Effect of Meal Acceptability on Postprandial Appetite Scores and Hormones of Male Participants with Varied Adiposity

Differences in gastrointestinal hormones and appetite ratings between individuals with and without obesity-A systematic review and meta-analysis

Determining if gastrointestinal (GI) hormone response to food intake differs between individuals with, and without, obesity may improve our understanding of obesity pathophysiology. A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies assessing the concentrations of GI hormones, as well as appetite ratings, following a test meal, in individuals with and without obesity was undertaken. Systematic searches were conducted in the databases MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov. A total of 7514 unique articles were retrieved, 115 included in the systematic review, and 70 in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis compared estimated standardized mean difference in GI hormones' concentration, as well as appetite ratings, between individuals with and without obesity. Basal and postprandial total ghrelin concentrations were lower in individuals with obesity compared with controls, and this was reflected by lower postprandial hunger ratings in the former. Individuals with obesity had a lower postprandial concentration of total peptide YY compared with controls, but no significant differences were found for glucagon-like peptide 1, cholecystokinin, or other appetite ratings. A large methodological and statistical heterogeneity among studies was found. More comprehensive studies are needed to understand if the differences observed are a cause or a consequence of obesity.

Acute glycemic and insulinemic effects of low-energy sweeteners: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

It has been suggested that low-energy sweeteners (LES) may be associated with an increased risk of metabolic diseases, possibly due to stimulation of glucose-responsive mechanisms.

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of human intervention studies examining the acute effect of LES intake on postprandial glucose (PPG) and postprandial insulin (PPI) responses, in order to comprehensively and objectively quantify these relations.

METHODS

We systematically searched the Medline, OVID FSTA, and SCOPUS databases until January 2020. Randomized controlled trials comparing acute postprandial effects on PPG and/or PPI after exposure to LES, either alone, with a meal, or with other nutrient-containing preloads to the same intervention without LES were eligible for inclusion. PPG and PPI responses were calculated as mean incremental area under the curve divided by time. Meta-analyses were performed using random effects models with inverse variance weighing.

RESULTS

Twenty-six papers (34 PPG trials and 29 PPI trials) were included. There were no reports of statistically significant differences in the effects of LES on PPG and PPI responses compared with control interventions. Pooled effects of LES intake on the mean change difference in PPG and PPI were -0.02 mmol/L (95% CI: -0.09, 0.05) and -2.39 pmol/L (95% CI: -11.83, 7.05), respectively. The results did not appreciably differ by the type or dose of LES consumed, cointervention type, or fasting glucose and insulin levels. Among patients with type 2 diabetes, the mean change difference indicated a smaller PPG response after exposure to LES compared with the control (-0.3 mmol/L; 95% CI: -0.53, -0.07).

CONCLUSIONS

Ingestion of LES, administered alone or in combination with a nutrient-containing preload, has no acute effects on the mean change in postprandial glycemic or insulinemic responses compared with a control intervention. Apart from a small beneficial effect on PPG (-0.3 mmol/L) in studies enrolling patients with type 2 diabetes, the effects did not differ by type or dose of LES, or fasting glucose or insulin levels. This review and meta-analysis was registered at PROSPERO as CRD42018099608.