Dataset Information

Differential effects of fructose versus glucose on brain and appetitive responses to food cues and decisions for food rewards.

ABSTRACT: Prior studies suggest that fructose compared with glucose may be a weaker suppressor of appetite, and neuroimaging research shows that food cues trigger greater brain reward responses in a fasted relative to a fed state. We sought to determine the effects of ingesting fructose versus glucose on brain, hormone, and appetitive responses to food cues and food-approach behavior. Twenty-four healthy volunteers underwent two functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) sessions with ingestion of either fructose or glucose in a double-blinded, random-order cross-over design. fMRI was performed while participants viewed images of high-calorie foods and nonfood items using a block design. After each block, participants rated hunger and desire for food. Participants also performed a decision task in which they chose between immediate food rewards and delayed monetary bonuses. Hormones were measured at baseline and 30 and 60 min after drink ingestion. Ingestion of fructose relative to glucose resulted in smaller increases in plasma insulin levels and greater brain reactivity to food cues in the visual cortex (in whole-brain analysis) and left orbital frontal cortex (in region-of-interest analysis). Parallel to the neuroimaging findings, fructose versus glucose led to greater hunger and desire for food and a greater willingness to give up long-term monetary rewards to obtain immediate high-calorie foods. These findings suggest that ingestion of fructose relative to glucose results in greater activation of brain regions involved in attention and reward processing and may promote feeding behavior.

SUBMITTER: Luo S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4443321 | biostudies-literature | 2015 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Differential effects of fructose versus glucose on brain and appetitive responses to food cues and decisions for food rewards.

Luo Shan S Monterosso John R JR Sarpelleh Kayan K Page Kathleen A KA

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 20150504 20

Prior studies suggest that fructose compared with glucose may be a weaker suppressor of appetite, and neuroimaging research shows that food cues trigger greater brain reward responses in a fasted relative to a fed state. We sought to determine the effects of ingesting fructose versus glucose on brain, hormone, and appetitive responses to food cues and food-approach behavior. Twenty-four healthy volunteers underwent two functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) sessions with ingestion of eithe ...[more]

PMID: 25941364

Similar Datasets

Project description:Cephalic phase responses (CPRs) are conditioned anticipatory physiological responses to food cues. They occur before nutrient absorption and are hypothesized to be important for satiation and glucose homeostasis. Cephalic phase insulin responses (CPIRs) and pancreatic polypeptide responses (CPPPRs) are found consistently in animals, but human literature is inconclusive. We performed a systematic review of human studies to determine the magnitude and onset time of these CPRs. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were used to develop a search strategy. The terms included in the search strategy were cephalic or hormone response or endocrine response combined with insulin and pancreatic polypeptide (PP). The following databases were searched: Scopus (Elsevier), Science Direct, PubMed, Google Scholar, and The Cochrane Library. Initially, 582 original research articles were found, 50 were included for analysis. An insulin increase (≥1μIU/mL) was observed in 41% of the treatments (total n = 119). In 22% of all treatments the increase was significant from baseline. The median (IQR) insulin increase was 2.5 (1.6-4.5) μIU/mL, 30% above baseline at 5± 3 min after food cue onset (based on study treatments that induced ≥1 μIU/mL insulin increase). A PP increase (>10 pg/mL) was found in 48% of the treatments (total n = 42). In 21% of the treatments, the increase was significant from baseline. The median (IQR) PP increase was 99 (26-156) pg/mL, 68% above baseline at 9± 4 min after food cue onset (based on study treatments that induced ≥1 μIU/mL insulin increase). In conclusion, CPIRs are small compared with spontaneous fluctuations. Although CPPPRs are of a larger magnitude, both show substantial variation in magnitude and onset time. We found little evidence for CPIR or CPPPR affecting functional outcomes, that is, satiation and glucose homeostasis. Therefore, CPRs do not seem to be biologically meaningful in daily life.

Project description:Introduction/purposeDietary restriction (DIET) and aerobic exercise (AEX) interventions may impact energy balance differently. Our aim was to describe the effects of weight loss interventions via DIET or AEX on measures of energy balance.MethodsAdults with overweight or obesity were randomized to 12 weeks of DIET or AEX with similar calorie deficit goals. A study day was conducted before and after the intervention to assess subjective and hormonal (ghrelin, peptide-YY, glucagon-like peptide-1) appetite responses to a control meal, ad libitum energy intake (EI) at a single meal, and over three days of free-living conditions and eating behavior traits. Resting metabolic rate (RMR) was measured with indirect calorimetry and adjusted for body composition measured by dual X-ray absorptiometry. Non-exercise activity was measured using accelerometers.ResultsForty-four individuals were included (age: 37 ± 9 years, body mass index: 30.6 ± 3.1 kg/m2). Both interventions resulted in weight and fat mass loss. The DIET group lost fat-free mass, although differences between groups were not significant (DIET: -1.2 ± 1.7 kg, p<0.001; AEX: 0.4 ± 1.5 kg, p=0.186; p=0.095 interaction). There were no differences in RMR after body composition adjustment. Both interventions were associated with an increase in dietary restraint (DIET: 4.9 ± 1.2, AEX: 2.8 ± 0.7; p<0.001 in both groups). Hunger decreased with DIET (-1.4 ± 0.5, p=0.003), and disinhibition decreased with AEX (-1.5 ± 0.5, p<0.001), although these changes were not different between groups (i.e., no group × time interaction). No other differences in appetite, EI, or non-exercise physical activity were observed within or between groups.ConclusionsAEX did not result in compensatory alterations in appetite, ad libitum EI, or physical activity, despite assumed increased energy expenditure. Modest evidence also suggested that disinhibition and hunger may be differentially impacted by weight loss modality.

Dataset Information

Differential effects of fructose versus glucose on brain and appetitive responses to food cues and decisions for food rewards.

Publications

Differential effects of fructose versus glucose on brain and appetitive responses to food cues and decisions for food rewards.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets