Acute and two-week effects of neotame, stevia rebaudioside M and sucrose-sweetened biscuits on postprandial appetite and endocrine response in adults with overweight/obesity-a randomised crossover trial from the SWEET consortium.
Appetite
Endocrine response
Glycaemia
Solid food
Sweeteners
Sweetness enhancers
Journal
EBioMedicine
ISSN: 2352-3964
Titre abrégé: EBioMedicine
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101647039
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
25 Mar 2024
25 Mar 2024
Historique:
received:
02
10
2023
revised:
26
01
2024
accepted:
28
01
2024
medline:
30
3
2024
pubmed:
30
3
2024
entrez:
29
3
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Sweeteners and sweetness enhancers (S&SE) are used to replace energy yielding sugars and maintain sweet taste in a wide range of products, but controversy exists about their effects on appetite and endocrine responses in reduced or no added sugar solid foods. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the acute (1 day) and repeated (two-week daily) ingestive effects of 2 S&SE vs. sucrose formulations of biscuit with fruit filling on appetite and endocrine responses in adults with overweight and obesity. In a randomised crossover trial, 53 healthy adults (33 female, 20 male) with overweight/obesity in England and France consumed biscuits with fruit filling containing 1) sucrose, or reformulated with either 2) Stevia Rebaudioside M (StRebM) or 3) Neotame daily during three, two-week intervention periods with a two-week washout. The primary outcome was composite appetite score defined as [desire to eat + hunger + (100 - fullness) + prospective consumption]/4. Each formulation elicited a similar reduction in appetite sensations (3-h postprandial net iAUC). Postprandial insulin (2-h iAUC) was lower after Neotame (95% CI (0.093, 0.166); p < 0.001; d = -0.71) and StRebM (95% CI (0.133, 0.205); p < 0.001; d = -1.01) compared to sucrose, and glucose was lower after StRebM (95% CI (0.023, 0.171); p < 0.05; d = -0.39) but not after Neotame (95% CI (-0.007, 0.145); p = 0.074; d = -0.25) compared to sucrose. There were no differences between S&SE or sucrose formulations on ghrelin, glucagon-like peptide 1 or pancreatic polypeptide iAUCs. No clinically meaningful differences between acute vs. two-weeks of daily consumption were found. In conclusion, biscuits reformulated to replace sugar using StRebM or Neotame showed no differences in appetite or endocrine responses, acutely or after a two-week exposure, but can reduce postprandial insulin and glucose response in adults with overweight or obesity. The present study was funded by the Horizon 2020 program: Sweeteners and sweetness enhancers: Impact on health, obesity, safety and sustainability (acronym: SWEET, grant no: 774293).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Sweeteners and sweetness enhancers (S&SE) are used to replace energy yielding sugars and maintain sweet taste in a wide range of products, but controversy exists about their effects on appetite and endocrine responses in reduced or no added sugar solid foods. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the acute (1 day) and repeated (two-week daily) ingestive effects of 2 S&SE vs. sucrose formulations of biscuit with fruit filling on appetite and endocrine responses in adults with overweight and obesity.
METHODS
METHODS
In a randomised crossover trial, 53 healthy adults (33 female, 20 male) with overweight/obesity in England and France consumed biscuits with fruit filling containing 1) sucrose, or reformulated with either 2) Stevia Rebaudioside M (StRebM) or 3) Neotame daily during three, two-week intervention periods with a two-week washout. The primary outcome was composite appetite score defined as [desire to eat + hunger + (100 - fullness) + prospective consumption]/4.
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Each formulation elicited a similar reduction in appetite sensations (3-h postprandial net iAUC). Postprandial insulin (2-h iAUC) was lower after Neotame (95% CI (0.093, 0.166); p < 0.001; d = -0.71) and StRebM (95% CI (0.133, 0.205); p < 0.001; d = -1.01) compared to sucrose, and glucose was lower after StRebM (95% CI (0.023, 0.171); p < 0.05; d = -0.39) but not after Neotame (95% CI (-0.007, 0.145); p = 0.074; d = -0.25) compared to sucrose. There were no differences between S&SE or sucrose formulations on ghrelin, glucagon-like peptide 1 or pancreatic polypeptide iAUCs. No clinically meaningful differences between acute vs. two-weeks of daily consumption were found.
INTERPRETATION
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, biscuits reformulated to replace sugar using StRebM or Neotame showed no differences in appetite or endocrine responses, acutely or after a two-week exposure, but can reduce postprandial insulin and glucose response in adults with overweight or obesity.
FUNDING
BACKGROUND
The present study was funded by the Horizon 2020 program: Sweeteners and sweetness enhancers: Impact on health, obesity, safety and sustainability (acronym: SWEET, grant no: 774293).
Identifiants
pubmed: 38553262
pii: S2352-3964(24)00040-9
doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2024.105005
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
105005Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of interests JCGH and JAH are in receipt of research funding from the American Beverage Association. ARA has received honoraria from Nestle, Unilever and the International Sweeteners Association. University of Liverpool has received income from International Food Information Council by CH. CH has received honoraria for work with Food Standards Agency Advisory Committee on Social Sciences. MW was previously contracted to research funded by AstraZeneca through funding paid to University of Liverpool. CS is a paid employee of Cargill, Inc. The University of Leeds has received income from consultancy for Mars Inc by JCGH. EAR has received honoraria for manuscript writing from Institute of Life Sciences (ILSI-Europe).