Guidelines for the design, conduct and reporting of human intervention studies to evaluate the health benefits of foods.

There is substantial evidence to link what we eat to the reduction of the risk of major chronic diseases and/or the improvement of functions. Thus, it is important for public health agencies and the food industry to facilitate the consumption of foods with particular health benefits by providing consumer products and messages based on scientific evidence. Although fragmentary advice is available from a range of sources, there is a lack of comprehensive scientific guidelines for the design, conduct and reporting of human intervention studies to evaluate the health benefits of foods. Such guidelines are needed both to support nutrition science in general, and to facilitate the substantiation of health claims. In the present study, which presents the consensus view of an International Life Sciences Institute Europe Expert Group that included senior scientists from academia and industry, the term 'foods' refers to foods, dietary supplements and food constituents, but not to whole diets. The present study is based on an initial survey of published papers, which identified the range and strengths and weaknesses of current methodologies, and was finalised following exchanges between representatives from industry, academia and regulatory bodies. The major factors involved in the design, conduct and reporting of studies are identified, summarised in a checklist table that is based on the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines, and elaborated and discussed in the text.

The biological relevance of direct antioxidant effects of polyphenols for cardiovascular health in humans is not established.

Human studies provide evidence for beneficial effects of polyphenol-rich foods on cardiovascular health. The antioxidant activity of polyphenols potentially explains these effects, but is the antioxidant activity a reliable predictor for these effects? An International Life Sciences Institute Europe working group addressed this question and explored the potential of antioxidant claims for polyphenols in relation to cardiovascular health by using the so-called Process for the Assessment of Scientific Support for Claims on Foods project criteria. In this process, analytical aspects of polyphenols, their occurrence in foods, dietary intake, and bioavailability were reviewed. Human studies on polyphenols and cardiovascular health were reviewed together with methods for biomarkers of oxidative damage and total antioxidant capacity (TAC). In retrospective studies, F2-isoprostanes and oxidized LDL, the most reliable biomarkers of lipid peroxidation, and measures for TAC showed the expected differences between cardiovascular disease patients and healthy controls, but prospective studies are lacking, and a causal relationship between these biomarkers and cardiovascular health could not be established. Therefore, the physiological relevance of a potential change in these biomarkers is unclear. We found limited evidence that some types of polyphenol-rich products modify these biomarkers in humans. A direct antioxidant effect of polyphenols in vivo is questionable, however, because concentrations in blood are low compared with other antioxidants and extensive metabolism following ingestion lowers their antioxidant activity. Therefore, the biological relevance of direct antioxidant effects of polyphenols for cardiovascular health could not be established. Overall, although some polyphenol-rich foods exert beneficial effects on some biomarkers of cardiovascular health, there is no evidence that this is caused by improvements in antioxidant function biomarkers (oxidative damage or antioxidant capacity).

Guide to designing, conducting, publishing and communicating results of clinical studies involving probiotic applications in human participants.

The heterogeneity of human clinical trials to assess the effectiveness of probiotics presents challenges regarding interpretation and comparison. Evidence obtained from clinical trials among a population with a disease or specific risk factors may not be generalizable to healthy individuals. The evaluation of interventions in healthy persons requires careful selection of outcomes due to the absence of health indicators and the low incidence of preventable conditions. Given the tremendous resources invested in such trials, development of consistent approaches to assessing the effectiveness of probiotics would be beneficial. Furthermore, the reporting, presentation and communication of results may also affect the validity of the scientific evidence obtained from a trial. This review outlines the challenges associated with the design, implementation, data analysis and interpretation of clinical trials in humans involving probiotics. Best practices related to their design are offered along with recommendations for enhanced collaboration to advance research in this emerging field.