Staple crops biofortified with increased micronutrient content: effects on vitamin and mineral status, as well as health and cognitive function in the general population

Biofortified Maize Improves Selenium Status of Women and Children in a Rural Community in Malawi: Results of the Addressing Hidden Hunger With Agronomy Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Selenium deficiency is widespread in the Malawi population. The selenium concentration in maize, the staple food crop of Malawi, can be increased by applying selenium-enriched fertilizers. It is unknown whether this strategy, called agronomic biofortification, is effective at alleviating selenium deficiency. Objectives: The aim of the Addressing Hidden Hunger with Agronomy (AHHA) trial was to determine whether consumption of maize flour, agronomically-biofortified with selenium, affected the serum selenium concentrations of women, and children in a rural community setting. Design: An individually-randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial was conducted in rural Malawi. Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either intervention maize flour biofortified with selenium through application of selenium fertilizer, or control maize flour not biofortified with selenium. Participant households received enough flour to meet the typical consumption of all household members (330 g capita -1 day-1) for a period of 8 weeks. Baseline and endline serum selenium concentration (the primary outcome) was measured by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). Results: One woman of reproductive age (WRA) and one school-aged child (SAC) from each of 180 households were recruited and households were randomized to each group. The baseline demographic and socioeconomic status of participants were well-balanced between arms. No serious adverse events were reported. In the intervention arm, mean (standard deviation) serum selenium concentration increased over the intervention period from 57.6 (17.0) μg L-1 (n = 88) to 107.9 (16.4) μg L-1 (n = 88) among WRA and from 46.4 (14.8) μg L-1 (n = 86) to 97.1 (16.0) μg L-1 (n = 88) among SAC. There was no evidence of change in serum selenium concentration in the control groups. Conclusion: Consumption of maize flour biofortified through application of selenium-enriched fertilizer increased selenium status in this community providing strong proof of principle that agronomic biofortification could be an effective approach to address selenium deficiency in Malawi and similar settings. Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN85899451, identifier: ISRCTN85899451.

Preparing for a community-based agriculture-to-nutrition trial in rural Malawi: formative research to assess feasibility and inform design and implementation decisions

BACKGROUND

This study reports findings from formative research conducted to assess the feasibility and inform the design and implementation of the Addressing Hidden Hunger with Agronomy (AHHA) trial. The AHHA trial was a randomised, controlled trial conducted in rural Malawi, in which participants were given maize flour biofortified with selenium or control flour not biofortified with selenium for a period of 10 weeks, after which blood samples were taken to measure selenium status.

METHODS

Formative research was conducted in villages near to the AHHA trial study site 1 year before the planned intervention. A short questionnaire with adult women (n = 50), focus group discussions with male (n groups = 3) and female (n groups = 3) community members, and in-depth key informant interviews (n = 7) were conducted to understand community practices and perceptions.

FINDINGS

Meals were typically cooked and eaten at home in this community, while participants reported that maize flour would be less readily sold than maize grain - important considerations for the design of the trial. Regarding intervention delivery, we identified potential concerns around effects on fertility, links between blood sampling and witchcraft, and the potential for social stigma if community members considered participants lazy for receiving free flour. Participants reported that involvement of the Malawi government partners including health extension workers would increase trust.

INTERPRETATION

Following the formative research, the AHHA trial appeared feasible. However, community sensitisation would be essential to address potential fears and concerns; effective sensitisation would support recruitment and treatment adherence, and would protect the safety and wellbeing of participants and researchers. People in positions of authority and trust including village headmen, religious leaders, health and agriculture extension workers, and community care groups should be involved in community sensitisation.

