| Literature DB >> 34505561 |
Alison Smith1, Amanda Avery1, Rebecca Ford1, Qian Yang1, Aurélie Goux2, Indraneil Mukherjee3, David C A Neville4, Preeti Jethwa1.
Abstract
Food manufacturers are under increasing pressure to limit the amount of free sugars in their products. Many have reformulated products to replace sucrose, glucose and fructose with alternative sweeteners, but some of these have been associated with additional health concerns. Rare sugars are 'monosaccharides and their derivatives that hardly exist in nature', and there is increasing evidence that they could have health benefits. This review aimed to scope the existing literature in order to identify the most commonly researched rare sugars, to ascertain their proposed health benefits, mechanisms of action and potential uses and to highlight knowledge gaps. A process of iterative database searching identified fifty-five relevant articles. The reported effects of rare sugars were noted, along with details of the research methodologies conducted. Our results indicated that the most common rare sugars investigated are d-psicose and d-tagatose, with the potential health benefits divided into three topics: glycaemic control, body composition and CVD. All the rare sugars investigated have the potential to suppress postprandial elevation of blood glucose and improve glycaemic control in both human and animal models. Some animal studies have suggested that certain rare sugars may also improve lipid profiles, alter the gut microbiome and reduce pro-inflammatory cytokine expression. The present review demonstrates that rare sugars could play a role in reducing the development of obesity, type 2 diabetes and/or CVD. However, understanding of the mechanisms by which rare sugars may exert their effects is limited, and their effectiveness when used in reformulated products is unknown.Entities:
Keywords: Obesity; Rare sugar; Type 2 diabetes; d-psicose; d-tagatose
Year: 2021 PMID: 34505561 PMCID: PMC9343225 DOI: 10.1017/S0007114521003524
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Br J Nutr ISSN: 0007-1145 Impact factor: 4.125
Fig. 1Identification and selection of relevant research. PSI: D-psicose, TAG: D-tagatose, SOR: D-sorbose, RSS: rare sugar syrup, ALL: D-allose.
Fig. 2Mapping diagram to show the health benefits of rare sugars and how they are interlinked. Blue text indicates actions of rare sugars demonstrated in at least one study included in this review. Letters in brackets indicate the rare sugars involved, with capital letters denoting human studies and lower-case letters denoting animal studies: A/a – allose, P/p – psicose, S/s – sorbose, T/t – tagatose.
Summary of the reported health benefits of rare sugar consumption (including only studies reporting significant results)§
| Observed effect of rare sugar | Human studies | Animal studies | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subjects with T2D, hyperglycaemia or obesity | Healthy subjects | Animal models of metabolic disease | Normal animals | |||||
| Reduced PEBG | PSI | Hayashi 2010( | PSI | Matsuo 2011( | PSI | Hossain 2011( | SOR | Oku 2014( |
| Noronha 2018( | Yamada 2018( | Iwasaki 2018( | ||||||
| TAG | Kwak 2013( | Iida 2008( | Pongkan 2020( | RSS | Shintani 2017( | |||
| RSS | Nakamura 2017( | |||||||
| Improved long-term glycaemic control | TAG | Ensor 2014( | PSI | Baek 2010( | PSI | Iida 2013( | ||
| Do 2019( | ||||||||
| Han 2016( | ||||||||
| Hossain 2011( | ||||||||
| Reduced body weight | PSI | Han 2018( | RSS | Hayashi 2014( | PSI | Han 2016( | PSI | Huang 2018( |
| Donner 2010( | Baek 2010( | Nagata 2015( | ||||||
| TAG | Ensor 2014( | Choi 2018( | Yagi 2009( | |||||
| Chung 2012( | RSS | Iida 2013( | ||||||
| Do 2019( | Shintani 2017( | |||||||
| Hossain 2011( | ALL | Iga 2010( | ||||||
| Itoh 2015( | ||||||||
| Kim 2017( | ||||||||
| Ochiai 2013( | ||||||||
| Hossain 2015( | ||||||||
| TAG | Williams 2015( | |||||||
| Reduced body fat | PSI | Han 2018( | RSS | Hayashi 2014( | PSI | Han 2020( | PSI | Chen 2017( |
| Choi 2018( | ||||||||
| Hossain 2011( | ||||||||
| Itoh 2015( | ||||||||
| Kim 2017( | ||||||||
| Ochiai 2013( | ||||||||
| RSS | Ochiai 2017( | |||||||
| Improved plasma lipid profile | TAG | Ensor 2015( | PSI | Han 2016( | PSI | Chen 2017( | ||
| Baek 2010( | ||||||||
| Choi 2018( | ||||||||
| Do 2019( | ||||||||
| Ochiai 2013( | ||||||||
| Hossain 2015( | ||||||||
| Kim 2017( | ||||||||
| Kanasaki 2019( | ||||||||
| TAG | Williams 2015( | |||||||
| Reduced hepatic lipid accumulation | PSI | Han 2016( | PSI | Chen 2019( | ||||
| Do 2019( | ||||||||
| Hossain 2011( | ||||||||
| Itoh 2015( | ||||||||
| ALL | Yamamoto 2017( | |||||||
| Improved gut microbiome | PSI | Han 2020( | ||||||
| TAG | Son 2019( | |||||||
| Reduced inflammation | PSI | Han 2020( | ||||||
| TAG | Son 2019( | |||||||
| Improved oxidative status | PSI | Pratchayasakul 2020( | PSI | Chen 2017( | ||||
PEBG, postprandial elevation of blood glucose.
