Mahroukh Rafii1, Karen Chapman1, Jillian Owens1, Rajavel Elango2, Wayne W Campbell3, Ronald O Ball4, Paul B Pencharz5, Glenda Courtney-Martin6. 1. Research Institute, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada. 2. Department of Pediatrics, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada Child & Family Research Institute, BC Children's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada. 3. Department of Nutrition Science, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN. 4. Departments of Nutritional Sciences and Department of Agriculture, Food, and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. 5. Research Institute, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada Departments of Nutritional Sciences and Pediatrics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; and Department of Agriculture, Food, and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. 6. Research Institute, Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada glenda.courtney-martin@sickkids.ca.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Studies on protein requirements in vulnerable groups such as older adults are few, and results are conflicting. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to determine the protein requirements of free-living women >65 y by measuring the oxidation of l-[1-(13)C]phenylalanine to (13)CO2 in response to graded intakes of protein. METHODS:Twelve subjects participated in the study, with protein intakes ranging from 0.2 to 2.0 g · kg(-1) · d(-1) for a total of 82 studies. The diets provided energy at 1.5 times each subject's resting energy expenditure and were isocaloric. Protein was given as an amino acid mixture on the basis of the egg protein pattern, except for phenylalanine and tyrosine, which were maintained constant across the protein intake amounts. All subjects were adapted for 2 d before the study day to a protein intake of 1.0 g · kg(-1) · d(-1). The mean protein requirement was determined by applying a mixed-effects change-point regression analysis to F(13)CO2 (label tracer oxidation in (13)CO2 breath), which identified a breakpoint in the F(13)CO2 in response to graded amounts of protein. RESULTS: The mean estimated average requirement (EAR) and upper 95% CI (approximating the RDA) protein requirement of women >65 y were 0.96 and 1.29 g · kg(-1) · d(-1), respectively. CONCLUSION: These estimates of protein requirements for older women are higher than the current EAR and RDA based on nitrogen balance data, which are 0.66 and 0.80 g · kg(-1) · d(-1), respectively. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01604980.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Studies on protein requirements in vulnerable groups such as older adults are few, and results are conflicting. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this study was to determine the protein requirements of free-living women >65 y by measuring the oxidation of l-[1-(13)C]phenylalanine to (13)CO2 in response to graded intakes of protein. METHODS: Twelve subjects participated in the study, with protein intakes ranging from 0.2 to 2.0 g · kg(-1) · d(-1) for a total of 82 studies. The diets provided energy at 1.5 times each subject's resting energy expenditure and were isocaloric. Protein was given as an amino acid mixture on the basis of the egg protein pattern, except for phenylalanine and tyrosine, which were maintained constant across the protein intake amounts. All subjects were adapted for 2 d before the study day to a protein intake of 1.0 g · kg(-1) · d(-1). The mean protein requirement was determined by applying a mixed-effects change-point regression analysis to F(13)CO2 (label tracer oxidation in (13)CO2 breath), which identified a breakpoint in the F(13)CO2 in response to graded amounts of protein. RESULTS: The mean estimated average requirement (EAR) and upper 95% CI (approximating the RDA) protein requirement of women >65 y were 0.96 and 1.29 g · kg(-1) · d(-1), respectively. CONCLUSION: These estimates of protein requirements for older women are higher than the current EAR and RDA based on nitrogen balance data, which are 0.66 and 0.80 g · kg(-1) · d(-1), respectively. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01604980.
Authors: C M Apovian; M R Singer; W W Campbell; S Bhasin; A C McCarthy; M Shah; S Basaria; L L Moore Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2017 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Oleg Zaslavsky; Shira Zelber-Sagi; James R Hebert; Susan E Steck; Nitin Shivappa; Fred K Tabung; Michael D Wirth; Yunqi Bu; James M Shikany; Tonya Orchard; Robert B Wallace; Linda Snetselaar; Lesley F Tinker Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2017-04-19 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Margrit Richter; Kurt Baerlocher; Jürgen M Bauer; Ibrahim Elmadfa; Helmut Heseker; Eva Leschik-Bonnet; Gabriele Stangl; Dorothee Volkert; Peter Stehle Journal: Ann Nutr Metab Date: 2019-03-22 Impact factor: 3.374