Trial Outcomes & Findings for A Study to Investigate the Impact of Fortified Malt Based on Immunity Outcomes in School Children (NCT NCT02542865)
NCT ID: NCT02542865
Last Updated: 2019-12-05
Results Overview
Number of days a participant was ill due to GI and/or respiratory illness as diagnosed by physician, as per criteria defined, over the intervention duration. This equals total number of days (symptomatic or asymptomatic) in illnesses episodes whereas each episode is defined as an incidence of illness followed by at least 3 symptoms free days. GI illness was defined as an acute illness that includes any of following symptoms:3 or more loose/liquid/watery stools and/or vomiting in 24hours (h). Respiratory illness was defined as an acute illness that included more than or equal to \[\>=\] 1 of the following symptoms: runny nose, stuffy or blocked nose, cough fever or chills, sore throat or sneezing.
COMPLETED
NA
924 participants
At month 9
2019-12-05
Participant Flow
Participants were recruited from 4 schools in India.
Total 958 participants were screened. Of these, 924 participants were enrolled for randomized treatment, of which, 2 participants withdrew their consent before starting the treatment. 34 participants were not enrolled, of which, 11 did not meet study criteria, 22 had withdrawal of consent and 1 identified as screen failure.
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
462
|
462
|
|
Overall Study
Treated
|
460
|
462
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
445
|
462
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
17
|
0
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
Identified as screen failure
|
1
|
0
|
|
Overall Study
Withdrawal by Subject
|
16
|
0
|
Baseline Characteristics
A Study to Investigate the Impact of Fortified Malt Based on Immunity Outcomes in School Children
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=460 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
Total
n=922 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
8.0 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.78 • n=5 Participants
|
7.9 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.84 • n=7 Participants
|
8.0 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.81 • n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
196 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
206 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
402 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
264 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
256 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
520 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
|
460 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
462 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
922 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Height
|
120.83 Centimeters (cm)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.804 • n=5 Participants
|
120.71 Centimeters (cm)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5.070 • n=7 Participants
|
120.77 Centimeters (cm)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.937 • n=5 Participants
|
|
Weight
|
22.66 Kilograms (kg)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.053 • n=5 Participants
|
22.14 Kilograms (kg)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.565 • n=7 Participants
|
22.40 Kilograms (kg)
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.323 • n=5 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: At month 9Population: mITT (modified intent-to-treat) population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Number of days a participant was ill due to GI and/or respiratory illness as diagnosed by physician, as per criteria defined, over the intervention duration. This equals total number of days (symptomatic or asymptomatic) in illnesses episodes whereas each episode is defined as an incidence of illness followed by at least 3 symptoms free days. GI illness was defined as an acute illness that includes any of following symptoms:3 or more loose/liquid/watery stools and/or vomiting in 24hours (h). Respiratory illness was defined as an acute illness that included more than or equal to \[\>=\] 1 of the following symptoms: runny nose, stuffy or blocked nose, cough fever or chills, sore throat or sneezing.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Total Number of Ill Days Due to Gastrointestinal (GI) and Respiratory Illness at Month 9
|
2.3 Number of days
Standard Deviation 5.23
|
8.2 Number of days
Standard Deviation 7.97
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Number of episodes of GI and respiratory illnesses was calculated at month 9 using a diagnosis form (DF) which were used to note the diagnosis, severity, and school absenteeism due to GI and respiratory illnesses only, as defined in the study protocol. The DF captured the start and end date of all occurrences of GI and respiratory illnesses in the week. The frequency was calculated as total number of GI and respiratory illness episodes, divided by duration of intervention, where each episode is defined as each incidence of illness followed by at least uninterrupted 3 symptom free days. Therefore, the formula for calculation used was: frequency (per month) = number of episodes multiply (x) 30 and divided by (/) number of days between first and last visit.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Frequency of GI and Respiratory Illnesses at Month 9
