Toxicological safety evaluation of the human‐identical milk oligosaccharide 6′‐sialyllactose sodium salt
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human milk oligosaccharides (HMOs) are abundant in breastmilk, but their presence in infant formula is negligible. Sialylated HMOs, such as 6'-sialyllactose, constitute a significant portion of the HMO fraction of human milk and are linked to important biological functions. To produce infant formula that is more comparable with human milk, biosynthesized sialyllactoses known as human-identical milk oligosaccharides (structurally identical counterparts to their respective naturally occurring HMOs in breastmilk) are proposed for use in infant formula and other functional foods for the general population. To support the safety of 6'-sialyllactose sodium salt (6'-SL), a 90-day oral (gavage) toxicity study and in vitro genotoxicity tests were conducted. The 90-day study is the first to be conducted with 6'-SL using neonatal rats (day 7 of age at the start of dosing), thus addressing safety of 6'-SL for consumption by the most sensitive age group (infants). In the 90-day study, neonatal rats received 6'-SL at doses up to 5000 mg/kg body weight (BW)/day and reference controls received 5000 mg/kg BW/day of fructooligosaccharide (an ingredient approved for use in infant formula) for comparison with the high-dose 6'-SL group, followed by a 4-week recovery period. There was no evidence of genotoxicity in vitro. No test item-related adverse effects were observed on any parameter in the 90-day study, thus the high dose (5000 mg/kg BW/day) was established as the no-observed-adverse-effect level. These results confirm that 6'-SL is safe for use in formula milk for infants and in other functional foods for the general population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".