Almiron-Roig Eva, Navas-Carretero Santiago, Castelnuovo Gabriele, Kjølbæk Louise, Romo-Hualde Ana, Normand Mie, Maloney Niamh, Hardman Charlotte A, Hodgkins Charo E, Moshoyiannis Hariklia, Finlayson Graham, Scott Corey, Raats Monique M, Harrold Joanne A, Raben Anne, Halford Jason C G, Martínez J Alfredo
University of Navarra, Faculty of Pharmacy and Nutrition, Dept. of Food Science and Physiology, Pamplona, Spain; University of Navarra, Center for Nutrition Research, Pamplona, Spain; Navarra Institute for Health Research (IdiSNa), Pamplona, Spain.
University of Navarra, Faculty of Pharmacy and Nutrition, Dept. of Food Science and Physiology, Pamplona, Spain; University of Navarra, Center for Nutrition Research, Pamplona, Spain; Navarra Institute for Health Research (IdiSNa), Pamplona, Spain; Spanish Biomedical Research Centre in Physiopathology of Obesity and Nutrition (CIBERobn), Institute of Health Carlos III, Madrid, Spain.
Appetite. 2023 May 1;184:106515. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2023.106515. Epub 2023 Feb 26.
Project SWEET examined the barriers and facilitators to the use of non-nutritive sweeteners and sweetness enhancers (hereafter "S&SE") alongside potential risks/benefits for health and sustainability. The Beverages trial was a double-blind multi-centre, randomised crossover trial within SWEET evaluating the acute impact of three S&SE blends (plant-based and alternatives) vs. a sucrose control on glycaemic response, food intake, appetite sensations and safety after a carbohydrate-rich breakfast meal. The blends were: mogroside V and stevia RebM; stevia RebA and thaumatin; and sucralose and acesulfame-potassium (ace-K). At each 4 h visit, 60 healthy volunteers (53% male; all with overweight/obesity) consumed a 330 mL beverage with either an S&SE blend (0 kJ) or 8% sucrose (26 g, 442 kJ), shortly followed by a standardised breakfast (∼2600 or 1800 kJ with 77 or 51 g carbohydrates, depending on sex). All blends reduced the 2-h incremental area-under-the-curve (iAUC) for blood insulin (p < 0.001 in mixed-effects models), while the stevia RebA and sucralose blends reduced the glucose iAUC (p < 0.05) compared with sucrose. Post-prandial levels of triglycerides plus hepatic transaminases did not differ across conditions (p > 0.05 for all). Compared with sucrose, there was a 3% increase in LDL-cholesterol after stevia RebA-thaumatin (p < 0.001 in adjusted models); and a 2% decrease in HDL-cholesterol after sucralose-ace-K (p < 0.01). There was an impact of blend on fullness and desire to eat ratings (both p < 0.05) and sucralose-acesulfame K induced higher prospective intake vs sucrose (p < 0.001 in adjusted models), but changes were of a small magnitude and did not translate into energy intake differences over the next 24 h. Gastro-intestinal symptoms for all beverages were mostly mild. In general, responses to a carbohydrate-rich meal following consumption of S&SE blends with stevia or sucralose were similar to sucrose.
“甜蜜计划”研究了使用非营养性甜味剂和甜味增强剂（以下简称“S&SE”）的障碍与促进因素，以及其对健康和可持续性的潜在风险/益处。饮料试验是“甜蜜计划”中的一项双盲多中心随机交叉试验，评估三种S&SE混合物（植物基和替代物）与蔗糖对照对富含碳水化合物早餐后血糖反应、食物摄入量、食欲感觉和安全性的急性影响。这些混合物分别是：罗汉果甜苷V和甜叶菊莱苞迪苷M；甜叶菊莱苞迪苷A和索马甜；以及三氯蔗糖和乙酰磺胺酸钾（安赛蜜）。在每次4小时的访视中，60名健康志愿者（53%为男性；均超重/肥胖）饮用330毫升含有S&SE混合物（0千焦）或8%蔗糖（26克，442千焦）的饮料，随后不久食用标准化早餐（根据性别，约2600或1800千焦，含77或51克碳水化合物）。所有混合物均降低了血液胰岛素的2小时增量曲线下面积（iAUC）（混合效应模型中p<0.001），而与蔗糖相比，甜叶菊莱苞迪苷A和三氯蔗糖混合物降低了葡萄糖iAUC（p<0.05）。餐后甘油三酯加肝转氨酶水平在各条件下无差异（所有p>0.05）。与蔗糖相比，甜叶菊莱苞迪苷A-索马甜后低密度脂蛋白胆固醇升高3%（校正模型中p<0.001）；三氯蔗糖-安赛蜜后高密度脂蛋白胆固醇降低2%（p<0.01）。混合物对饱腹感和进食欲望评分有影响（均p<0.05），三氯蔗糖-乙酰磺胺酸钾诱导的预期摄入量高于蔗糖（校正模型中p<0.001），但变化幅度较小，且在接下来的24小时内未转化为能量摄入差异。所有饮料的胃肠道症状大多较轻。总体而言，食用含甜叶菊或三氯蔗糖的S&SE混合物后对富含碳水化合物餐的反应与蔗糖相似。
