Search

Objective To describe the history, key features, recent enhancements, and common applications of the Dietary Supplement Label Database (DSLD). Background and history Although many Americans use dietary supplements, databases of dietary supplements sold in the United States have not been widely available. The DSLD, an easily accessible public-use database was created in 2008 to provide information on dietary supplement composition for use by researchers and consumers. Rationale Accessing current information easily and quickly is crucial for documenting exposures to dietary supplements because they contain nutrients and other bioactive ingredients that may have beneficial or adverse effects on human health. This manuscript details recent developments with the DSLD to achieve this goal and provides examples of how the DSLD has been used. Recent developments With periodic updates to track changes in product composition and capture new products entering the market, the DSLD currently contains more than 71,000 dietary supplement labels. Following usability testing with consumer and researcher user groups completed in 2016, improvements to the DSLD interface were made. As of 2017, both a desktop and mobile device version are now available. Since its inception in 2008, the use of the DSLD has included research, exposure monitoring, and other purposes by users in the public and private sectors. Future directions Further refinement of the user interface and search features to facilitate ease of use for stakeholders is planned. Conclusions The DSLD can be used to track changes in product composition and capture new products entering the market. With over 71,000 DS labels it is a unique resource that policymakers, researchers, clinicians, and consumers may find valuable for multiple applications.

Inconsistent and contradictory results from nutrition studies conducted by different investigators continue to emerge, in part because of the inherent variability of natural products, as well as the unknown and therefore uncontrolled variables in study populations and experimental designs. Given these challenges inherent in nutrition research, it is critical for the progress of the field that researchers strive to minimize variability within studies and enhance comparability between studies by optimizing the characterization, control, and reporting of products, reagents, and model systems used, as well as the rigor and reporting of experimental designs, protocols, and data analysis. Here we describe some recent developments relevant to research on plant-derived products used in nutrition research, highlight some resources for optimizing the characterization and reporting of research using these products, and describe some of the pitfalls that may be avoided by adherence to these recommendations.

OBJECTIVES: Turmeric root (Curcuma longa) and its constituents, the curcuminoids, are widely reported to have anti-inflammatory effects. A recent meta-analysis found that 8 studies that met the review criteria “provide scientific evidence that supports the efficacy of turmeric extract…in the treatment of arthritis” but notes the small number of trials and “the methodological quality of the studies were not sufficient to draw definitive conclusions.” The objective of this project was to apply p-curve analysis to these trials, to assess the likelihood of biased data reporting or p-hacking, a common source of false positive reports. METHODS: PubMed was searched for English language reports of randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials of turmeric- or curcuminoid-containing products for osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis (henceforth arthritis) pain or other inflammatory conditions in arthritis patients. Trials in which curcumin was combined with other supplements or drugs were included. Data for primary outcomes from the retrieved papers were used to generate a p-curve. Where multiple primary outcomes were reported, or no primary outcome was specified, results for a well-validated arthritis scale were used for the analysis. RESULTS: Twelve randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of curcumin for arthritis were identified and analyzed. Dates of publication ranged from 1991 to 2019, group sizes ranged from 12 to 80, doses, where specified, ranged from 180 to 1500 mg curcuminoids or turmeric extract per day, and treatment duration ranged from 6 to 36 weeks. The p-curve analysis did not reveal a left-skewed curve which would be diagnostic of p-hacking (more p-values concentrated around .04 and fewer low values) and thus does not suggest that p-hacking is present. CONCLUSIONS: Inspection of the distribution of p values for placebo-controlled clinical trials of curcumin-containing products for osteo- and rheumatoid arthritis in the PubMed database do not show evidence of extensive p-hacking. FUNDING SOURCES: NIH Office of Dietary Supplements.

Energy drinks are relatively new to the United States but are the fastest growing segment of the beverage market. Humans have a long history of consuming caffeine in traditional beverages, such as cocoa, coffee, tea, and yerba mate, but 2 workshops held at the Institute of Medicine (http://www.iom.edu/Activities/Nutrition/PotentialHazardsCaffeineSupplements/2013-AUG-05.aspx) and the NIH (http://ods.od.nih.gov/News/EnergyDrinksWorkshop2013.aspx) in 2013 highlighted many critical gaps in understanding the biologic and behavioral effects of the mixtures of caffeine, vitamins, herbs, sugar or other sweeteners, and other ingredients that typify caffeine-containing energy drinks (CCEDs). For example, different surveys over the same 2010–2012 timeframe report discrepant prevalence of CCED use by teenagers, ranging from 10.3% in 13–17 y olds to >30% of those in grades 10 and 12. Understanding of functional interactions between CCED ingredients, drivers of use, and biologic and behavioral effects is limited. The 4 speakers in the Experimental Biology 2014 symposium titled “Energy Drinks: Current Knowledge and Critical Research Gaps” described recent progress by their groups in extending our understanding of prevalence of CCED use, sources of caffeine in the United States, drivers of CCED use, and behavioral correlations and effects of CCEDs, including effects on attractiveness of both alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages.

Sales of energy drinks in the United States reached $12.5 billion in 2012. Emergency department visits related to consumption of these products have increased sharply, and while these numbers remain small relative to product sales, they raise important questions regarding biological and behavioral effects. Although some common ingredients of energy drinks have been extensively studied (e.g., caffeine, B vitamins, sugars, inositol), data on other ingredients (e.g., taurine) are limited. Summarized here are data presented elsewhere in this issue on the prevalence and patterns of caffeine-containing energy drink use, the effects of these products on alertness, fatigue, cognitive functions, sleep, mood, homeostasis, as well as on exercise physiology and metabolism, and the biological mechanisms mediating the observed effects. There are substantial data on the effects of some energy drink ingredients, such as caffeine and sugars, on many of these outcomes; however, even for these ingredients many controversies and gaps remain, and data on other ingredients in caffeine-containing energy drinks, and on ingredient interactions, are sparse. This summary concludes with a discussion of critical gaps in the data and potential next steps.

Evidence from in vitro and in vivo studies suggests that Ginkgo biloba has cancer chemopreventive properties, but epidemiological evidence is sparse. We analyzed cancer as a secondary endpoint in the Ginkgo Evaluation of Memory (GEM) Study, the largest randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of Ginkgo supplementation to date.A total of 3069 GEM participants 75+ years of age were randomized to twice-daily doses of either 120 mg Ginkgo extract (EGb 761) or placebo and followed for a median 6.1 years. We identified hospitalizations for invasive cancer by reviewing hospital admission and discharge records for all reported hospitalizations over follow-up. Using an intention-to-treat approach, we compared the risk of cancer hospitalization between participants assigned to treatment and those assigned to placebo.During the intervention, there were 148 cancer hospitalizations in the placebo group and 162 in the EGb 761 group (Hazard ratio (HR), 1.09; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.87-1.36; p = 0.46). Among the site-specific cancers analyzed, we observed an increased risk of breast (HR, 2.15; 95%CI, 0.97-4.80; p = 0.06) and colorectal (HR, 1.62; 95%CI, 0.92-2.87; p = 0.10) cancer, and a reduced risk of prostate cancer (HR, 0.71; 95%CI, 0.43-1.17; p = 0.18).Overall, these results do not support the hypothesis that regular use of Ginkgo biloba reduces the risk of cancer.