The Influence of Oligosaccharides when Measuring Lactose and Total Carbohydrates in Human Milk and Comparison of Methods.

BACKGROUND: Understanding how human milk impacts growth requires valid analytical methods for quantifying the composition. Lactose, the most abundant constituent in human milk and a predominant source of energy, is often assessed using methods borrowed from the bovine dairy industry. However, the carbohydrate matrices of bovine and human milk are quite different, especially as they relate to human milk oligosaccharides (HMOs), each with a terminal lactose unit that may influence analytical methods. OBJECTIVES: Our goals were to determine the extent to which HMOs influence common analytical methods for measuring carbohydrates in human milk and to compare common methods for measuring lactose. METHODS: Two sets of experiments were performed. In the first set, native and HMO-spiked human milk samples (n = 16 each) were assessed and compared using 4 methods: AOAC 2006.06 (based on the Megazyme enzymatic assay), BioVision enzymatic assay, ultraperformance LC with MS, and infrared analysis. In the second set, human milk samples (n = 20) were assessed using 2 methods approved for measuring lactose in bovine milk: AOAC 984.22 that uses high-performance LC and refractive index detection and AOAC 2006.06 prepared using both volume and weighted dilutions. RESULTS: Native and HMO-spiked samples were not significantly different in lactose using AOAC 2006.06 and ultraperformance LC with MS but were significantly different using BioVision (mean difference = 0.2 g/dL; 95% CI: 0.1, 0.4; P = 0.005). Total carbohydrate measurements assessed using infrared were also higher after HMO spiking (mean difference = 0.4 g/dL; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.6; P < 0.001). Only AOAC methods 984.22 and 2006.06 for measuring lactose were very highly correlated (r > 0.90, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: AOAC methods 984.22 and 2006.06 are comparable for measuring lactose in human milk and are not influenced by HMOs. HMOs influence other enzymatic methods as well as infrared analysis, which leads to an overestimate of energy values. J Nutr 2023;x:xx.