Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 26, 2026

Individualized Reconstitution of Human Milk Microbiota: A Feasible Approach in Real-World Settings
Published on: February 7, 2025
Partially hydrolysed 100% whey-based infant formula and the prevention of atopic dermatitis: comparative
Jörg Spieldenner1, Dominique Belli, Christophe Dupont
1Nestlé Nutrition Institute, Avenue Reller 22, Vevey, Switzerland. joerg.spieldenner@nestle.com
Insights
Using partially hydrolysed whey infant formula (PHF-W) is cost-effective for preventing atopic dermatitis in high-risk infants. This approach offers savings compared to standard formula and extensively hydrolysed formulas.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Allergy and Immunology
- Health Economics
- Nutritional Science
Background:
- Clinical trials show partially hydrolysed whey infant formula (PHF-W) reduces atopic dermatitis risk in high-risk infants when breastfeeding is not possible.
- The cost-effectiveness of using hydrolysed formulas for atopic dermatitis prevention remains largely unexplored.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a specific partially hydrolysed whey infant formula (PHF-W) compared to standard formula (SF) for atopic dermatitis prevention in at-risk infants.
- To assess the cost-saving potential of PHF-W compared to extensively hydrolysed formulas (EHF) in prevention.
Main Methods:
- Economic analyses conducted in 5 European countries.
- A decision-analytic model with a 12-month horizon evaluated costs and resource utilization from public healthcare, family, and societal perspectives.
- Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs); cost-minimisation analysis compared PHF-W with EHF.
Main Results:
- CEA indicated PHF-W was cost-effective versus SF, with ICERs per avoided case ranging from EUR 982-1,343 (public healthcare), showing savings from family (-EUR 2,202 to -624) and societal (-EUR 1,220 to 719) perspectives.
- Primary costs involved formula (public healthcare, societal) and parental time loss (family).
- Cost-minimisation analysis revealed PHF-W offered savings of EUR 4.3–120 million compared to EHF-whey for prevention.
Conclusions:
- Partially hydrolysed whey infant formula (PHF-W) is a cost-effective strategy for preventing atopic dermatitis in at-risk infants compared to standard formula.
- PHF-W demonstrates cost savings when compared to extensively hydrolysed formulas for preventative use.
- These findings support the use of PHF-W in infant feeding guidelines for atopic dermatitis prevention, considering economic benefits.
Abstract:
Clinical trials have demonstrated that the risk of developing atopic dermatitis is reduced when using hydrolysed formulas to feed infants with a documented risk of atopy (i.e. an affected parent and/or sibling)when breastfeeding is not practised. However, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of using hydrolysed formulas. Consequently, economic analyses in 5 European countries (Denmark, France, Germany, Spain and Switzerland) have evaluated the costs and cost-effectiveness of a specific brand of 100% whey-based partially hydrolysed infant formula, NAN-HA® (PHF-W) compared with a cow's milk standard formula (SF) in the prevention of atopic dermatitis in at-risk children. This review synthesises the findings of these studies. Cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) used a decision-analytic model to determine treatment pathways, resource utilisation and costs associated with the management of atopic dermatitis in healthy at-risk newborns who were not exclusively breastfed. The model had a 12-month horizon and applied reimbursement rates of 60-100% depending on the country. Outcomes were considered from the perspective of the public healthcare system (e.g. the Ministry of Health; MOH), family and society. The final outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per avoided case of atopic dermatitis (ICER) for PHF-W versus SF. A cost-minimisation analysis was also performed to compare PHF-W with extensively hydrolysed formulas (EHF). The base-case CEA produced ICERs per avoided case for PHF-W versus SF of EUR 982-1,343 (MOH perspective), EUR -2,202 to -624 (family perspective) indicating savings, and EUR -1,220 to 719 from the societal perspective. The main costs related to formula (MOH and society) and time loss (family). In the cost-minimisation analysis, PHF-W yielded savings of between EUR 4.3 and 120 million compared with EHF-whey when the latter was used in prevention. In conclusion, PHF-W was cost-effective versus SF in the prevention of atopic dermatitis and cost saving compared with EHF when used in prevention.
More Related Videos
04:53A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
Published on: September 20, 2019
09:36Effect of Hyaluronic Acid 35 kDa on an In Vitro Model of Preterm Small Intestinal Injury and Healing Using Enteroid-Derived Monolayers
Published on: July 28, 2022
Related Concept Videos
Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients: Drug Distribution
Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients: Overview and Drug Absorption
Pharmaceutical Alternatives: Polymorphic Form-Related and Particle Size-Related Therapeutic Nonequivalence
Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients: Drug Metabolism
Dosage Regimens: Partial Pharmacokinetic Parameters
Pharmacokinetics in Pediatric Patients: Drug Excretion