Individual participant data meta-analysis provides no evidence of intervention response variation in individuals supplementing with beta-alanine

Esteves, GP, Swinton, P, Sale, C ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5816-4169, James, RM, Artioli, GG, Roschel, H, Gualano, B, Saunders, B and Dolan, E (2021) Individual participant data meta-analysis provides no evidence of intervention response variation in individuals supplementing with beta-alanine. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, 31 (4). pp. 305-313. ISSN 1526-484X

Preview

Accepted Version Available under License In Copyright. Download (705kB) | Preview

Abstract

Currently, little is known about the extent of interindividual variability in response to beta-alanine (BA) supplementation, nor what proportion of said variability can be attributed to external factors or to the intervention itself (intervention response). To investigate this, individual participant data on the effect of BA supplementation on a high-intensity cycling capacity test (CCT110%) were meta-analyzed. Changes in time to exhaustion (TTE) and muscle carnosine were the primary and secondary outcomes. Multilevel distributional Bayesian models were used to estimate the mean and SD of BA and placebo group change scores. The relative sizes of group SDs were used to infer whether observed variation in change scores were due to intervention or non-intervention-related effects. Six eligible studies were identified, and individual data were obtained from four of these. Analyses showed a group effect of BA supplementation on TTE (7.7, 95% credible interval [CrI] [1.3, 14.3] s) and muscle carnosine (18.1, 95% CrI [14.5, 21.9] mmol/kg DM). A large intervention response variation was identified for muscle carnosine (σIR = 5.8, 95% CrI [4.2, 7.4] mmol/kg DM) while equivalent change score SDs were shown for TTE in both the placebo (16.1, 95% CrI [13.0, 21.3] s) and BA (15.9, 95% CrI [13.0, 20.0] s) conditions, with the probability that SD was greater in placebo being 0.64. In conclusion, the similarity in observed change score SDs between groups for TTE indicates the source of variation is common to both groups, and therefore unrelated to the supplement itself, likely originating instead from external factors such as nutritional intake, sleep patterns, or training status.