|
0.067 Number of episodes per month
Standard Deviation 0.1100
|
0.241 Number of episodes per month
Standard Deviation 0.1584
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Severity of GI illness was calculated at month 9 using DF with observations listed by study physician based on assessment of severity grade: classified as, diarrhea (Mild, increase of less than \[\<\] 4 stools per \[/\] day over baseline; Moderate, increase of 4 to 6 stools/day over baseline; Severe, increase of more than or equal to \[\>=\]7 loose stools/day over baseline) and vomiting (1-2 episodes, separated by 5 minutes\[min\] in 24 h; Moderate, 3-5 episodes, separated by 5 min in 24 h; Severe, \>=6 episodes, separated by 5 min in 24 h. The count of participants was calculated based on the episode of worst severity. Lower severity indicates no illness of participant.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Severity of GI Illnesses at Month 9
Mild
|
30 Participants
|
163 Participants
|
|
Severity of GI Illnesses at Month 9
Moderate
|
13 Participants
|
20 Participants
|
|
Severity of GI Illnesses at Month 9
Severe
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Severity of GI Illnesses at Month 9
No illness
|
402 Participants
|
279 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Intensity of respiratory illness was calculated at month 9 using DF with observations listed by study physician based on assessment of severity grade classified as, Mild or Grade1 is asymptomatic or mild symptoms; clinical or diagnostic observations only; intervention not indicated; Moderate or Grade 2 is minimal, local or non-invasive intervention indicated; limiting age-appropriate instrumental activities of daily living (ADL). Instrumental ADL refer to school attendance, playing, studying, participating in school activities; and Severe or Grade 3 and 4: Grade 3 is severe or medically significant, but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self-care ADL. Self-care ADL refers to bathing, dressing and undressing, feeding self, using the toilet, taking medications, and not bedridden; Grade 4 is life-threatening consequences; urgent indication indicated.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Severity of Respiratory Illnesses at Month 9
Mild
|
97 Participants
|
293 Participants
|
|
Severity of Respiratory Illnesses at Month 9
Moderate
|
50 Participants
|
89 Participants
|
|
Severity of Respiratory Illnesses at Month 9
Severe
|
12 Participants
|
8 Participants
|
|
Severity of Respiratory Illnesses at Month 9
No illness
|
286 Participants
|
72 Participants
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
School absenteeism was calculated as number of days when a participant failed to attend school because of GI and/or respiratory illnesses. DF was used to note school absenteeism , however it was marked for absenteeism due to GI and respiratory illnesses only.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
School Absenteeism Assessment Due to GI and Respiratory Illnesses at Month 9
|
0.1 Number of days
Standard Deviation 0.61
|
0.6 Number of days
Standard Deviation 1.34
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At screening and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Change in Body Mass Index (BMI) was calculated at month 9 using anthropometric measurements. For measuring participant's height, portable stadio-meter was used with the participant standing barefoot; to the nearest 0.1 centimeters (cm) and average of 3 measurements were recorded. All data recorded in cm were converted to meters (m) for BMI calculation. For measuring participant's weight, standardized weighing scale was used in standard clothing to the nearest 0.1kilograms (kg) and average of 3 measurements were recorded. BMI value was calculated using the formula weight divided by square of height (weight \[kilogram (kg)/ Height \[meter (m)\]\^2)
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI) at Month 9
At month 9
|
15.668 Kilograms per meter square (kg/m^2)
Standard Deviation 2.3446
|
15.187 Kilograms per meter square (kg/m^2)
Standard Deviation 2.3620
|
|
Change From Baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI) at Month 9
Change from baseline at month 9
|
0.194 Kilograms per meter square (kg/m^2)
Standard Deviation 0.9948
|
0.068 Kilograms per meter square (kg/m^2)
Standard Deviation 1.4408