Perspective: Practical Approach to Preventing Subclinical B12 Deficiency in Elderly Population

Vitamin B12 (also known as cobalamin) is an essential water-soluble vitamin that plays a pivotal role for several physiologic functions during one's lifespan. Only certain microorganisms are able to synthetize B12, thus humans obtain cobalamin exclusively from their diet, specifically from animal-derived foods. Specific sub-group populations are at risk of vitamin B12 subclinical deficiency due to different factors including poor intake of animal source foods and age-dependent decrease in the capacity of intestinal B12 uptake. Consumption of animal products produces some negative health issues and negatively impacts sustainability while a plant-based diet increases the risk of B12 deficiency. Taking a cue from the aforementioned considerations, this narrative review aims to summarize facts about B12 deficiency and the burden of inadequate dietary intake in elderly population, as well as to discuss sustainable approaches to vitamin B12 deficiency in aging population.

Reassessing the Cost-Effectiveness of High-Provitamin A Bananas to Reduce Vitamin A Deficiency in Uganda

There are two high-provitamin A (pVA) banana-based interventions potentially available in Uganda—biofortified genetically modified (GM) banana and fast-tracked banana landraces from outside Uganda that are naturally high in provitamin A (nHpVA). Based on the newest country statistics and using adoption scenarios obtained through focus group discussions and expert interviews, we assess obstacles and opportunities for adoption as well as cost-effectiveness of these interventions. In two alternative scenarios for the GM banana (M9 matooke), we assume 40% and 64% adoption rates, which would result in US$29,374,151 and US$63,259,415 in income saved, respectively. As an alternative, for the symmetrical scenarios, we calculate that if the nHpVA banana (Apantu plantain, native of Ghana) were to be adopted, US$46,100,148 and US$76,364,988 in income would be saved. Taking into account the full cost of R&D, we estimate that the M9 matooke could save one disability-adjusted life year (DALY) at a cost of US$67.37 at best and US$145.09 at worst. We estimate that the Apantu plantain could save one DALY at a cost of US$50.54 at best and US$83.72 at worst. Our DALY analysis estimates that all assessed HpVA banana interventions are extremely cost-effective in all scenarios, following both the World Bank's and the WHO criteria. Nevertheless, successful interventions would require extensive promotion campaigns and shifts in agricultural value chains.

Wheat flour fortification with iron and other micronutrients for reducing anaemia and improving iron status in populations

