Maternal Factors and Human Milk Oligosaccharide Composition in the CHILD Cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rationale Accumulating evidence suggests that human milk oligosaccharides (HMOs) impact infant health. However, which maternal factors influence HMO composition is largely unknown. Methods We analyzed 427 breast milk samples from the Canadian Healthy Infant Longitudinal Development (CHILD) study by rapid high‐throughput HPLC to determine associations between HMO composition and maternal age, ethnicity, parity, secretor blood group status, method of delivery and milk collection time postpartum. Milk samples were collected at 4 months postpartum (median 16 weeks, interquartile range 14–19 weeks). Spearman correlations, t‐tests and multivariable linear regression were used to evaluate relationships between HMO composition and maternal factors. Results Maternal secretor blood group status, lactation time postpartum, and parity were significantly and independently associated with total HMO concentration. Secretor mothers, expressing an active FUT2 gene, had increased levels of total HMOs when compared to non‐secretors (mean 15,908 ± 1,513 vs. 8.935 ± 2,796 nmol/mL, p<0.001). Non‐secretor status was more common among Asian vs. Caucasian mothers (40% vs. 26%, p=0.04). Total HMO level decreased with increasing time postpartum (adjusted b: −66 nmol/L per week; 95%CI −113, −19; p=0.006), although some individual HMOs increased, including: 3′‐fucosyllactose (3′FL, Spearman r = +0.15), 3′‐sialyllactose (3′SL, +0.18), lacto‐N‐fucopentaose‐III (LNFPIII, +0.12), and especially disialyllacto‐N‐tetraose (DSLNT, +0.28) (all p<0.02). Furthermore, total HMO levels increased with parity (adjusted b: +529 nmol/mL per child; 95%CI 173, 884; p<0.01). In contrast, maternal age and method of delivery were not significantly associated with total HMO level. Conclusion Our data suggest that both genetic and non‐genetic maternal factors influence HMO composition. Whether these associations have implications for infant health remains to be investigated. Support or Funding Information This study was funded by Research Manitoba and supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Allergy, Genes and Environment Network of Centres of Excellence.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".