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Improvement in gut wall integrity was considered a possible factor to assess the micronutrient absorption. Lactulose mannitol test was used to evaluate change in gut wall permeability status to assess impact on micronutrient absorption. After 3h of fasting, pre-measured amount of lactulose/mannitol solution (2 milliliter/Kilogram \[mL/Kg\] of body weight) containing lactulose (250 milligram/milliliter \[mg/mL\])\] and mannitol (50 mg/mL) was administered as a test solution. Participants were allowed to return to their regular diet 30 minutes after ingestion of the test solution. During the 2.5 h time, participants were offered liquids frequently in order to permit collection of an adequate volume of urine. After 2.5 h, urine collection was performed. All urine passed over duration of 2.5 h was collected and analysed. High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) test method was used to measure the levels. The normal range of urinary lactulose: mannitol is less than \[\<\] 0.035.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Gut Integrity/ Health Measured by Urine Lactulose: Mannitol Test at Month 9
At baseline
|
0.0504 Ratio (unitless)
Standard Deviation 0.19891
|
0.0218 Ratio (unitless)
Standard Deviation 0.01150
|
|
Change From Baseline in Gut Integrity/ Health Measured by Urine Lactulose: Mannitol Test at Month 9
At month 9
|
0.0429 Ratio (unitless)
Standard Deviation 0.06399
|
0.0405 Ratio (unitless)
Standard Deviation 0.12221
|
|
Change From Baseline in Gut Integrity/ Health Measured by Urine Lactulose: Mannitol Test at Month 9
Change from baseline at month 9
|
-0.0082 Ratio (unitless)
Standard Deviation 0.21151
|
0.0192 Ratio (unitless)
Standard Deviation 0.12400
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Improvement in gut wall integrity was considered a possible factor to assess the micronutrient absorption. Neopterin test was used to evaluate change in gut wall permeability status to assess impact on micronutrient absorption. Spontaneous random urine was collected from the participants and a volume of 2mL per participant was stored and analysed. Urine sample for this test were collected prior to administration of Lactulose/Mannitol solution. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) test method was used to measure the levels. The values were measured in Millimoles per moles of creatinin (mmol/mol creatinin). The normal range of urinary neopterin is 0.10-5.00 mmol/ mol creatinin.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Gut Integrity/ Health Using Urinary Neopterin Assessment at Month 9
At month 9
|
0.537 mmol/mol creatinin
Standard Deviation 0.4955
|
0.557 mmol/mol creatinin
Standard Deviation 0.4937
|
|
Change From Baseline in Gut Integrity/ Health Using Urinary Neopterin Assessment at Month 9
Change from baseline at month 9
|
0.119 mmol/mol creatinin
Standard Deviation 0.6188
|
0.169 mmol/mol creatinin
Standard Deviation 0.6302
|
|
Change From Baseline in Gut Integrity/ Health Using Urinary Neopterin Assessment at Month 9
At baseline
|
0.419 mmol/mol creatinin
Standard Deviation 0.3967
|
0.388 mmol/mol creatinin
Standard Deviation 0.4410
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Quantity of salivary IgA was used to measure the impact of fortified malt based food on mucosal immunity. Saliva was collected using saliva collection aid (SCA). Ribbed-end of the SCA were securely placed into a pre-labeled collection vial. Participants were instructed to pool the saliva in mouth. SCA was placed on mouth entry. Then, participants were asked to tilt the head forward, and gently force saliva through the SCA into the vial to fill with at least 50 microliters (mcL) of volume. A small amount of air space was reserved in the vial to accommodate liquid expansion during freezing. After collection of sample, SCA was removed and discarded and cap was attached to collection vial and tightened. ELISA test method was used to detect the salivary IgA levels. The normal range of salivary IgA is 25.00-168.00 milligrams per liter (mg/L).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Mucosal Immunity Using Salivary Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Assessment at Month 9
At baseline
|
84.659 mg/L
Standard Deviation 33.7306
|
79.278 mg/L
Standard Deviation 33.3108
|
|
Change From Baseline in Mucosal Immunity Using Salivary Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Assessment at Month 9
At month 9
|
94.392 mg/L
Standard Deviation 29.3311
|
90.386 mg/L
Standard Deviation 29.2448
|
|
Change From Baseline in Mucosal Immunity Using Salivary Immunoglobulin A (IgA) Assessment at Month 9
Change from baseline at month 9
|
9.733 mg/L
Standard Deviation 25.7247
|
11.108 mg/L
Standard Deviation 24.9461
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Quantity of micronutrients, serum vitamin-A and of trace elements Zn, Cu and Fe levels in serum were used to assess the impact of fortified malt based food product on nutrient biochemistry at month 9. To quantitate the nutrient biochemistry, a total volume of approximately 14 milliliters (ml), 7ml each at screening and at month 9, whole blood sample was collected from each participant after application of an anesthetic patch/ointment. The test methods used were ELISA for vitamin-A and colorimetric assays for Zn, Cu and Fe as 5-Br-PAPS; 3,5-Dibromo-PAES and TPTZ, respectively. The normal range of serum Vitamin-A is 26.00-49.00 micrograms per deciliter (mcg/dL) and serum Zn is 78.00-105.00 (male and females aged 7-9 years), 78.00- 118.00 (females aged 10 years) and 78.00-98.00 (males aged 10 years) mcg/dL. The normal range of serum Cu is 51.00-121.00 mcg/dL and serum Fe is 50.00-120.00 mcg/dL.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Vitamin-A : at baseline