BACKGROUND

Anaemia is a condition where the number of red blood cells (and consequently their oxygen-carrying capacity) is insufficient to meet the body's physiological needs. Fortification of wheat flour is deemed a useful strategy to reduce anaemia in populations.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the benefits and harms of wheat flour fortification with iron alone or with other vitamins and minerals on anaemia, iron status and health-related outcomes in populations over two years of age.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, 21 other databases and two trials registers up to 21 July 2020, together with contacting key organisations to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included cluster- or individually-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) carried out among the general population from any country, aged two years and above. The interventions were fortification of wheat flour with iron alone or in combination with other micronutrients. We included trials comparing any type of food item prepared from flour fortified with iron of any variety of wheat DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently screened the search results and assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion, extracted data from included studies and assessed risks of bias. We followed Cochrane methods in this review.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search identified 3538 records, after removing duplicates. We included 10 trials, involving 3319 participants, carried out in Bangladesh, Brazil, India, Kuwait, Philippines, South Africa and Sri Lanka. We identified two ongoing studies and one study is awaiting classification. The duration of interventions varied from 3 to 24 months. One study was carried out among adult women and one trial among both children and nonpregnant women. Most of the included trials were assessed as low or unclear risk of bias for key elements of selection, performance or reporting bias. Three trials used 41 mg to 60 mg iron/kg flour, three trials used less than 40 mg iron/kg and three trials used more than 60 mg iron/kg flour. One trial used various iron levels based on type of iron used: 80 mg/kg for electrolytic and reduced iron and 40 mg/kg for ferrous fumarate. All included studies contributed data for the meta-analyses. Iron-fortified wheat flour with or without other micronutrients added versus wheat flour (no added iron) with the same other micronutrients added Iron-fortified wheat flour with or without other micronutrients added versus wheat flour (no added iron) with the same other micronutrients added may reduce by 27% the risk of anaemia in populations (risk ratio (RR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 0.97; 5 studies, 2315 participants; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether iron-fortified wheat flour with or without other micronutrients reduces iron deficiency (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.04; 3 studies, 748 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or increases haemoglobin concentrations (in g/L) (mean difference MD 2.75, 95% CI 0.71 to 4.80; 8 studies, 2831 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported data on adverse effects in children (including constipation, nausea, vomiting, heartburn or diarrhoea), except for risk of infection or inflammation at the individual level. The intervention probably makes little or no difference to the risk of Infection or inflammation at individual level as measured by C-reactive protein (CRP) (mean difference (MD) 0.04, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.11; 2 studies, 558 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Iron-fortified wheat flour with other micronutrients added versus unfortified wheat flour (nil micronutrients added) It is unclear whether wheat flour fortified with iron, in combination with other micronutrients decreases anaemia (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.46; 2 studies, 317 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The intervention probably reduces the risk of iron deficiency (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99; 3 studies, 382 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and it is unclear whether it increases average haemoglobin concentrations (MD 2.53, 95% CI -0.39 to 5.45; 4 studies, 532 participants; very low-certainty evidence). No trials reported data on adverse effects in children. Nine out of 10 trials reported sources of funding, with most having multiple sources. Funding source does not appear to have distorted the results in any of the assessed trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Fortification of wheat flour with iron (in comparison to unfortified flour, or where both groups received the same other micronutrients) may reduce anaemia in the general population above two years of age, but its effects on other outcomes are uncertain. Iron-fortified wheat flour in combination with other micronutrients, in comparison with unfortified flour, probably reduces iron deficiency, but its effects on other outcomes are uncertain. None of the included trials reported data on adverse side effects except for risk of infection or inflammation at the individual level. The effects of this intervention on other health outcomes are unclear. Future studies at low risk of bias should aim to measure all important outcomes, and to further investigate which variants of fortification, including the role of other micronutrients as well as types of iron fortification, are more effective, and for whom.

Seed Biofortification by Engineered Nanomaterials: A Pathway To Alleviate Malnutrition?

Micronutrient deficiencies in global food chains are a significant cause of ill health around the world, particularly in developing countries. Agriculture is the primary source of nutrients required for sound health, and as the population has continued to grow, the agricultural sector has come under pressure to improve crop production, in terms of both quantity and quality, to meet the global demands for food security. The use of engineered nanomaterial (ENM) has emerged as a promising technology to sustainably improve the efficiency of current agricultural practices as well as overall crop productivity. One promising approach that has begun to receive attention is to use ENM as seed treatments to biofortify agricultural crop production and quality. This review highlights the current state of the science for this approach as well as critical knowledge gaps and research needs that must be overcome to optimize the sustainable application of nano-enabled seed fortification approaches.

