Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T08:01:48.227Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Net protein utilization determined by rat bioassay of a protein hydrolysate and a diet for children with phenylketonuria

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

Elisabeth Kindt ,
Halvor Holm ,
Sverre Halvorsen  and
Sverre O. Lie
Elisabeth Kindt
Affiliation:
Paediatric Research Institute, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
Halvor Holm
Affiliation:
Institute for Nutrition Research, School of Medicine, University of Oslo, Norway
Sverre Halvorsen
Affiliation:
Department of Paediatrics, Ullevål Sykehus, University of Oslo, Norway
Sverre O. Lie
Affiliation:
Paediatric Research Institute, Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. In a previous study (Kindt et al. 1983, 1984) it was assumed that a protein hydrolysate, devoid of phenylalanine, together with intact protein as given to children with phenylketonuria (PKU), was equivalent to egg or milk protein. One group of children was given this ‘PKU protein’ in amounts corresponding to the Joint FAO/WHO ad hoc Expert Committee (1973) recommendations. The results indicated that the Joint FAO/WHO ad hoc Expert Committee (1973) recommended levels of protein intake were marginal.

2. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether the quality of the protein hydrolysate, together with intact protein (‘PKU protein’), is equivalent to egg or milk protein. This was done using a rat bioassay. Four protein sources were used: (1) egg protein, (2) protein hydrolysate, (3) protein hydrolysate diluted with non-essential amino acids, (4) protein hydrolysate mixed with food proteins (‘PKU protein’), comparable with the diet previously used (Kindt et al. 1983, 1984).

3. The results indicated that the ‘PKU protein’ was of very high qua1ity: net protein utilization (NPU) > 90. The protein hydrolysate alone and the protein hydrolysate diluted with non-essential amino acids gave a NPU > 80.

4. The conclusion drawn from the present study is that the ‘PKU protein’, as used in the treatment of children with PKU, is equivalent to egg or milk protein. This supported the view that the Joint FAO/WHO ad hoc Expert Committee (1973) recommended levels of intake were marginal.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 54 , Issue 2 , September 1985 , pp. 349 - 353
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1985

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, H. L., Heindel, M. B. & Linkswiler, H. (1969). Journal of Nutrition 99, 82–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eggum, B. O. (1980). In Nutritional Evaluation of Protein Foods, p. 108 [Pellett, P. L. and Young, V. R. editors]. Tokyo: United Nations University.Google Scholar
FAO (1970). Amino Acid Content of Food and Biological Data on Proteins. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization.Google Scholar
Food and Nutrition Board (1974). Recommended Daily Allowances, 8th ed. Washington, DC: National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Food and Nutrition Board (1980). Recommended Daily Allowances, 9th ed. Washington DC: National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Forsum, E. (1975). Nutrition Reports International 11, 419–428.Google Scholar
Forsum, E. & Hambraeus, L. (1978). Journal of Nutrition 108, 1518–1526.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Itoh, H., Kishi, T. & Chibata, I. (1973). Journal of Nutrition 103, 1709&1715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joint FAO/WHO ad hoc Expert Committee (1973). Energy and Protein Requirements. Technical Report Series no. 522. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
Kindt, W., Motzfeldt, K., Halvorsen, S. & Lie, S. O. (1983). American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 37, 778–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kindt, E., Motzfeldt, K., Halvorsen, S. & Lie, S. O. (1984). British Journal of Nutrition 51, 435–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. L., Arteage, C. & Heymsfield, S. B. (1982). New England Journal of Medicine 306, 1013–1018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugahara, M., Baker, H. D., Harmon, B. G. & Jensen, A. H. (1969). Journal of Nutrition 98, 344–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tourian, A. Y. & Sidbury, J. B. (1974). In The Metabolic Basis of Inherited Disease, p. 240 [Stanbury, J. B., Syngarden, J. G. and Fredrickson, D. S., editors]. New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co.Google Scholar