|
29.522 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 6.3004
|
28.141 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 5.4046
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Vitamin-A : at month 9
|
31.631 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 7.4251
|
31.446 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 6.5425
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Vitamin-A : change from baseline at month 9
|
2.109 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 8.0874
|
3.305 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 7.4460
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Zn: at baseline
|
72.166 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 19.8017
|
72.583 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 19.9806
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Zn: at month 9
|
88.795 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 22.4039
|
89.450 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 23.1540
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Zn: change from baseline at month 9
|
16.629 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 19.8966
|
16.867 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 19.6339
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Cu: at baseline
|
117.896 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 15.9230
|
117.771 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 16.0825
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Cu: at month 9
|
116.514 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 19.2957
|
116.996 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 18.0636
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Cu: change from baseline at month 9
|
-1.382 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 19.0421
|
-0.775 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 19.3061
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Fe: at baseline
|
70.087 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 29.7686
|
71.426 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 29.1396
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Fe: at month 9
|
70.843 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 23.5478
|
70.349 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 21.7732
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin A and Trace Elements Zinc (Zn), Copper (Cu) and Iron (Fe) at Month 9
Serum Fe: change from baseline at month 9
|
0.755 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 27.2156
|
-1.077 mcg/dL
Standard Deviation 24.7602
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Quantity of the trace element, serum Se was used to assess the impact of fortified malt based food product on nutrient biochemistry at month 9. To quantitate the nutrient biochemistry, a total volume of approximately 14 milliliters (ml), 7ml each at screening and at month 9, whole blood sample was collected from each participant after application of an anesthetic patch/ointment. The test method used was inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). The normal range of serum Se is 55.00-134.00 micrograms per liter (mcg/L).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Trace Element Selenium (Se) at Month 9
Serum Selenium: at baseline
|
83.625 mcg/L
Standard Deviation 12.6082
|
85.905 mcg/L
Standard Deviation 12.2420
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Trace Element Selenium (Se) at Month 9
Serum Selenium: at month 9
|
92.703 mcg/L
Standard Deviation 17.5743
|
91.286 mcg/L
Standard Deviation 17.0242
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Trace Element Selenium (Se) at Month 9
Serum Selenium: change from baseline at month 9
|
9.078 mcg/L
Standard Deviation 17.2151
|
5.381 mcg/L
Standard Deviation 17.0555
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Quantity of micronutrient, serum vitamin-B12 was used to assess the impact of fortified malt based food product on nutrient biochemistry at month 9. To quantitate the nutrient biochemistry, a total volume of approximately 14 milliliters (ml), 7ml each at screening and at month 9, whole blood sample was collected from each participant after application of an anesthetic patch/ointment. The test method ELISA was used to measure the levels. The normal range of the serum vitamin B12 is 312.00-1237.00 is picograms per milliliter (pg/mL).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin B12 at Month 9
At baseline
|
374.384 pg/mL
Standard Deviation 87.3163
|
375.671 pg/mL
Standard Deviation 97.5075
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin B12 at Month 9
At month 9
|
429.682 pg/mL
Standard Deviation 85.4784
|
419.310 pg/mL
Standard Deviation 91.2245
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin B12 at Month 9
Change from baseline at month 9
|
55.299 pg/mL
Standard Deviation 80.1776
|
43.638 pg/mL
Standard Deviation 78.1703
