Safety and immunoenhancing effect of a Chlorella-derived dietary supplement in healthy adults undergoing influenza vaccination: randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Enhancement of immune function has been claimed as a benefit of some natural health products, although few have been subjected to randomized clinical trials. We evaluated the effect of an oral dietary supplement derived from the edible microalga Chlorella pyrenoidosa on immune response after influenza vaccination. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled community-based clinical trial in a convenience sample of 124 healthy adults at least 50 years of age randomly assigned to receive the study product (200 or 400 mg of a Chlorella-derived dietary supplement) or placebo. Participants took the study product or placebo once daily for 28 days. On day 21, we administered a single dose of a licensed trivalent, inactivated influenza vaccine. We obtained serum specimens to measure hemagglutination inhibition titres before and 7 and 21 days after vaccination. The primary immunological outcomes were the proportion of participants with a 4-fold or greater increase in antibodies and geometric mean antibody titres after vaccination; the proportion of participants reporting adverse events during therapy was the safety outcome. RESULTS: A total of 117 (94%) participants completed all aspects of the study. There were no differences in the proportions of recipients of 200 or 400 mg of the Chlorella-derived dietary supplement or placebo who achieved at least a 4-fold increase in antibodies (proportions for the 3 virus strains ranged from 17.9% to 28.2% for the 200-mg group, from 11.1% to 22.2% for the 400-mg group and from 19.0% to 21.4% for the placebo group; p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Reports of adverse events were similar for recipients of the supplement and placebo, except with regard to fatigue, which was reported more frequently by recipients of 200 mg of the supplement (18/41 or 44%) than by those who received 400 mg of the supplement (8/40 or 20%; p = 0.032) or placebo (8/42 or 19%; p = 0.019). Recipients of 400 mg of the supplement who were 55 years of age or younger had significantly higher geometric mean antibody titres against influenza A/New Caledonia 21 days after vaccination (p = 0.047) and against B/Yamanashi 7 days after vaccination (p = 0.034); the trends were nonsignificant for titres against A/Panama. We also observed similar increases for the proportions of subjects with a 2-fold or greater or a 4-fold or greater increase in antibodies. INTERPRETATION: The Chlorella-derived dietary supplement did not have any effect in increasing the antibody response to influenza vaccine in the overall study population, although there was an increase in antibody response among participants aged 50-55 years. Adverse events were similar among those receiving the supplement and the placebo. Further studies are warranted to explore the range of clinical effects resulting from ingestion of this dietary supplement.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».