1.
The entero-endocrine response following a mixed-meal tolerance test with a non-nutritive pre-load in participants with pre-diabetes and type 2 diabetes: A crossover randomized controlled trial proof of concept study.
Muilwijk, M, Beulens, JWJ, Groeneveld, L, Rutters, F, Blom, MT, Agamennone, V, van den Broek, T, Keijser, BJF, Hoevenaars, F
PloS one. 2023;18(8):e0290261
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
There is a process within the mouth and gut that is responsible for sensing nutrients and releasing hormones, which is called the entero-endocrine response. This response is responsible for ensuring that we do not overeat and maintain normal metabolism. The use of stevia, which is a sweetener, instead of sugar in food has been reported to have blood sugar lowering effects, which may be of benefit to individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, it is not fully understood how stevia can affect the entero-endocrine response, especially in individuals with T2D and prediabetes. This cross-over randomised control trial aimed to determine the entero-endocrine response in 20 individuals with either T2D or prediabetes following the consumption of stevia before a meal. The results showed that there was an enhanced entero-endocrine response to stevia in individuals with T2D compared to those with prediabetes. Blood sugar and the hormones responsible for lowering blood sugar and appetite suppression were all higher in individuals with T2D. There were no associations between the composition of the oral or gut microbiota and the entero-endocrine response. It was concluded that the consumption of stevia before a meal differentially effects the entero-endocrine response in individuals with T2D and prediabetes. This study could be used by healthcare professionals to understand that the consumption of stevia before a meal elicits an individual response. However, as this was a small study, further understanding of the mechanisms involved would be of benefit.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION This crossover randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigated differences in short-term entero-endocrine response to a mixed-meal tolerance test preceded by nutrient sensing between participants with pre-diabetes (pre-T2D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). Additionally, differences in gut and oral microbiome composition between participants with a high and low entero-endocrine response were investigated. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Ten participants with pre-T2D and ten with T2D underwent three test days with pre-loads consisting of either swallowing water (control), or rinsing with a non-nutritive sweetener solution, or swallowing the sweetener solution before a mixed-meal tolerance test. Blood glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP), glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), glucagon, glucose, insulin and peptide YY (PYY) were determined at t = -20, 0, 15, 30, 60, 120 and 240 minutes. The composition of the oral and gut microbiome at baseline were also determined. RESULTS The entero-endocrine response differed by pre-loads, e.g. a lower PYY response after swallowing the non-nutritive sweetener (-3585.2pg/mL [95% CI: -6440.6; -729.8]; p = 0.01). But it also differed by T2D status, e.g. a higher glucose, glucagon and PYY response was found in participants with T2D, compared to those with pre-T2D. Evidence for associations between the oral and gut microbiome composition and the entero-endocrine response was limited. Still, the level of entero-endocrine response was associated with several oral microbiome measures. Higher oral anterior α-diversity was associated with a lower PYY response (e.g. Inverse Simpson index -1357pg/mL [95% CI -2378; -336; 1.24]), and higher oral posterior α-diversitywith a higher GIP response (e.g. Inverse Simpson index 6773pg/mL [95% CI 132; 13414]) in models adjusted for sex, age and T2D status. CONCLUSIONS Non-nutritive pre-loads influence the entero-endocrine response to a mixed-meal, and this effect varies based on (pre-)T2D status. The entero-endocrine response is likely not associated with the gut microbiome, and there is limited evidence for association with the α-diversity of the oral microbiome composition. TRIAL REGISTRATION Trial register: Netherlands Trial Register NTR7212, accessible through International Clinical Trials Registry Platform: ICTRP Search Portal (who.int).
2.
Impact of Experimentally Induced Cognitive Dietary Restraint on Eating Behavior Traits, Appetite Sensations, and Markers of Stress during Energy Restriction in Overweight/Obese Women.
Morin, I, Bégin, C, Maltais-Giguère, J, Bédard, A, Tchernof, A, Lemieux, S
Journal of obesity. 2018;2018:4259389
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
The treatment of obesity has become a public health priority given the negative impact of this condition on physical and mental health. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of energy restriction alone or in combination with induced cognitive dietary restraint (CDR) on eating behaviour traits, appetite sensations, and markers of stress in overweight and obese premenopausal women. The study is a single-blinded randomised clinical study which recruited premenopausal women aged between 26 and 50 years. The participants were randomised to either an energy-restriction-plus-induced CDR condition (CDR+group) or an energy-restriction-without induced CDR condition (CDR−group). Results indicate that inducing CDR in a context of energy restriction had no further effects on eating behaviour traits, appetite sensations, and markers of stress in the short term as well as in the longer term than energy restriction alone. Authors conclude that increasing CDR has no negative impact on factors regulating energy balance in the context of energy restriction.