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Quantity of serum vitamin-D (25-hydroxycholecalciferol) and serum folate micronutrients were used to assess the impact of fortified malt based food product on nutrient biochemistry at month 9. To quantitate the nutrient biochemistry, a total volume of approximately 14 milliliters (ml), 7ml each at screening and at month 9, whole blood sample was collected from each participant after application of an anesthetic patch/ointment. The test method ELISA was used to measure the levels. The normal range of serum Vitamin-D is 30.00-100.00 nanograms per milliliter (ng/mL) and serum folate is 5.00-21.00 ng/mL.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrients Vitamin-D and Serum Folate at Month 9
Serum Vitamin-D: at baseline
|
17.479 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 5.6318
|
17.893 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 5.1043
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrients Vitamin-D and Serum Folate at Month 9
Serum Vitamin-D: at month 9
|
20.329 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 5.7833
|
20.054 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 5.0556
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrients Vitamin-D and Serum Folate at Month 9
Serum Vitamin-D: change in baseline at month 9
|
2.850 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 4.9529
|
2.161 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 4.8962
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrients Vitamin-D and Serum Folate at Month 9
Serum folate: at baseline
|
4.510 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 0.7322
|
4.415 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 0.7075
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrients Vitamin-D and Serum Folate at Month 9
Serum folate: at month 9
|
5.171 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 0.7914
|
5.070 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 0.8106
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrients Vitamin-D and Serum Folate at Month 9
Serum folate: change from baseline at month 9
|
0.661 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 0.7897
|
0.656 ng/mL
Standard Deviation 0.7631
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Quantity of micronutrient, serum vitamin-E was used to assess the impact of fortified malt based food product on nutrient biochemistry at month 9. To quantitate the nutrient biochemistry, a total volume of approximately 14 milliliters (ml), 7ml each at screening and at month 9, whole blood sample was collected from each participant after application of an anesthetic patch/ointment. The test method ELISA was used to measure the levels. The normal range of serum vitamin-E is 0.30-0.90 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin-E at Month 9
At month 9
|
0.541 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.1407
|
0.494 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.1145
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin-E at Month 9
At baseline
|
0.493 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.1435
|
0.475 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.1616
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Micronutrient Vitamin-E at Month 9
Change from baseline at month 9
|
0.048 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.1549
|
0.018 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.1452
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Quantitative analysis of serum ferritin was studied to measure iron status. Its value was adjusted by other acute phase proteins such as C-reactive protein (CRP) and Alpha 1-acid glycoprotein (AGP) which are not related to iron status and played a role as a part of assessment on inflammatory status and to adjust ferritin status. To quantitate this load, a total volume of approximately 14 milliliters (ml), 7ml each at screening and at month 9, whole blood sample was collected from each participant after application of an anesthetic patch/ointment. The turbidimetry test method was used to measure the levels.The normal range of serum ferritin is 7.00-140.00 nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Ferritin Using Blood Testing at Month 9
At baseline
|
24.261 ng/ml
Standard Deviation 18.3705
|
22.743 ng/ml
Standard Deviation 13.5996
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Ferritin Using Blood Testing at Month 9
At month 9
|
27.239 ng/ml
Standard Deviation 12.7525
|
25.223 ng/ml
Standard Deviation 13.6193
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of Ferritin Using Blood Testing at Month 9
Change from baseline at month 9
|
2.978 ng/ml
Standard Deviation 19.4921
|
2.480 ng/ml
Standard Deviation 16.1006
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Quantitative analysis of sTfR along with serum iron and serum ferritin was studied to measure iron status. In cases of a high prevalence of infection and inflammation, sTfR becomes the choice of iron status marker. To quantitate this load, a total volume of approximately 14 milliliters (ml), 7ml each at screening and at month 9, whole blood sample was collected from each participant after application of an anesthetic patch/ointment. The immunoturbidimetry test method was used to measure the levels. The normal range of sTfR is 1.90-4.40 milligrams per liter (mg/L).
