4.7 Article

Sex Hormones, Gonadotropins, and Sex Hormone-binding Globulin in Infants Fed Breast Milk, Cow Milk Formula, or Soy Formula

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 7, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-04610-y

关键词

-

资金

  1. Joint China-Sweden Mobility Programme of the Swedish Foundation for International Cooperation in Research and Higher Education [STINT CH2015-6145]
  2. International Cooperation and Exchange Grant of the National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC 8151101192]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [NSFC 81270015]
  4. Shanghai Summit & Plateau Disciplines

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Measurement of endogenous hormones in early life is important to investigate the effects of hormonally active environmental compounds. To assess the possible hormonal effects of different feeding regimens in different sample matrices of infants, 166 infants were enrolled from two U.S hospitals between 2006 and 2009. The children were classified into exclusive soy formula, cow milk formula or breast milk regimens. Urine, saliva and blood samples were collected over the first 12 months of life. Estradiol, estrone, testosterone, luteinizing hormone (LH), follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) levels were measured in the three matrices. Lower estradiol and LH levels were found in urine and saliva samples of soy formula-fed boys compared to cow formula-fed boys. Higher LH level was found in urine samples of soy formula-fed girls compared to cow formula-fed girls. However, we found neither a neonatal testosterone rise in the boys nor a gender-specific difference in testosterone levels, which suggests that urinary testosterone levels may not accurately reflect blood levels during mini-puberty. Nevertheless, our study shows that blood, urine and saliva samples are readily collectible and suitable for multi-hormone analyses in children and allow examination of hypotheses concerning endocrine effects from dietary compounds.

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