Obesity and Sex-Related Associations With Differential Effects of Sucralose vs Sucrose on Appetite and Reward Processing: A Randomized Crossover Trial.
Journal
JAMA network open
ISSN: 2574-3805
Titre abrégé: JAMA Netw Open
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101729235
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 09 2021
01 09 2021
Historique:
entrez:
28
9
2021
pubmed:
29
9
2021
medline:
22
1
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Nonnutritive sweeteners (NNSs) are used as an alternative to nutritive sweeteners to quench desire for sweets while reducing caloric intake. However, studies have shown mixed results concerning the effects of NNSs on appetite, and the associations between sex and obesity with reward and appetitive responses to NNS compared with nutritive sugar are unknown. To examine neural reactivity to different types of high-calorie food cues (ie, sweet and savory), metabolic responses, and eating behavior following consumption of sucralose (NNS) vs sucrose (nutritive sugar) among healthy young adults. In a randomized, within-participant, crossover trial including 3 separate visits, participants underwent a functional magnetic resonance imaging task measuring blood oxygen level-dependent signal in response to visual cues. For each study visit, participants arrived at the Dornsife Cognitive Neuroimaging Center of University of Southern California at approximately 8:00 am after a 12-hour overnight fast. Blood was sampled at baseline and 10, 35, and 120 minutes after participants received a drink containing sucrose, sucralose, or water to measure plasma glucose, insulin, glucagon-like peptide(7-36), acyl-ghrelin, total peptide YY, and leptin. Participants were then presented with an ad libitum meal. Participants were right-handed, nonsmokers, weight-stable for at least 3 months before the study visits, nondieters, not taking medication, and with no history of eating disorders, illicit drug use, or medical diagnoses. Data analysis was performed from March 2020 to March 2021. Participants ingested 300-mL drinks containing either sucrose (75 g), sucralose (individually sweetness matched), or water (as a control). Primary outcomes of interest were the effects of body mass index (BMI) status and sex on blood oxygen level-dependent signal to high-calorie food cues, endocrine, and feeding responses following sucralose vs sucrose consumption. Secondary outcomes included neural, endocrine, and feeding responses following sucrose vs water and sucralose vs water (control) consumption, and cue-induced appetite ratings following sucralose vs sucrose (and vs water). A total of 76 participants were randomized, but 2 dropped out, leaving 74 adults (43 women [58%]; mean [SD] age, 23.40 [3.96] years; BMI range, 19.18-40.27) who completed the study. In this crossover design, 73 participants each received water (drink 1) and sucrose (drink 2), and 72 participants received water (drink 1), sucrose (drink 2), and sucralose (drink 3). Sucrose vs sucralose was associated with greater production of circulating glucose, insulin, and glucagon-like peptide-1 and suppression of acyl-ghrelin, but no differences were found for peptide YY or leptin. BMI status by drink interactions were observed in the medial frontal cortex (MFC; P for interaction < .001) and orbitofrontal cortex (OFC; P for interaction = .002). Individuals with obesity (MFC, β, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.83; P < .001; OFC, β, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.11 to 0.43; P = .002), but not those with overweight (MFC, β, 0.02; 95% CI, -0.19 to 0.23; P = .87; OFC, β, -0.06; 95% CI, -0.21 to 0.09; P = .41) or healthy weight (MFC, β, -0.13; 95% CI, -0.34 to 0.07; P = .21; OFC, β, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.23 to 0.06; P = .16), exhibited greater responsivity in the MFC and OFC to savory food cues after sucralose vs sucrose. Sex by drink interactions were observed in the MFC (P for interaction = .03) and OFC (P for interaction = .03) after consumption of sucralose vs sucrose. Female participants had greater MFC and OFC responses to food cues (MFC high-calorie vs low-calorie cues, β, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.37; P = .01; MFC sweet vs nonfood cues, β, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.42; P = .03; OFC food vs nonfood cues, β, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.22; P = .03; and OFC sweet vs nonfood cues, β, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.27; P = .01), but male participants' responses did not differ (MFC high-calorie vs low-calorie cues, β, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.19 to 0.21; P = .90; MFC sweet vs nonfood cues, β, -0.04; 95% CI, -0.26 to 0.18; P = .69; OFC food vs nonfood cues, β, -0.08; 95% CI, -0.24 to 0.08; P = .32; OFC sweet vs nonfood cues, β, -0.11; 95% CI, -0.31 to 0.09; P = .31). A sex by drink interaction on total calories consumed during the buffet meal was observed (P for interaction = .03). Female participants consumed greater total calories (β, 1.73; 95% CI, 0.38 to 3.08; P = .01), whereas caloric intake did not differ in male participants (β, 0.68; 95% CI, -0.99 to 2.35; P = .42) after sucralose vs sucrose ingestion. These findings suggest that female individuals and those with obesity may be particularly sensitive to disparate neural responsivity elicited by sucralose compared with sucrose consumption. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02945475.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34581796
pii: 2784545
doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.26313
pmc: PMC8479585
doi:
Substances chimiques
Sweetening Agents
0
Sucrose
57-50-1
trichlorosucrose
96K6UQ3ZD4
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02945475']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e2126313Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
BMJ. 1990 Jan 27;300(6719):230-5
pubmed: 2106931
Physiol Behav. 2012 Nov 5;107(4):560-7
pubmed: 22583859
Curr Opin Lipidol. 2014 Feb;25(1):80-4
pubmed: 24345988
Physiol Behav. 2010 Mar 30;99(4):538-43
pubmed: 20096712
Int J Obes (Lond). 2016 Mar;40(3):381-94
pubmed: 26365102
J Neurosci. 2007 Jun 13;27(24):6436-41
pubmed: 17567804
Am J Clin Nutr. 2008 Dec;88(6):1733S-1737S
pubmed: 19064538
Cell Metab. 2020 Mar 3;31(3):493-502.e7
pubmed: 32130881
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2019 Aug 1;104(8):3481-3490
pubmed: 30938760
Circ Res. 2018 Sep 14;123(7):886-904
pubmed: 30355075
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2011 Apr;65(4):508-13
pubmed: 21245879
Diabetes Care. 1995 Feb;18(2):245-50
pubmed: 7729306
Behav Brain Res. 2006 Apr 25;169(1):111-9
pubmed: 16445991
Curr Nutr Rep. 2020 Sep;9(3):278-289
pubmed: 32588329
Behav Brain Res. 2015 Feb 15;279:139-47
pubmed: 25449847
Physiol Behav. 2012 Jun 6;106(3):317-24
pubmed: 22450260
Neuroimage. 2011 Jan 15;54(2):1367-74
pubmed: 20804848
Appetite. 2018 Apr 1;123:160-168
pubmed: 29273466
Cereb Cortex. 2003 Oct;13(10):1064-71
pubmed: 12967923
Behav Neurosci. 2013 Apr;127(2):262-74
pubmed: 23398432
Int J Obes (Lond). 2013 Nov;37(11):1435-42
pubmed: 23459322
Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2009 Apr;296(4):G735-9
pubmed: 19221011
Physiol Behav. 2015 Dec 1;152(Pt B):381-8
pubmed: 26048305
Obesity (Silver Spring). 2010 Feb;18(2):254-60
pubmed: 19629052
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018 Jun;72(6):796-804
pubmed: 29760482
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2021 Mar 8;106(3):654-664
pubmed: 33300990
Nutrition. 2019 Apr;60:80-86
pubmed: 30529886
Appetite. 2017 Sep 1;116:82-89
pubmed: 28432007
Int J Obes (Lond). 2017 Mar;41(3):450-457
pubmed: 27956737
BMJ. 2019 Jan 2;364:k4718
pubmed: 30602577
Appetite. 2017 May 1;112:143-149
pubmed: 28126491
Br J Nutr. 2011 May;105(9):1320-8
pubmed: 21255472
Appetite. 2014 Dec;83:82-88
pubmed: 25128835
J Clin Invest. 2011 Oct;121(10):4161-9
pubmed: 21926468
Neuroimage. 2008 Feb 15;39(4):1559-69
pubmed: 18096409
Am J Clin Nutr. 2019 May 1;109(5):1288-1301
pubmed: 30997499
Proc Nutr Soc. 2007 Feb;66(1):96-112
pubmed: 17343776
Appetite. 2012 Apr;58(2):504-7
pubmed: 22178008
Brain Res. 2010 Sep 2;1350:159-66
pubmed: 20423700
Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Nov;96(5):989-99
pubmed: 22990034
Neuroimage. 2008 Jun;41(2):636-47
pubmed: 18413289
Appetite. 2018 Jun 1;125:557-565
pubmed: 29526693
J Acad Nutr Diet. 2017 Mar;117(3):441-448.e2
pubmed: 28087414
Nutrients. 2018 May 15;10(5):
pubmed: 29762471
Physiol Behav. 2016 Oct 1;164(Pt B):524-528
pubmed: 27061939
Physiol Behav. 2017 Dec 1;182:17-26
pubmed: 28939430
Nutr J. 2017 Sep 8;16(1):55
pubmed: 28886707
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2017 Aug;88:22-33
pubmed: 28502831
J Neurosci. 2008 May 7;28(19):5088-98
pubmed: 18463262
Am J Physiol. 1991 Apr;260(4 Pt 2):R756-63
pubmed: 2012246
Front Nutr. 2014 Jul 09;1:7
pubmed: 25988110
Front Psychol. 2014 Jun 24;5:617
pubmed: 25009514
Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 Nov;82(5):1011-6
pubmed: 16280432
Psychosom Med. 1996 Mar-Apr;58(2):160-4
pubmed: 8849634
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007 Dec;1121:273-96
pubmed: 17846154
Int J Obes (Lond). 2014 Sep;38(9):1186-92
pubmed: 24335762
Nutr Neurosci. 2021 May;24(5):395-405
pubmed: 31288630
Neuroimage. 2007 Aug 15;37(2):410-21
pubmed: 17566768
Diabetes Care. 1990 Feb;13(2):172-5
pubmed: 2351014
Int J Obes (Lond). 2011 Jan;35(1):142-9
pubmed: 20548302
Brain Cogn. 2016 Dec;110:20-42
pubmed: 27156016
Front Psychiatry. 2018 Jan 04;8:297
pubmed: 29403396
Appetite. 2012 Feb;58(1):303-12
pubmed: 22063094