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Levels of Serum Transferrin Receptor (sTfR) Using Blood Testing at Month 9
At baseline
|
1.564 mg/L
Standard Deviation 0.5009
|
1.521 mg/L
Standard Deviation 0.4937
|
|
Change From Baseline in Levels of Serum Transferrin Receptor (sTfR) Using Blood Testing at Month 9
At month 9
|
1.510 mg/L
Standard Deviation 0.3670
|
1.471 mg/L
Standard Deviation 0.3483
|
|
Change From Baseline in Levels of Serum Transferrin Receptor (sTfR) Using Blood Testing at Month 9
Change from baseline at month 9
|
-0.055 mg/L
Standard Deviation 0.4181
|
-0.050 mg/L
Standard Deviation 0.3594
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Quantitative analysis of acute phase proteins such as serum CRP and serum AGP were studied to assess inflammatory status and adjust ferritin status. To quantitate this load, a total volume of approximately 14 milliliters (ml), 7ml each at screening and at month 9, whole blood sample was collected from each participant after application of an anesthetic patch/ointment. The immunoturbidimetry test method was used to measure the levels of CRP and turbidimetry for AGP. The normal range of the serum CRP is less than (\<) 0.50 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) and serum AGP is 50.00-120.00 mg/dL.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of C-reactive Protein (CRP) and Alpha 1-acid Glycoprotein (AGP) Using Blood Testing at Month 9
AGP: at month 9
|
74.972 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 18.8386
|
74.219 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 16.9083
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of C-reactive Protein (CRP) and Alpha 1-acid Glycoprotein (AGP) Using Blood Testing at Month 9
CRP: at baseline
|
0.057 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.1978
|
0.046 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.1466
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of C-reactive Protein (CRP) and Alpha 1-acid Glycoprotein (AGP) Using Blood Testing at Month 9
CRP: at month 9
|
0.114 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.2117
|
0.103 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.1839
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of C-reactive Protein (CRP) and Alpha 1-acid Glycoprotein (AGP) Using Blood Testing at Month 9
CRP: change from baseline at month 9
|
0.058 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.2682
|
0.057 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 0.1916
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of C-reactive Protein (CRP) and Alpha 1-acid Glycoprotein (AGP) Using Blood Testing at Month 9
AGP: at baseline
|
74.888 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 20.4840
|
74.542 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 18.0323
|
|
Change From Baseline in Serum Levels of C-reactive Protein (CRP) and Alpha 1-acid Glycoprotein (AGP) Using Blood Testing at Month 9
AGP: change from baseline at month 9
|
0.083 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 18.8226
|
-0.323 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 16.7025
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
IDDS-measure of nutritional quality of individual's diet-assessed by questionnaire based on Guidelines for measuring household and individual dietary diversity set by Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of United Nations\[FAO guidelines dietary diversity,2011\].Based on data of foods and beverages consumed in last 24h as captured by 24h dietary survey,appropriate food groups were selected. IDDS was calculated by adding number of food groups consumed by child over 24h recall period. Scoring 0-9with 1 point for foods that were consumed from each of food groups in previous 24h:starchy staples,dark green leafy vegetables,other vitamin A rich fruits and vegetables,other fruits and vegetables,organ meat, meat and fish, eggs, legumes, nuts, and seeds, milk and milk products. Based on IDDS,participants were listed into 3 food groups: a) less than or equal to \[\<=\]3-low dietary diversity (DD);b)4-5-medium DD;c) greater than or equal to \[\>=\]6-high DD. High score indicates nutrition rich food.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Individual Dietary Diversity Score (IDDS) at Month 9
At baseline
|
4.2 Diversity score
Standard Deviation 0.71
|
4.4 Diversity score
Standard Deviation 0.67
|
|
Change From Baseline in Individual Dietary Diversity Score (IDDS) at Month 9
At month 9
|
5.7 Diversity score
Standard Deviation 1.23
|
4.6 Diversity score
Standard Deviation 0.76
|
|
Change From Baseline in Individual Dietary Diversity Score (IDDS) at Month 9
Change from baseline at month 9
|
1.5 Diversity score
Standard Deviation 1.54
|
0.3 Diversity score
Standard Deviation 0.99
