux environnementaux dans ce type de phĂ©nomĂšnes et des conditions qui auraient permis, sinon de l’empĂȘcher, du moins de mieux l’anticiper et d’en rĂ©duire les consĂ©quences, pour mieux se prĂ©munir lors d’une prochaine crise similaire. Les structures dĂ©cisionnelles, gouvernement et ministĂšres se trouvant confrontĂ©es Ă  la multiplicitĂ© des opinions et avis, relatifs notamment aux liens entre Covid-19 et crise de la biodiversitĂ©, se sont tournĂ©es vers les organismes de recherche en vue d’obtenir leur Ă©clairage sur les points principaux suivants :‱ Quels sont les liens de la crise sanitaire actuelle avec la faune sauvage : quel rĂŽle un ou plusieurs Ă©lĂ©ments de la faune sauvage ont-ils jouĂ© dans l’initiation de la pandĂ©mie ?‱ Quels sont les liens de ce type de crise avec l’érosion de la biodiversitĂ© et la destruction des milieux naturels : peut-on mettre en parallĂšle les atteintes Ă  la biodiversitĂ© et la multiplication de zoonoses, sources d’épidĂ©mies, voire de pandĂ©mies ?‱ Quels sont les liens de ce type de crise avec les systĂšmes de production alimentaire et les transports (humains, animaux d’élevage, produits agricoles) ? Certains systĂšmes de production agricoles et alimentaires peuvent-ils faciliter directement, ou indirectement, le passage d’une zoonose Ă  une Ă©pidĂ©mie puis Ă  une pandĂ©mie, en tenant compte aussi de la rapiditĂ© et de l’intensitĂ© des transports internationaux ?Les ministĂšres concernĂ©s et les organismes de recherche membres de l’alliance AllEnvi, ont confiĂ© Ă  la FRB et Ă  son Conseil scientifique, Ă©largi Ă  des experts extĂ©rieurs, le soin d’apporter les Ă©clairages de la communautĂ© des sciences de la biodiversitĂ© sur la question des relations entre zoonose et Ă©tat et dynamique de la biodiversitĂ© et des services Ă©cosystĂ©miques.Trois attendus ont Ă©tĂ© mis en avant :‱ identifier les questions dont les rĂ©ponses font consensus au sein de la communautĂ© scientifique (y compris les trois questions soulevĂ©es par les ministĂšres) ;‱ exposer les points qui restent des questions ouvertes du fait de dissensus au sein de la communautĂ© de recherche ou de lacunes de connaissance scientifiques ;‱ proposer des messages aux dĂ©cideurs, s’accorder sur, et transmettre, des prĂ©conisations d’actions ou des options de mesures Ă  prendre, fondĂ©es sur la science en appui Ă  la dĂ©cision publique.The major public health, economic and social crisis resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic raises many questions as to its origin, its dynamics and the mechanisms that explain it. This pandemic also raises questions about the future: on the implication of environmental issues in this type of phenomenon, and on the conditions that would have allowed to, if not prevent, then at least better anticipate this crisis and reduce its impact, in order to be better prepared in the future. Decision-making structures, governments and ministries confronted with widely divergent views and opinions, particularly on the link between Covid-19 and the biodiversity crisis, have turned to research organizations for answers to the following questions:‱ How is the current health crisis related to wildlife? What role did wild species play in the emergence of this pandemic?‱ What is the link between this type of crisis, biodiversity loss and the destruction of natural habitats? Can we draw a parallel between the damage done to biodiversity and the increase in zoonotic diseases, which are a source of epidemics and even pandemics?‱ What is the link between this type of crisis, food production and transportation systems (for humans, livestock, agricultural products)? Can certain agricultural and food production systems, or the increasing rate of international transport, directly or indirectly facilitate the evolution of an emerging infectious disease into an epidemic and ultimately into a pandemic?The relevant ministries and research institutions of the AllEnvi alliance (The National Alliance for Environmental Research) have entrusted the FRB (The French Foundation for Biodiversity Research) and its Scientific Council with the task of giving the biodiversity science community's perspective on the current crisis, and on the relationship between zoonotic diseases, biodiversity and ecosystem services.This report had three objectives:‱ identify the issues for which there is consensus in the scientific community (including regarding the questions raised by the different departments);‱ outline the issues that remain open to question, because of dissensus within the research community or gaps in the scientific knowledge;‱ deliver messages to decision makers; make science-based recommendations for actions or options of measures that could be taken, in order to assist public decision-making

    The Link Between Covid-19 and Biodiversity : A Report Commissioned by the French Public Authorities

    No full text
    AUTRE = Experts sollicitĂ©sL’épidĂ©mie COVID-19 pose de nombreuses questions. Quels sont les liens de cette crise sanitaire avec la faune sauvage, quels sont ses liens avec l’érosion de la biodiversitĂ© que le dernier rapport de l’Ipbes a soulignĂ©, quels sont ses liens avec certains systĂšmes de production alimentaire et plus gĂ©nĂ©ralement avec l’anthropisation de la planĂšte ? Pour les Ă©clairer sur ces sujets, les pouvoirs publics se sont tournĂ©s vers la recherche

    The Link Between Covid-19 and Biodiversity:A Report Commissioned by the French Public Authorities

    No full text
    L’épidĂ©mie COVID-19 pose de nombreuses questions. Quels sont les liens de cette crise sanitaire avec la faune sauvage, quels sont ses liens avec l’érosion de la biodiversitĂ© que le dernier rapport de l’Ipbes a soulignĂ©, quels sont ses liens avec certains systĂšmes de production alimentaire et plus gĂ©nĂ©ralement avec l’anthropisation de la planĂšte ? Pour les Ă©clairer sur ces sujets, les pouvoirs publics se sont tournĂ©s vers la recherche

    Mobilisation de la FRB par les pouvoirs publics français sur les liens entre Covid-19 et biodiversité

    No full text
    L’épidĂ©mie COVID-19 pose de nombreuses questions. Quels sont les liens de cette crise sanitaire avec la faune sauvage, quels sont ses liens avec l’érosion de la biodiversitĂ© que le dernier rapport de l’Ipbes a soulignĂ©, quels sont ses liens avec certains systĂšmes de production alimentaire et plus gĂ©nĂ©ralement avec l’anthropisation de la planĂšte ? Pour les Ă©clairer sur ces sujets, les pouvoirs publics se sont tournĂ©s vers la recherche
    corecore