4.6 Article

Effects of Folic Acid Supplementation on Serum Folate and Plasma Homocysteine Concentrations in Older Adults: A Dose-Response Trial

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 172, 期 8, 页码 932-941

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwq197

关键词

adult; dietary supplements; folic acid; homocysteine

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [5 UO1 HL 50981, 1K01HL092595-01]
  2. Johns Hopkins School of Medicine General Clinical Research Center, National Center for Research Resources, National Institutes of Health [M01-RR00052]
  3. Seoul R&BD Program, Seoul, South Korea [10526]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The authors' objective in this study was to estimate the changes in serum folate and homocysteine concentration that resulted from 6 weeks of supplementation with folic acid. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-response trial with a parallel-group design was conducted. A total of 133 participants aged 60-90 years (70% female, 19% nonwhite) were assigned to receive 0, 100, 400, 1,000, or 2,000 mu g/day of folic acid for 6 weeks. Data were collected in the United States between June and September 1996. At baseline, median serum folate and plasma homocysteine concentrations were 5.7 ng/mL (interquartile range (25th-75th percentiles), 4.1-7.8) and 8.3 mu mol/L (interquartile range, 7.1-10.0), respectively. As the folic acid dose increased, serum folate levels increased (P-trend < 0.001). There was no dose-response relation with homocysteine level among all participants. In analyses restricted to persons with the lowest serum folate concentration (< 4.5 ng/mL) at baseline, there was a trend (P = 0.06) toward decreased homocysteine levels with increasing folic acid dose. In healthy, older adults with adequate folate status, folic acid supplementation is not beneficial for homocysteine reduction. However, for older adults with low serum folate levels, supplementation will improve folate status and may be beneficial for lowering homocysteine concentrations.

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

4.6
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