Abstract
Weight loss has been associated with changes in eating behaviors and appetite sensations that favor a regain in body weight. Since traditional weight loss approaches emphasize the importance of increasing cognitive dietary restraint (CDR) to achieve negative energy imbalance, it is difficult to untangle the respective contributions of energy restriction and increases in CDR on factors that can eventually lead to body weight regain. The present study aimed at comparing the effects of energy restriction alone or in combination with experimentally induced CDR on eating behavior traits, appetite sensations, and markers of stress in overweight and obese women. We hypothesized that the combination of energy restriction and induced CDR would lead to more prevalent food cravings, increased appetite sensations, and higher cortisol concentrations than when energy restriction is not coupled with induced CDR. A total of 60 premenopausal women (mean BMI: 32.0 kg/m2; mean age: 39.4 y) were provided with a low energy density diet corresponding to 85% of their energy needs during a 4-week fully controlled period. At the same time, women were randomized to either a condition inducing an increase in CDR (CDR+ group) or a condition in which CDR was not induced (CRD- group). Eating behavior traits (Three-Factor Eating Questionnaire and Food Craving Questionnaire), appetite sensations (after standardized breakfast), and markers of stress (Perceived Stress Scale; postawakening salivary cortisol) were measured before (T = 0 week) and after (T = 4 weeks) the 4-week energy restriction, as well as 3 months later. There was an increase in CDR in the CDR+ group while no such change was observed in the CDR- group (p=0.0037). No between-group differences were observed for disinhibition, hunger, cravings, appetite sensations, perceived stress, and cortisol concentrations. These results suggest that a slight increase in CDR has no negative impact on factors regulating energy balance in the context of energy restriction.
3.
Sleep restriction for 1 week reduces insulin sensitivity in healthy men.
Buxton, OM, Pavlova, M, Reid, EW, Wang, W, Simonson, DC, Adler, GK
Diabetes. 2010;59(9):2126-33
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Plain language summary
Short sleep duration is associated with an increased risk of many chronic diseases including diabetes, however the effects of sleep restriction on insulin sensitivity have not yet been established. The aim of study was to assess the effects of decreased sleep duration on insulin sensitivity in a controlled environment. This 12-day inpatient study included 20 healthy men who were randmoised to receive a wakefulness-promoting drug, modafinil, or placebo during the sleep restriction phase. This study showed that sleep restriction for one week significantly reduces insulin sensitivity. These findings raise concerns about chronic insufficient sleep on the development of metabolic diseases and promote further research into these effects.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Short sleep duration is associated with impaired glucose tolerance and an increased risk of diabetes. The effects of sleep restriction on insulin sensitivity have not been established. This study tests the hypothesis that decreasing nighttime sleep duration reduces insulin sensitivity and assesses the effects of a drug, modafinil, that increases alertness during wakefulness. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This 12-day inpatient General Clinical Research Center study included 20 healthy men (age 20-35 years and BMI 20-30 kg/m(2)). Subjects spent 10 h/night in bed for >or=8 nights including three inpatient nights (sleep-replete condition), followed by 5 h/night in bed for 7 nights (sleep-restricted condition). Subjects received 300 mg/day modafinil or placebo during sleep restriction. Diet and activity were controlled. On the last 2 days of each condition, we assessed glucose metabolism by intravenous glucose tolerance test (IVGTT) and euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp. Salivary cortisol, 24-h urinary catecholamines, and neurobehavioral performance were measured. RESULTS IVGTT-derived insulin sensitivity was reduced by (means +/- SD) 20 +/- 24% after sleep restriction (P = 0.001), without significant alterations in the insulin secretory response. Similarly, insulin sensitivity assessed by clamp was reduced by 11 +/- 5.5% (P < 0.04) after sleep restriction. Glucose tolerance and the disposition index were reduced by sleep restriction. These outcomes were not affected by modafinil treatment. Changes in insulin sensitivity did not correlate with changes in salivary cortisol (increase of 51 +/- 8% with sleep restriction, P < 0.02), urinary catecholamines, or slow wave sleep. CONCLUSIONS Sleep restriction (5 h/night) for 1 week significantly reduces insulin sensitivity, raising concerns about effects of chronic insufficient sleep on disease processes associated with insulin resistance.