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Quantity of dietary intake was measured by protein, carbohydrate, and fat intake which was assessed from 24h dietary recall form. A structured interview was conducted based on a questionnaire. Parent/LARs provided the majority of information, with the child/ participant making additions to fill in the gaps. Both participants and parents/LARs recalled all food and beverage consumed by the child during previous 24h and information such as list and amount of ingredients, cooking method and portion size was recorded. Calculation on energy, protein, carbohydrates and fat were made using Dietsoft software based on Indian data (NIN \[National Institute of Nutrition\] and ICMR \[Indian Council of Medical Research\]) was used.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Protein, Carbohydrates and Fat Consumption at Month 9
Protein: at baseline
|
38.840 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 11.8775
|
42.406 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 13.3945
|
|
Change From Baseline in Protein, Carbohydrates and Fat Consumption at Month 9
Protein: at month 9
|
46.556 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 11.7492
|
38.341 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 11.0772
|
|
Change From Baseline in Protein, Carbohydrates and Fat Consumption at Month 9
Protein: change from baseline at month 9
|
7.716 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 17.3205
|
-4.065 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 16.5706
|
|
Change From Baseline in Protein, Carbohydrates and Fat Consumption at Month 9
Carbohydrate: at baseline
|
189.478 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 50.7510
|
202.385 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 55.0813
|
|
Change From Baseline in Protein, Carbohydrates and Fat Consumption at Month 9
Carbohydrate: at month 9
|
186.223 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 42.4576
|
181.126 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 47.6042
|
|
Change From Baseline in Protein, Carbohydrates and Fat Consumption at Month 9
Carbohydrate: change from baseline at month 9
|
-3.255 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 67.6676
|
-21.259 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 74.4880
|
|
Change From Baseline in Protein, Carbohydrates and Fat Consumption at Month 9
Fat: at baseline
|
47.516 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 16.5686
|
40.034 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 16.4056
|
|
Change From Baseline in Protein, Carbohydrates and Fat Consumption at Month 9
Fat: at month 9
|
59.006 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 18.0862
|
40.210 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 16.2262
|
|
Change From Baseline in Protein, Carbohydrates and Fat Consumption at Month 9
Fat: change from baseline at month 9
|
11.490 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 23.3769
|
0.175 Grams (g)
Standard Deviation 20.6106
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: At baseline and month 9Population: mITT population (N=907) included all treated participants with post-treatment assessments who completed the entire study of 9 months.
Quantity of dietary intake was also measured by energy intake which was assessed from 24-h dietary recall survey. A structured interview was conducted based on a questionnaire. Parent/LARs (legally appropriate representative) provided the majority of information, with the child making additions to fill in the gaps. Parents/LARs recalled all food and beverage consumed by the child during previous 24-h and information such as list and amount of ingredients, cooking method and portion size was recorded. Calculation on energy, protein, carbohydrates and fat were made using Dietsoft software based on Indian data (NIN and ICMR) was used.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=445 Participants
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 Participants
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Change From Baseline in Energy Consumption at Month 9
At baseline
|
1395.142 Kilocalories (Kcal)
Standard Deviation 305.7777
|
1406.079 Kilocalories (Kcal)
Standard Deviation 352.7524
|
|
Change From Baseline in Energy Consumption at Month 9
At month 9
|
1496.411 Kilocalories (Kcal)
Standard Deviation 299.0027
|
1309.889 Kilocalories (Kcal)
Standard Deviation 325.2896
|
|
Change From Baseline in Energy Consumption at Month 9
Change from baseline at month 9
|
101.269 Kilocalories (Kcal)
Standard Deviation 446.1953
|
-96.190 Kilocalories (Kcal)
Standard Deviation 484.0124
|
Adverse Events
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
Dietary Counselling Only
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
| Measure |
Fortified Malt Based Food Plus Dietary Counselling
n=460 participants at risk
In this group, participants received fortified malt based food, 27 grams (g) powder made up in 150 milliliters (mL) lukewarm water, twice daily (during school days first dose was given as soon as the participants entered the school and the second dose just prior to school dismissal and during holidays, first dose was provided in the morning and the second dose administered in the evening, by parents/LARs \[legally acceptable representative\]) for 9 months. Dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LARs separately in 2 mandatory sessions, which were followed up in 5 follow up sessions.
