Literature DB >> 24034568

Comparison and validation of 2 analytical methods for measurement of urinary sucrose and fructose excretion.

Xiaoling Song1, Sandi L Navarro, Pho Diep, Wendy K Thomas, Elena C Razmpoosh, Yvonne Schwarz, Ching-Yun Wang, Mario Kratz, Marian L Neuhouser, Johanna W Lampe.   

Abstract

Urinary sugars excretion has been proposed as a potential biomarker for intake of sugars. In this study, we compared 2 analytical methods (gas chromatography [GC] and enzymatic reactions-UV absorption) for quantifying urinary fructose and sucrose using 24-hour urine samples from a randomized crossover controlled feeding study. All samples were successfully quantified by the GC method; however, 21% and 1.9% of samples were below the detection limit of the enzymatic method for sucrose and fructose, respectively. Although the correlation between the 2 methods was good for fructose (Pearson correlation, 0.71), the correlation was weak for sucrose (Pearson correlation, 0.27). We favor the GC method because of its better sensitivity, simplicity, and the ability to quantify fructose and sucrose directly in the same run. Of the 106 samples from 53 participants with complete urine collection after 2 study diets, 24-hour urinary fructose excretion was significantly associated with fructose intake. The sum of 24-hour urinary fructose and sucrose was significantly associated with total sugars consumption. However, variation in intakes of sugars explained only a modest amount of variation in urinary sugars excretion. In the unadjusted models, fructose intake explained 24.3% of urinary fructose excretion, and intake of total sugars explained 16.3% of the sum of urinary fructose and sucrose. The adjusted models explained 44.3% of urinary fructose excretion and 41.7% of the sum of urinary fructose and sucrose. Therefore, we caution using these biomarkers to predict sugars consumption before other factors that determine urinary sugars excretion are understood.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BMI; Biomarker; CARB; CI; CV; Carbohydrates and Related Biomarkers; DEXA; Diet; Dietary sucrose; FFQ; FHCRC; Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; Fructose/urine; GC; GL; Gas chromatography; Human; LOQ; ME; Sucrose/urine; body mass index; coefficient of variation; confidence interval; dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry; food frequency questionnaires; gas chromatography; glycemic load; limit of quantification; measurement error

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24034568      PMCID: PMC3775009          DOI: 10.1016/j.nutres.2013.05.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nutr Res        ISSN: 0271-5317            Impact factor:   3.315


  30 in total

1.  Choose beverages and foods to moderate your intake of sugars: measurement requires quantification.

Authors:  S M Krebs-Smith
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 4.798

2.  Urinary excretion of sucrose and fructose as a predictor of sucrose intake in dietary intervention studies.

Authors:  C Luceri; G Caderni; M Lodovici; M T Spagnesi; C Monserrat; L Lancioni; P Dolara
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  Gas chromatographic analysis of mono- and disaccharides in human blood and urine after oral administration of disaccharides.

Authors:  H Nakamura; Z Tamura
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  1972-07       Impact factor: 3.786

4.  Demographic, dietary and lifestyle factors differentially explain variability in serum carotenoids and fat-soluble vitamins: baseline results from the sentinel site of the Olestra Post-Marketing Surveillance Study.

Authors:  C L Rock; M D Thornquist; A R Kristal; R E Patterson; D A Cooper; M L Neuhouser; D Neumark-Sztainer; L J Cheskin
Journal:  J Nutr       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.798

5.  Urinary sucrose and fructose as biomarkers for sugar consumption.

Authors:  Natasa Tasevska; Shirley A Runswick; Alison McTaggart; Sheila A Bingham
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 6.  Interpretation of urine results used to assess chemical exposure with emphasis on creatinine adjustments: a review.

Authors:  M F Boeniger; L K Lowry; J Rosenberg
Journal:  Am Ind Hyg Assoc J       Date:  1993-10

7.  Rapid gas-chromatographic assay of lactulose and mannitol for estimating intestinal permeability.

Authors:  M Celli; P D'Eufemia; R Dommarco; R Finocchiaro; D Aprigliano; F Martino; E Cardi; O Giardini
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 8.327

8.  Food-based validation of a dietary questionnaire: the effects of week-to-week variation in food consumption.

Authors:  S Salvini; D J Hunter; L Sampson; M J Stampfer; G A Colditz; B Rosner; W C Willett
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1989-12       Impact factor: 7.196

9.  A new predictive equation for resting energy expenditure in healthy individuals.

Authors:  M D Mifflin; S T St Jeor; L A Hill; B J Scott; S A Daugherty; Y O Koh
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 7.045

Review 10.  Defining and interpreting intakes of sugars.

Authors:  Madeleine Sigman-Grant; Jaime Morita
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 7.045

View more
  6 in total

1.  Use of a urinary sugars biomarker to assess measurement error in self-reported sugars intake in the nutrition and physical activity assessment study (NPAAS).

Authors:  Natasha Tasevska; Douglas Midthune; Lesley F Tinker; Nancy Potischman; Johanna W Lampe; Marian L Neuhouser; Jeannette M Beasley; Linda Van Horn; Ross L Prentice; Victor Kipnis
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2014-09-18       Impact factor: 4.254

2.  Measurement of Circulating Phospholipid Fatty Acids: Association between Relative Weight Percentage and Absolute Concentrations.

Authors:  Xiaoling Song; Jeannette M Schenk; Pho Diep; Rachel A Murphy; Tamara B Harris; Gudny Eiriksdottir; Vilmundur Gudnason; Corey Casper; Johanna W Lampe; Marian L Neuhouser
Journal:  J Am Coll Nutr       Date:  2016-06-17       Impact factor: 3.169

Review 3.  Urinary Sugars--A Biomarker of Total Sugars Intake.

Authors:  Natasha Tasevska
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 5.717

4.  Dietary Fructose Enhances the Ability of Low Concentrations of Angiotensin II to Stimulate Proximal Tubule Na⁺ Reabsorption.

Authors:  Agustin Gonzalez-Vicente; Pablo D Cabral; Nancy J Hong; Jessica Asirwatham; Nianxin Yang; Jessica M Berthiaume; Fernando P Dominici; Jeffrey L Garvin
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 5.717

5.  The complex human urinary sugar profile: determinants revealed in the cross-sectional KarMeN study.

Authors:  Carina I Mack; Christoph H Weinert; Björn Egert; Paola G Ferrario; Achim Bub; Ingrid Hoffmann; Bernhard Watzl; Hannelore Daniel; Sabine E Kulling
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2018-09-01       Impact factor: 7.045

6.  Associations Between Sugars Intakes and Urinary Sugars Excretion and Carbon Stable Isotope Ratios in Red Blood Cells as Biomarkers of Sugars Intake in a Predominantly Māori Population.

Authors:  Lisa Te Morenga; Devonia Kruimer; Rachael McLean; Amandine J M Sabadel; Robert van Hale; Xavier Tatin; Jennié Harre Hindmarsh; Jim Mann; Tony Merriman
Journal:  Front Nutr       Date:  2021-06-30
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.