Indicates studies in which there was a possible energy deficit in the experimental group.
Indicates studies in which the rare sugar replaced another carbohydrate in the experimental diet.
Indicates studies available as abstracts only.
Studies reporting inconclusive or non-significant results have not been included.
Summary of human trials examining the effect of rare sugars on postprandial blood glucose elevation*
| Study and location | Study population | Trial design | RS dose | CHO load | Ratio RS:CHO | Control | Difference in AUC |
| Conclusions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Braunstein | Healthy volunteers ( | Randomised, controlled, double-blind, multiple-crossover | 5 g PSI in glucose solution | 75 g glucose solution | 1:15 | No addition to CHO load | –35 ( | 0·11 | No significant effect on plasma glucose iAUC compared with 0 g PSI control |
| 10 g PSI in glucose solution | 2:15 | –23 ( | 0·07 | ||||||
| Hayashi | Borderline diabetes ( | Randomised, controlled, double-blind, crossover | 5 g PSI single dose in tea given with meal | Standard meal (425 kcal, 84·5 g CHO, 13·3 g protein, 3·7 g fat) | 1:17 | Aspartame | –743·3 mg × min/dl overall for meal (11·5 % reduction) | < 0·01 | AUC for PSI meal was significantly less than control aspartame meal overall and in subgroup of subjects with borderline diabetes but not in subgroup of healthy participants |
| Kimura et al, 2017( | Healthy volunteers ( | Randomised, controlled, single-blind, crossover | 5 g PSI single dose in solution, 30 min before meal | Standard meal (571 kcal; 61 % of energy as CHO, 25 % as fat, 14 % as protein. (estimated 93 g CHO) | 1:19 | Aspartame | NA | NA | PSI supplementation gave significantly lower change in plasma glucose at 90 min only, compared with aspartame control. No significant difference in plasma insulin |
| Noronha | Subjects with T2D, controlled with diet or OHA, not insulin ( | Randomized controlled, double-blind, crossover | 5 g PSI in glucose solution | 75 g glucose solution | 1:15 | No addition to CHO load | –48·1 mol × min/l (6·2 % reduction) | 0·051 | Significant linear dose–response gradient for reduction in AUC for glucose |
| 10 g PSI in glucose solution | 2:15 | –60·1 mol × min/l (7·7 % reduction) | 0·015 | ||||||
| Matsuo & Lu, 2011( | Healthy volunteers ( | No crossover, no info on randomisation or blinding | 6 g PSI single dose before meal | Normal lunch selected by subjects (636 kcal, 87·6 g CHO for males, 513 kcal, 18·9 g CHO for females) | 1:15 male, 1:3 female | 6 g | NA | NA | Postprandial glycaemic response significantly lower after PSI compared with D-fructose control |
| Iida | Healthy volunteers ( | Randomised, single-blind crossover | 2·5, 5 or 7·5 g PSI | 75 g maltodextrin solution | 1:10, 1:15 or 1:30 | No addition to CHO load | NA | NA | Dose-dependent reduction in postprandial blood glucose, with significant effects at doses of 5 g or greater |
| Tanaka | Healthy volunteers ( | Randomised, single blind crossover | 0, 1·8, 3·6 or 12·5 g PSI in 50 g chocolate | 50 g chocolate (carbohydrate content not provided) | NA | NA | NA | NA | Reduction in postprandial blood glucose and insulin with PSI compared with control |
| Nakamura | Healthy volunteer ( | Randomised, single-blind, placebo-controlled crossover | 0, 15, 25 or 35 g RSS | Total 50 g CHO-sucrose with part replaced by RSS | 3:7, 5:5 or 7:3 | Sucrose | NA | NA | Compared with 100 % sucrose control, 5:5 and 7:3 ratios gave significant reduction in iAUC for glucose and insulin. 3:7 ratio gave significant reduction in iAUC for insulin but not glucose |
| Healthy volunteers ( | 5 g RSS | Total 10 g CHO-sucrose with half replaced by RSS | 1:1 | Sucrose | Significant reduction in iAUC for glucose and insulin with 1:1 RSS:sucrose compared with sucrose alone | ||||
| Yamada | Healthy volunteers ( | Randomised, single blind, placebo-controlled crossover | Half sucrose replaced with RSS | Sucrose (no info on amount) | 1:1 | Sucrose | NA | NA | Significant reduction in iAUC for glucose compared with sucrose control |
