| Literature DB >> 33119948 |
L M Sanders1, M R Dicklin1, O M Palacios1, C E Maki1,2, M L Wilcox2, K C Maki1,2,3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The intake of certain types of resistant starch (RS) has been associated in some studies with increased whole-body insulin sensitivity. This randomised, cross-over pilot trial evaluated the effect of consuming cooked, then chilled potatoes, a source of RS, compared to isoenergetic, carbohydrate (CHO)-containing control foods, on insulin sensitivity and related markers.Entities:
Keywords: carbohydrate; diabetes; insulin sensitivity; potato; resistant starch
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33119948 PMCID: PMC7894332 DOI: 10.1111/jhn.12822
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Hum Nutr Diet ISSN: 0952-3871 Impact factor: 3.089
Energy, macronutrient, dietary fibre and resistant starch (RS) content of each meal, snack and standardised breakfast meals for the potato‐containing foods and carbohydrate (CHO)‐based control foods during each treatment condition*
| Parameter | Potato‐containing foods | Isocaloric, CHO‐based control foods | Standardised breakfast (both conditions) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lunch & evening meals: potato salad, turkey sandwich with Swiss cheese | Evening snack: chilled potato gazpacho soup, crackers & juice | Total | Lunch & evening meals: noodle salad, turkey sandwich with Swiss cheese | Evening snack: chilled crouton gazpacho soup, crackers & juice | Total | Kellogg’s® Corn Pops®, 2% milk | |
| Energy (kJ / kcal) | 2172/519 | 2176/520 | 8620/2060 | 2176/520 | 2172/519 | 8624/2061 | 2100/502 |
| Total fat (g) | 24 | 12 | 69 | 24 | 12 | 69 | 9 |
| SFA (g) | 7.5 | 0.7 | 21.6 | 7.5 | 0.7 | 21.6 | 5.9 |
| Total CHO (g) | 51 | 93 | 276 | 47 | 91 | 266 | 81 |
| Dietary fibre (g) | 2.6 | 8.0 | 13.6 | 1.9 | 7.2 | 11.4 | <0.5 |
| RS | 6.1 | 6.1 | 19.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 0.9 |
| FMS | 40.8 | 55.7 | 170.6 | 44.1 | 59.8 | 181.3 | 33.3 |
| Protein (g) | 28 | 11 | 86 | 29 | 11 | 88 | 19 |
FMS, fully metabolisable starch; SFA, saturated fatty acids.
Nutrient composition was determined using food label information, when available, and US Department of Agriculture Food Data Central ( ).
Lunch and evening meals were identical.
Includes standardised breakfast for both conditions.
Resistant starch content was estimated based on published tables ( , , ).
Estimate based on Total CHO – sugar – dietary fibre – RS.
Product label states 0 g.
Figure 1Flow diagram of subjects assessed for eligibility, excluded, randomised, and analysed for the present study.
Demographic and anthropometric baseline characteristics of subjects (n = 19)
|
| |
|---|---|
| Gender | |
| Female | 13 (68.4) |
| Male | 6 (31.6) |
| Race | |
| White | 11 (57.9) |
| Black/African American | 7 (36.8) |
| Not disclosed | 1 (5.3) |
| Ethnicity | |
| Not Hispanic/Latino | 12 (63.2) |
| Hispanic/Latino | 4 (21.1) |
| Not disclosed | 3 (15.8) |
| Smoking status | |
| Non‐smoker | 16 (84.2) |
| Current smoker | 2 (10.5) |
| Alcohol consumer | |
| No | 12 (63.2) |
| Yes | 7 (36.8) |
BMI, body mass index; n, number of subjects; SEM, standard error of the mean.
Matsuda insulin sensitivity index (MISI), homeostasis model assessment‐2 insulin sensitivity (HOMA2‐%S) and beta‐cell function (HOMA2‐%B) following a breakfast meal tolerance test by diet condition
| Condition | Between condition | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Potato ( | Control ( | ||
| Median (Q1, Q3) | |||
| MISI | 4.08 (2.70, 6.79) | 3.88 (2.44, 7.50) | 0.310 |
| HOMA2‐%S | 94.8 (52.0, 149) | 70.3 (49.8, 121) | 0.094 |
| HOMA2‐%B | 136 (84.8, 157) | 119 (92.2, 170) | 0.398 |
| Mean (SEM) | |||
| Fasting plasma glucose (mmol L−1) | 4.4 (0.2) | 4.8 (0.2) |
|
| Fasting plasma insulin (pmol L−1) | 48.0 (34.2, 92.4) | 63.6 (39.6, 96.0) | 0.077 |
Q1 and Q3, interquartile limits.
Bolded P values are considered significant.
For MISI n = 18 because one subject was missing glucose and insulin values at t = 60 min and was excluded from this analysis.
MISI was calculated using glucose and insulin valued at t = 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 min.
Figure 2Median (interquartile limits) plasma insulin (pmol L−1) and mean (SEM) glucose (mmol L−1) concentrations from pre‐breakfast (t = 0 min) to 300 min post‐breakfast by diet condition (n = 19).
Figure 3Mean (SEM) breath hydrogen (ppm) from pre‐breakfast (t = 0 min) to 300 min post‐breakfast by diet condition (n = 17).
Figure 4Mean (SEM) plasma free fatty acid concentration (µmol L−1) from pre‐breakfast (t = 0 min) to 300 min post‐breakfast by diet condition (n = 19).
Breath hydrogen and free fatty acid responses during a breakfast meal tolerance test by diet condition
| Condition | Between condition | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Potato ( | Control ( | ||
| Mean (SEM) | |||
| Breath hydrogen | 11 756 (1806) | 10 749 (1298) | 0.280 |
| Free fatty acids, AUC0–300 min (µmol L−1*min) | 72 457 (5932) | 82 722 (6848) |
|
| Free fatty acids at 300 min (µmol L−1) | 408 (50.6) | 482 (50.6) |
|
| Median (Q1, Q3) | |||
| Breath hydrogen at 300 min (ppm) | 53 (22, 96) | 43 (22, 62) |
|
AUC0–300 min, area under the curve from 0‐300 min; ppm, parts per million; Q1 and Q3, interquartile limits.
Bolded P values are considered significant.
Two subjects did not have baseline values and were excluded from the analysis (n = 17).
Figure 5Mean (SEM) visual analogue scale ratings from pre‐breakfast (t = 0 min) to 300 min post‐breakfast for hunger, desire to eat, and fullness by diet condition (n = 19). Only fullness had a significantly different net incremental area under the curve (niAUC) between control and potato (P = 0.003).
Net incremental area under the curve (niAUC) for hunger, desire to eat, fullness and prospective consumption visual analogue scale (VAS) ratings from pre‐breakfast (t = 0 min) to 300 min post‐breakfast
| Condition | Between condition | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Potato ( | Control ( | ||
| Mean (SEM) | |||
| Hunger (mm*min) | –4825 (1787) | –7417 (2367) | 0.150 |
| Desire to eat (mm*min) | –5048 (1687) | –6910 (2221) | 0.221 |
| Fullness (mm*min) | 3591 (1567) | 9819 (1726) |
|
| Prospective consumption (mm*min) | –4479 (1871) | –8043 (1536) | 0.064 |
Bolded P values are considered significant.
One subject was missing t = 30‐minute VAS rating during the control breakfast and was excluded from the analysis (n = 18).