Relationship between bitter-taste receptor genotype and solid medication formulation usage among young children: A retrospective analysis

Clinical Therapeutics

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 728-733

  Lipchock, Sarah V ^a   Reed, Danielle R ^a   Mennella, Julie A ^a  

^a MONELL CHEMICAL SENSES CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Bitterness; Children; Medication formulation; Preference; Sweetness; Taste genetics

Indexed keywords

SUCROSE; SUGAR; SWEETENING AGENT; WATER;

ALLELE; ARTICLE; BEVERAGE; BITTER TASTE; CHILD; DRUG FORMULATION; FEMALE; GENETIC ASSOCIATION; GENOTYPE; HUMAN; LIQUID; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; PRESCHOOL CHILD; PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCHOOL CHILD; SOLID; TASTE BUD; TASTE PREFERENCE;

ADMINISTRATION, ORAL; ALLELES; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; DEGLUTITION; FEMALE; FOOD PREFERENCES; GENOTYPE; HUMANS; MALE; RECEPTORS, G-PROTEIN-COUPLED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SUCROSE; TABLETS; TASTE;

EID: 84858609345     PISSN: 01492918     EISSN: 1879114X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2012.02.006     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Pediatric drug research: studies conducted under Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act: report to congressional committees 2007, US Government Accountability Office, GOA, Washington, DC.
2. Mennella J.A., Pepino M.Y., Reed D.R. Genetic and environmental determinants of bitter perception and sweet preferences. Pediatrics 2005, 115:e216-e222.
3. Mennella J.A., Pepino M.Y., Duke F.F., Reed D.R. Age modifies the genotype-phenotype relationship for the bitter receptor TAS2R38. BMC Genet 2010, 11:60.
4. Blakeslee A.F. Genetics of sensory thresholds: taste for phenyl thio carbamide. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1932, 18:120-130.
5. Negri R., Di Feola M., Di Domenico S., et al. Taste perception and food choices. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2011 Dec 23, [Epub ahead of print].
6. Milne C.P., Bruss J.B. The economics of pediatric formulation development for off-patent drugs. Clin Ther 2008, 30:2133-2145.
7. Periodic Survey #44: Patient compliance with prescription regimens American Academy of Pediatrics, Accessed December 15, 2011. http://www.aap.org/research/periodicsurvey/ps44bexs.htm.
8. Schneider B.A., Trehub S.E., Morrongiello B.A., Thorpe L.A. Developmental changes in masked thresholds. J Acoust Soc Am 1989, 86:1733-1742.
9. Dorries K.M., Schmidt H.J., Beauchamp G.K., Wysocki C.J. Changes in sensitivity to the odor of androstenone during adolescence. Dev Psychobiol 1989, 22:423-435.
10. Patil S., Maibach H.I. Effect of age and sex on the elicitation of irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1994, 30:257-264.
11. Steiner J.E., Glaser D., Hawilo M.E., Berridge K.C. Comparative expression of hedonic impact: affective reactions to taste by human infants and other primates. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2001, 25:53-74.
12. Ventura A.K., Mennella J.A. Innate and learned preferences for sweet taste during childhood. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 2011, 14:379-384.
13. Nahata M.C., Allen L.V. Extemporaneous drug formulations. Clin Ther 2008, 30:2112-2119.
14. Allen L.V. Dosage form design and development. Clin Ther 2008, 30:2102-2111.
15. Formulation of choice for the paediatric population. EMA 2006, European Medicines Agency.
16. Bufe B., Breslin P.A., Kuhn C., et al. The molecular basis of individual differences in phenylthiocarbamide and propylthiouracil bitterness perception. Curr Biol 2005, 15:322-327.
17. Polaha J., Dalton W.T., Lancaster B.M. Parental report of medication acceptance among youth: implications for everyday practice. South Med J 2008, 101:1106-1112.
18. Khoury M.J., Beaty T.H., Cohen B.H. Fundamentals of Genetic Epidemiology 1993, Oxford University Press, New York, NY.
19. Mennella J.A., Lukasewycz L.D., Griffith J.W., Beauchamp G.K. Evaluation of the Monell forced-choice, paired-comparison tracking procedure for determining sweet taste preferences across the lifespan. Chem Senses 2011, 36:345-355.
20. Kim U.K., Jorgenson E., Coon H., et al. Positional cloning of the human quantitative trait locus underlying taste sensitivity to phenylthiocarbamide. Science 2003, 299:1221-1225.
21. Howell D.C. Statistical Methods for Psychology 2002, Duxbury/Thomson Learning, Pacific Grove, Calif. 5th ed.
22. Meyerhof W., Batram C., Kuhn C., et al. The molecular receptive ranges of human TAS2R bitter taste receptors. Chemical Senses 2009, 35:157-170.
23. Bartoshuk L.M., Duffy V.B., Reed D., Williams A. Supertasting, earaches and head injury: genetics and pathology alter our taste worlds. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 1996, 20:79-87.
24. Hayes J.E., Bartoshuk L.M., Kidd J.R., Duffy V.B. Supertasting and PROP bitterness depends on more than the TAS2R38 gene. Chemical Senses 2008, 33:255-265.
25. Adler E., Hoon M.A., Mueller K.L., et al. A novel family of mammalian taste receptors. Cell 2000, 100:693-702.
26. Desor J.A., Greene L.S., Maller O. Preferences for sweet and salty in 9- to 15-year-old and adult humans. Science 1975, 190:686-687.
27. Pepino M.Y., Mennella J.A. Factors contributing to individual differences in sucrose preference. Chemical Senses 2005, 30(Suppl 1):i319-i320.
28. Campbell M.C., Ranciaro A., Froment A., et al. Evolution of functionally diverse alleles associated with PTC bitter taste sensitivity in Africa. Mol Biol Evol 2012 Feb 16, [Epub ahead of print].