Fortification of staple foods with vitamin A for vitamin A deficiency

BACKGROUND

Vitamin A deficiency is a significant public health problem in many low- and middle-income countries, especially affecting young children, women of reproductive age, and pregnant women. Fortification of staple foods with vitamin A has been used to increase vitamin A consumption among these groups.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of fortifying staple foods with vitamin A for reducing vitamin A deficiency and improving health-related outcomes in the general population older than two years of age.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following international databases with no language or date restrictions: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 6) in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE and MEDLINE In Process OVID; Embase OVID; CINAHL Ebsco; Web of Science (ISI) SCI, SSCI, CPCI-exp and CPCI-SSH; BIOSIS (ISI); POPLINE; Bibliomap; TRoPHI; ASSIA (Proquest); IBECS; SCIELO; Global Index Medicus - AFRO and EMRO; LILACS; PAHO; WHOLIS; WPRO; IMSEAR; IndMED; and Native Health Research Database. We also searched clinicaltrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to identify ongoing and unpublished studies. The date of the last search was 19 July 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included individually or cluster-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this review. The intervention included fortification of staple foods (sugar, edible oils, edible fats, maize flour or corn meal, wheat flour, milk and dairy products, and condiments and seasonings) with vitamin A alone or in combination with other vitamins and minerals. We included the general population older than two years of age (including pregnant and lactating women) from any country.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened and assessed eligibility of studies for inclusion, extracted data from included studies and assessed their risk of bias. We used standard Cochrane methodology to carry out the review.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 randomised controlled trials involving 4455 participants. All the studies were conducted in low- and upper-middle income countries where vitamin A deficiency was a public health issue. One of the included trials did not contribute data to the outcomes of interest.Three trials compared provision of staple foods fortified with vitamin A versus unfortified staple food, five trials compared provision of staple foods fortified with vitamin A plus other micronutrients versus unfortified staple foods, and two trials compared provision of staple foods fortified with vitamin A plus other micronutrients versus no intervention. No studies compared staple foods fortified with vitamin A alone versus no intervention.The duration of interventions ranged from three to nine months. We assessed six studies at high risk of bias overall. Government organisations, non-governmental organisations, the private sector, and academic institutions funded the included studies; funding source does not appear to have distorted the results.Staple food fortified with vitamin A versus unfortified staple food We are uncertain whether fortifying staple foods with vitamin A alone makes little or no difference for serum retinol concentration (mean difference (MD) 0.03 μmol/L, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.12; 3 studies, 1829 participants; I² = 90%, very low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether vitamin A alone reduces the risk of subclinical vitamin A deficiency (risk ratio (RR) 0.45, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.05; 2 studies; 993 participants; I² = 33%, very low-certainty evidence). The certainty of the evidence was mainly affected by risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency.It is uncertain whether vitamin A fortification reduces clinical vitamin A deficiency, defined as night blindness (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.98; 1 study, 581 participants, very low-certainty evidence). The certainty of the evidence was mainly affected by imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias.Staple foods fortified with vitamin A versus no intervention No studies provided data for this comparison.Staple foods fortified with vitamin A plus other micronutrients versus same unfortified staple foods Fortifying staple foods with vitamin A plus other micronutrients may not increase the serum retinol concentration (MD 0.08 μmol/L, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.22; 4 studies; 1009 participants; I² = 95%, low-certainty evidence). The certainty of the evidence was mainly affected by serious inconsistency and risk of bias.In comparison to unfortified staple foods, fortification with vitamin A plus other micronutrients probably reduces the risk of subclinical vitamin A deficiency (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.49; 3 studies; 923 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-certainty evidence). The certainty of the evidence was mainly affected by serious risk of bias.Staple foods fortified with vitamin A plus other micronutrients versus no interventionFortification of staple foods with vitamin A plus other micronutrients may increase serum retinol concentration (MD 0.22 μmol/L, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.30; 2 studies; 318 participants; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence). When compared to no intervention, it is uncertain whether the intervention reduces the risk of subclinical vitamin A deficiency (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.98; 2 studies; 318 participants; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence) . The certainty of the evidence was affected mainly by serious imprecision and risk of bias.No trials reported on the outcomes of all-cause morbidity, all-cause mortality, adverse effects, food intake, congenital anomalies (for pregnant women), or breast milk concentration (for lactating women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Fortifying staple foods with vitamin A alone may make little or no difference to serum retinol concentrations or the risk of subclinical vitamin A deficiency. In comparison with provision of unfortified foods, provision of staple foods fortified with vitamin A plus other micronutrients may not increase serum retinol concentration but probably reduces the risk of subclinical vitamin A deficiency.Compared to no intervention, staple foods fortified with vitamin A plus other micronutrients may increase serum retinol concentration, although it is uncertain whether the intervention reduces the risk of subclinical vitamin A deficiency as the certainty of the evidence has been assessed as very low.It was not possible to estimate the effect of staple food fortification on outcomes such as mortality, morbidity, adverse effects, congenital anomalies, or breast milk vitamin A, as no trials included these outcomes.The type of funding source for the studies did not appear to distort the results from the analysis.