4.7 Article

Intakes of Folate and Vitamin B12 and Biomarkers of Status in the Very Old: The Newcastle 85+Study

Journal

NUTRIENTS
Volume 8, Issue 10, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu8100604

Keywords

'aged 80 and over'; Newcastle 85+Study; red blood cell folate; vitamin B12; FUT2; MTHFR; food groups

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council
  2. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  3. Dunhill Medical Trust
  4. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Newcastle Biomedical Research Centre, based at Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
  5. Newcastle University
  6. NIHR
  7. MRC [MR/J50001X/1, G0500997, MR/K006312/1] Funding Source: UKRI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Very old adults are at increased risk of folate and vitamin B12 deficiencies due to reduced food intake and gastrointestinal absorption. The main aim was to determine the association between folate and vitamin B12 intake from total diets and food groups, and status. Folate or vitamin B12 intakes (2 x 24 h multiple pass recalls) and red blood cell (RBC) folate or plasma vitamin B12 (chemiluminescence immunoassays) concentrations were available at baseline for 731 participants aged 85 from the Newcastle 85+ Study (North-East England). Generalized additive and binary logistic models estimated the associations between folate and vitamin B12 intakes from total diets and food groups, and RBC folate and plasma B12. Folate intake from total diets and cereal and cereal products was strongly associated with RBC folate (p < 0.001). Total vitamin B12 intake was weakly associated with plasma vitamin B12 (p = 0.054) but those with higher intakes from total diets or meat and meat products were less likely to have deficient status. Women homozygous for the FUT2 G allele had higher concentrations of plasma vitamin B12. Cereals and cereal products are a very important source of folate in the very old. Higher intakes of folate and vitamin B12 lower the risk of inadequate status.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available