对SSBs和ASBs的血糖反应:混合膳食的作用和个体差异。

IF 4.4 2区 医学 Q1 NUTRITION & DIETETICS
Sejin Kim, YoonJu Song
{"title":"对SSBs和ASBs的血糖反应:混合膳食的作用和个体差异。","authors":"Sejin Kim, YoonJu Song","doi":"10.1186/s12937-025-01181-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While artificially sweetened beverages (ASBs) are widely reported to have minimal glycemic impact compared to sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), their effects in mixed meal conditions and individual variability in response remain poorly understood. This study aimed to evaluate postprandial glycemic response (PPGR) and individual variability in response to an SSB (regular cola) and an ASB (zero cola), both in single and mixed conditions, using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 66 healthy young adults participated in this 14-day, non-randomized crossover intervention study. Test meals included 75 g oral glucose load as a reference, muffin, regular cola, zero cola, muffin with regular cola (MRC), and muffin with zero cola (MZC). PPGR was evaluated using incremental area under the curve. The glucose dip was assessed as the minimum glucose reduction from baseline. Participants were classified as MZC-High (n = 17) if their glycemic response to MZC was higher than to MRC, and as MZC-Stable (n = 44) if MRC showed the higher response.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 75 g oral glucose load reference exhibited a typical glycemic pattern, peaking at 45 min before steadily declining. The muffin induced a moderate glycemic response, while regular cola led to a rapid glucose rise followed by a sharp decline. When combined with a muffin, MRC exhibited a slightly higher glycemic response (iAUC<sub>180</sub>:161.6 mmol∙min/L), whereas MZC showed a similar response to the muffin alone (113.3 and 111.1 mmol∙min /L, respectively). At 120 min, the glucose dip was most pronounced for regular cola, whereas oral glucose load and muffin showed smaller reductions. These patterns persisted at 180 min, with oral glucose load showing the largest drop. Mixed meals attenuated glucose dips, with MRC and MZC preventing excessive declines. Individual responses analysis revealed that while the overall iAUC was not significantly different between muffin alone and MZC, 26 participants (MZC-High Responders) exhibited a higher iAUC with MZC than with MRC, suggesting variability in glucose regulation. Comparisons between MZC-High Responders and MZC-Stable participants showed no significant differences in age or body composition.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While zero cola alone or in combination with a muffin had a minimal overall glycemic impact, some individuals exhibited higher glycemic responses in mixed conditions. These findings suggest that individual variability and mixed condition should be considered when consuming artificially sweetened beverages.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS, cris.nih.go.kr) No. KCT0009921.</p>","PeriodicalId":19203,"journal":{"name":"Nutrition Journal","volume":"24 1","pages":"113"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Glycemic response to SSBs and ASBs: the role of mixed meals and individual variability.\",\"authors\":\"Sejin Kim, YoonJu Song\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12937-025-01181-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>While artificially sweetened beverages (ASBs) are widely reported to have minimal glycemic impact compared to sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), their effects in mixed meal conditions and individual variability in response remain poorly understood. This study aimed to evaluate postprandial glycemic response (PPGR) and individual variability in response to an SSB (regular cola) and an ASB (zero cola), both in single and mixed conditions, using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 66 healthy young adults participated in this 14-day, non-randomized crossover intervention study. Test meals included 75 g oral glucose load as a reference, muffin, regular cola, zero cola, muffin with regular cola (MRC), and muffin with zero cola (MZC). PPGR was evaluated using incremental area under the curve. The glucose dip was assessed as the minimum glucose reduction from baseline. Participants were classified as MZC-High (n = 17) if their glycemic response to MZC was higher than to MRC, and as MZC-Stable (n = 44) if MRC showed the higher response.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 75 g oral glucose load reference exhibited a typical glycemic pattern, peaking at 45 min before steadily declining. The muffin induced a moderate glycemic response, while regular cola led to a rapid glucose rise followed by a sharp decline. When combined with a muffin, MRC exhibited a slightly higher glycemic response (iAUC<sub>180</sub>:161.6 mmol∙min/L), whereas MZC showed a similar response to the muffin alone (113.3 and 111.1 mmol∙min /L, respectively). At 120 min, the glucose dip was most pronounced for regular cola, whereas oral glucose load and muffin showed smaller reductions. These patterns persisted at 180 min, with oral glucose load showing the largest drop. Mixed meals attenuated glucose dips, with MRC and MZC preventing excessive declines. Individual responses analysis revealed that while the overall iAUC was not significantly different between muffin alone and MZC, 26 participants (MZC-High Responders) exhibited a higher iAUC with MZC than with MRC, suggesting variability in glucose regulation. Comparisons between MZC-High Responders and MZC-Stable participants showed no significant differences in age or body composition.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While zero cola alone or in combination with a muffin had a minimal overall glycemic impact, some individuals exhibited higher glycemic responses in mixed conditions. These findings suggest that individual variability and mixed condition should be considered when consuming artificially sweetened beverages.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS, cris.nih.go.kr) No. KCT0009921.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19203,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nutrition Journal\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"113\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nutrition Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12937-025-01181-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NUTRITION & DIETETICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nutrition Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12937-025-01181-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NUTRITION & DIETETICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:虽然人工加糖饮料(asb)被广泛报道与含糖饮料(ssb)相比对血糖的影响最小,但它们在混合膳食条件下的影响和个体反应的可变性仍然知之甚少。本研究旨在评估餐后血糖反应(PPGR)和个体差异对SSB(普通可乐)和ASB(零可乐)的反应,在单一和混合条件下,使用连续血糖监测(CGM)。方法:共有66名健康的年轻人参加了这项为期14天的非随机交叉干预研究。试验餐包括75g口服葡萄糖负荷作为参考,松饼,普通可乐,零可乐,松饼加普通可乐(MRC)和松饼加零可乐(MZC)。利用曲线下增量面积评价PPGR。葡萄糖下降被评估为最低葡萄糖从基线下降。如果参与者对MZC的血糖反应高于对MRC的血糖反应,则将其归类为MZC高(n = 17),如果MRC表现出更高的血糖反应,则将其归类为MZC稳定(n = 44)。结果:75 g口服葡萄糖负荷参考表现出典型的血糖模式,在45分钟达到峰值,然后稳步下降。松饼引起了适度的血糖反应,而普通可乐导致葡萄糖迅速上升,然后急剧下降。当与松饼联合时,MRC表现出略高的血糖反应(iAUC180:161.6 mmol∙min/L),而MZC对松饼单独表现出类似的反应(分别为113.3和111.1 mmol∙min/L)。在120分钟时,普通可乐的葡萄糖下降最为明显,而口服葡萄糖负荷和松饼的下降幅度较小。这些模式持续180分钟,口服葡萄糖负荷下降幅度最大。混合膳食减轻葡萄糖下降,与MRC和MZC防止过度下降。个体反应分析显示,虽然整体iAUC在单独使用松饼和MZC之间没有显着差异,但26名参与者(MZC高响应者)使用MZC比使用MRC表现出更高的iAUC,这表明葡萄糖调节的可变性。在mzc高反应者和mzc稳定者之间的比较显示年龄或身体组成没有显著差异。结论:虽然零可乐单独或与松饼结合对总体血糖的影响最小,但有些人在混合条件下表现出更高的血糖反应。这些发现表明,在饮用人工加糖饮料时应考虑个体差异和混合情况。试验注册:临床研究信息服务(CRIS, crisis .nih.go.kr);KCT0009921。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Glycemic response to SSBs and ASBs: the role of mixed meals and individual variability.