| Healthy volunteers ( | Sucrose replaced with RSS | 3:10 and 5:5 | Sucrose | Significant reduction in iAUC for glucose compared with sucrose control | |||||
| Kwak | Healthy volunteers ( | Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover | 5 or 10 g TAG in drink before a meal | Standard meal, 356 kcal of which 60 % (53 g) CHO | 1:10 or 1:5 | Sucralose-erythritol drink | –3·3 mg/dl per h (1·32 % reduction) | NS | Significant reduction in iAUC only in hyperglycaemic subjects |
| Hyperglycaemic subjects (impaired fasting glucose or newly diagnosed T2D, | –15·4 mg/dl per h (4·0 % reduction) | < 0·05 | |||||||
| Wu | Healthy volunteers ( | Randomised, single-blind, placebo-controlled crossover | 40 g TAG–isomalt mixture (16 g TAG), 20 min before meal | Standard meal containing 63 g CHO | 1:4 | Sucralose preload | +0·5 mmol/l × min (0·25 % increase) | NS | Significant increase in iAUC with glucose preload, but no significant differences between TAG and control |
RS, rare sugar; PSI, d-psicose; CHO, carbohydrate; T2D, type 2 diabetes; OHA, oral hypoglycaemic agents; NA, not available; RSS, rare sugar syrup; TAG, d-tagatose; NS, not significant.
Difference in iAUC (incremental area under the curve) for glucose is the difference between rare sugar treatment group v. control group in 120 min following ingestion of carbohydrate load. P-values are for significance of difference as stated in the referenced article. Ages are given in years, and BMI is given in kg/m2. †Articles not available in English
The effects of in vivo PSI administration on the enzymes involved in lipid metabolism
| Enzyme | Role | Effect of PSI | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hepatic lipase | Hydrolysis of triacylglyceride | Increased activity |
( |
| Hepatic CPT1 | Catalyses the rate-limiting step in the | Increased expression or activity |
( |
| Hepatic ME | Catalyses conversion of malate to pyruvate, replenishing TCA cycle intermediates. Provides a source of NADPH for lipogenesis | Decreased activity |
( |
| Hepatic G6PDH | Provides a source of NADPH for lipogenesis | Decreased activity |
( |
| ACC | Catalyses the committed step in fatty acid synthesis | Reduced expression |
( |
| FAS | Catalyses the synthesis of long-chain fatty acids | No significant difference in activity |
( |
| Decreased activity or expression |
( | ||
| Adipose tissue CPT1 | Catalyses the rate-limiting step in the | Increased expression |
( |
| HSL | Hydrolysis of long-chain fatty acids inhibited by insulin | Increased expression |
( |
| PAP | Catalyses the conversion of phosphatidate to diacylglycerol, regulates TAG synthesis | Decreased activity |
( |
| LPL | Hydrolyses TAG in lipoproteins | Decreased expression |
( |
| ACAT | Catalyses key step in the mevalonate pathway, promotes cholesterol storage | Decreased activity |
( |
| PCSK9 | Binds to LDL receptor, reducing LDL-R recycling | Lower serum level |
( |
| HMGCR | Catalyses the rate-limiting step in cholesterol synthesis | Increased activity |
( |
CPT, carnitine palmitoyltransferase; ME, malic enzyme; G6PDH, glucose 6-phosphate dehydrogenase; ACC, acetyl-CoA carboxylase; FAS, fatty acid synthase; HSL, hormone-sensitive lipase; PAP, phosphatidate phosphatase; LPL, lipoprotein lipase; ACAT, acetyl-co-enzyme A acetyltransferase; PCSK9, proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9; HMGCR, 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-co-enzyme A reductase.
Fig. 3Outline of fatty acid metabolism in the liver (A) and adipose tissue (B), highlighting the effects of insulin and PSI. Green (+) or (-) indicates increased or decreased expression or activity stimulated by insulin. Red (+) or (-) indicates increased or decreased expression or activity as a result of PSI consumption. TG: triacylglycerol, VLDL: very low density lipoprotein, ACS: acyl-CoA synthase, ACC: acetyl-CoA carboxylase, CPT-1: carnitine-palmitoyl transferase 1, ME: malic enzyme, GLUT2: glucose transporter 2, GLUT4: glucose transporter 4, LPL: lipoprotein lipase. Diagrams adapted from Frayn, 2019(, p131 & 133.