Brenda Davy1, Hope Jahren. 1. aDepartment of Human Nutrition, Foods and Exercise, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia bDepartment of Geology and Geophysics, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Added sugar consumption is associated with adverse health outcomes, including weight gain and cardio-metabolic disease, yet the reliance on self-reported methods to determine added sugar intake continues to be a significant research limitation. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent advances in the development of two potential predictive biomarkers of added sugar intake: δC and urinary sugar excretion. RECENT FINDINGS: The results of numerous cross-sectional investigations have indicated modest associations of the δC sugar biomarker measured in a variety of sample types (e.g., fingerstick blood, serum, red blood cells, and hair) with self-reported added sugar and sugar-sweetened beverage intake, and δC values have been reported to change over time with changes in reported sugar-sweetened beverage intake. Results from large-scale trials have suggested modest associations of urinary sugar excretion with reported sugar intake, and a dose-response relation has been demonstrated between urinary sugar excretion and actual sugar intake. SUMMARY: Valid markers of sugar intake are urgently needed to more definitively determine the health consequences of added sugar intake. Adequately powered controlled feeding studies are needed to validate and compare these two biomarkers of sugar intake, and to determine what individual characteristics and conditions impact biomarker results.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Added sugar consumption is associated with adverse health outcomes, including weight gain and cardio-metabolic disease, yet the reliance on self-reported methods to determine added sugar intake continues to be a significant research limitation. The purpose of this review is to summarize recent advances in the development of two potential predictive biomarkers of added sugar intake: δC and urinary sugar excretion. RECENT FINDINGS: The results of numerous cross-sectional investigations have indicated modest associations of the δC sugar biomarker measured in a variety of sample types (e.g., fingerstick blood, serum, red blood cells, and hair) with self-reported added sugar and sugar-sweetened beverage intake, and δC values have been reported to change over time with changes in reported sugar-sweetened beverage intake. Results from large-scale trials have suggested modest associations of urinary sugar excretion with reported sugar intake, and a dose-response relation has been demonstrated between urinary sugar excretion and actual sugar intake. SUMMARY: Valid markers of sugar intake are urgently needed to more definitively determine the health consequences of added sugar intake. Adequately powered controlled feeding studies are needed to validate and compare these two biomarkers of sugar intake, and to determine what individual characteristics and conditions impact biomarker results.
Authors: A Hope Jahren; Christopher Saudek; Edwina H Yeung; W H Linda Kao; Rebecca A Kraft; Benjamin Caballero Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Valisa E Hedrick; Brenda M Davy; Grace A Wilburn; A Hope Jahren; Jamie M Zoellner Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: Valisa E Hedrick; Jamie M Zoellner; A Hope Jahren; Natalie A Woodford; Joshua N Bostic; Brenda M Davy Journal: J Nutr Date: 2015-04-08 Impact factor: 4.798
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
Authors: Quanhe Yang; Zefeng Zhang; Edward W Gregg; W Dana Flanders; Robert Merritt; Frank B Hu Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Gunter G C Kuhnle; Natasha Tasevska; Marleen A H Lentjes; Julian L Griffin; Matthew A Sims; Larissa Richardson; Sue M Aspinall; Angela A Mulligan; Robert N Luben; Kay-Tee Khaw Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2015-02-23 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: R J Scott Lacombe; Vanessa Giuliano; Stefanie M Colombo; Michael T Arts; Richard P Bazinet Journal: J Lipid Res Date: 2017-07-10 Impact factor: 5.922
Authors: Lori B Moore; Sarah V Liu; Tanya M Halliday; Andrew P Neilson; Valisa E Hedrick; Brenda M Davy Journal: J Nutr Date: 2017-09-20 Impact factor: 4.798
Authors: Kristin E Morrill; Victoria L Bland; Yann C Klimentidis; Melanie D Hingle; Cynthia A Thomson; David O Garcia Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Marinka Steur; Laura Johnson; Stephen J Sharp; Fumiaki Imamura; Ivonne Sluijs; Timothy J Key; Angela Wood; Rajiv Chowdhury; Marcela Guevara; Marianne U Jakobsen; Ingegerd Johansson; Albert Koulman; Kim Overvad; Maria-José Sánchez; Yvonne T van der Schouw; Antonia Trichopoulou; Elisabete Weiderpass; Maria Wennberg; Ju-Sheng Zheng; Heiner Boeing; Jolanda M A Boer; Marie-Christine Boutron-Ruault; Ulrika Ericson; Alicia K Heath; Inge Huybrechts; Liher Imaz; Rudolf Kaaks; Vittorio Krogh; Tilman Kühn; Cecilie Kyrø; Giovanna Masala; Olle Melander; Conchi Moreno-Iribas; Salvatore Panico; José R Quirós; Miguel Rodríguez-Barranco; Carlotta Sacerdote; Carmen Santiuste; Guri Skeie; Anne Tjønneland; Rosario Tumino; W M Monique Verschuren; Raul Zamora-Ros; Christina C Dahm; Aurora Perez-Cornago; Matthias B Schulze; Tammy Y N Tong; Elio Riboli; Nicholas J Wareham; John Danesh; Adam S Butterworth; Nita G Forouhi Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2021-11-19 Impact factor: 6.106