Background: While artificially sweetened beverages (ASBs) are widely reported to have minimal glycemic impact compared to sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), their effects in mixed meal conditions and individual variability in response remain poorly understood. This study aimed to evaluate postprandial glycemic response (PPGR) and individual variability in response to an SSB (regular cola) and an ASB (zero cola), both in single and mixed conditions, using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).

Methods: A total of 66 healthy young adults participated in this 14-day, non-randomized crossover intervention study. Test meals included 75 g oral glucose load as a reference, muffin, regular cola, zero cola, muffin with regular cola (MRC), and muffin with zero cola (MZC). PPGR was evaluated using incremental area under the curve. The glucose dip was assessed as the minimum glucose reduction from baseline. Participants were classified as MZC-High (n = 17) if their glycemic response to MZC was higher than to MRC, and as MZC-Stable (n = 44) if MRC showed the higher response.

Results: The 75 g oral glucose load reference exhibited a typical glycemic pattern, peaking at 45 min before steadily declining. The muffin induced a moderate glycemic response, while regular cola led to a rapid glucose rise followed by a sharp decline. When combined with a muffin, MRC exhibited a slightly higher glycemic response (iAUC180:161.6 mmol∙min/L), whereas MZC showed a similar response to the muffin alone (113.3 and 111.1 mmol∙min /L, respectively). At 120 min, the glucose dip was most pronounced for regular cola, whereas oral glucose load and muffin showed smaller reductions. These patterns persisted at 180 min, with oral glucose load showing the largest drop. Mixed meals attenuated glucose dips, with MRC and MZC preventing excessive declines. Individual responses analysis revealed that while the overall iAUC was not significantly different between muffin alone and MZC, 26 participants (MZC-High Responders) exhibited a higher iAUC with MZC than with MRC, suggesting variability in glucose regulation. Comparisons between MZC-High Responders and MZC-Stable participants showed no significant differences in age or body composition.

Conclusion: While zero cola alone or in combination with a muffin had a minimal overall glycemic impact, some individuals exhibited higher glycemic responses in mixed conditions. These findings suggest that individual variability and mixed condition should be considered when consuming artificially sweetened beverages.

Trial registration: Clinical Research Information Service (CRIS, cris.nih.go.kr) No. KCT0009921.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nutrition Journal
Nutrition Journal NUTRITION & DIETETICS-
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
68
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Nutrition Journal publishes surveillance, epidemiologic, and intervention research that sheds light on i) influences (e.g., familial, environmental) on eating patterns; ii) associations between eating patterns and health, and iii) strategies to improve eating patterns among populations. The journal also welcomes manuscripts reporting on the psychometric properties (e.g., validity, reliability) and feasibility of methods (e.g., for assessing dietary intake) for human nutrition research. In addition, study protocols for controlled trials and cohort studies, with an emphasis on methods for assessing dietary exposures and outcomes as well as intervention components, will be considered. Manuscripts that consider eating patterns holistically, as opposed to solely reductionist approaches that focus on specific dietary components in isolation, are encouraged. Also encouraged are papers that take a holistic or systems perspective in attempting to understand possible compensatory and differential effects of nutrition interventions. The journal does not consider animal studies. In addition to the influence of eating patterns for human health, we also invite research providing insights into the environmental sustainability of dietary practices. Again, a holistic perspective is encouraged, for example, through the consideration of how eating patterns might maximize both human and planetary health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信