|
Dietary Counselling Only
n=462 participants at risk
In this group, only dietary counseling was provided to both participants and parents/LAR. This was matched to test group (fortified malt based product plus dietary counselling) with respect to quality, content and duration.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Diarrhea
|
4.6%
21/460 • Number of events 25 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
10.2%
47/462 • Number of events 52 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Dyspepsia
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.22%
1/462 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Enteritis
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.22%
1/462 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Gastritis
|
1.3%
6/460 • Number of events 6 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
18.2%
84/462 • Number of events 99 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Malabsorption
|
3.9%
18/460 • Number of events 18 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
3.5%
16/462 • Number of events 16 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Mouth ulceration
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.22%
1/462 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Nausea
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.43%
2/462 • Number of events 2 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Post-tussive vomiting
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Vomiting
|
2.8%
13/460 • Number of events 14 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
12.1%
56/462 • Number of events 59 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
General disorders
Pyrexia
|
7.0%
32/460 • Number of events 35 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
10.6%
49/462 • Number of events 59 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Immune system disorders
Multiple allergies
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.43%
2/462 • Number of events 2 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Immune system disorders
Seasonal allergy
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.65%
3/462 • Number of events 3 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Bronchitis
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
3.0%
14/462 • Number of events 14 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Conjunctivitis
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.22%
1/462 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Diarrhea infectious
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Gastritis viral
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.43%
2/462 • Number of events 2 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Gastroenteritis
|
3.0%
14/460 • Number of events 16 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
6.9%
32/462 • Number of events 33 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Gastrointestinal infection
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Lower respiratory tract infection
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
3.5%
16/462 • Number of events 18 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Nasopharyngitis
|
0.43%
2/460 • Number of events 2 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pharyngitis
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
1.7%
8/462 • Number of events 9 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Respiratory tract infection
|
2.2%
10/460 • Number of events 10 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Respiratory tract infection viral
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.22%
1/462 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Rhinitis
|
3.0%
14/460 • Number of events 15 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
24.9%
115/462 • Number of events 172 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Upper respiratory tract infection
|
25.2%
116/460 • Number of events 174 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
63.2%
292/462 • Number of events 542 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Urinary tract infection
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Viral infection
|
0.87%
4/460 • Number of events 4 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
1.5%
7/462 • Number of events 7 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Viral upper respiratory tract infection
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.43%
2/462 • Number of events 2 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Skin abrasion
|
0.65%
3/460 • Number of events 3 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Thermal burn
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Investigations
Blood iron decreased
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.22%
1/462 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Investigations
Blood zinc decreased
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.22%
1/462 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Investigations
Transferrin decreased
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.22%
1/462 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Dehydration
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Vitamin D deficiency
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.65%
3/462 • Number of events 3 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Dizziness
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.43%
2/462 • Number of events 2 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Allergic bronchitis
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.87%
4/462 • Number of events 4 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Allergic cough
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
5.0%
23/462 • Number of events 27 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Allergic respiratory disease
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
1.9%
9/462 • Number of events 11 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Allergic respiratory symptom
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.65%
3/462 • Number of events 3 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Cough
|
2.8%
13/460 • Number of events 16 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
6.1%
28/462 • Number of events 29 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Oropharyngeal pain
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
2.8%
13/462 • Number of events 14 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Productive cough
|
0.00%
0/460 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.87%
4/462 • Number of events 5 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Respiratory disorder
|
2.0%
9/460 • Number of events 10 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Rhinitis allergic
|
0.43%
2/460 • Number of events 2 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
16.2%
75/462 • Number of events 88 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Rhinorrhoea
|
0.43%
2/460 • Number of events 2 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.65%
3/462 • Number of events 3 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Sneezing
|
0.65%
3/460 • Number of events 3 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
2.4%
11/462 • Number of events 11 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Throat irritation
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Dermatitis allergic
|
0.22%
1/460 • Number of events 1 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
0.00%
0/462 • From baseline up to 9 months
The Safety Population (N=922) included all participants who received at least 1 dose of the study product (test or reference product). Adverse Events (AEs) were regarded as treatment-emergent if they occurred on or after the first study product administration. If this date was missing, a suitable alternative was used for example a date of particular visit. All other AEs prior to this were considered non-treatment emergent.
|
Additional Information
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee GSK agreements may vary with individual investigators but will not prohibit any investigator from publishing. GSK supports the publication of results from all centers of a multi-center trial but requests that reports based on single-site data not precede the primary publication of the entire clinical trial.
- Publication restrictions are in place
Restriction type: OTHER