The effect of small doses of fructose and allulose on postprandial glucose metabolism in type 2 diabetes: A double-blind, randomized, controlled, acute feeding, equivalence trial.

AIM: To assess and compare the effect of small doses of fructose and allulose on postprandial blood glucose regulation in type 2 diabetes. METHODS: A double-blind, multiple-crossover, randomized, controlled, acute feeding, equivalence trial in 24 participants with type 2 diabetes was conducted. Each participant was randomly assigned six treatments separated by >1-week washouts. Treatments consisted of fructose or allulose at 0 g (control), 5 g or 10 g added to a 75-g glucose solution. A standard 75-g oral glucose tolerance test protocol was followed with blood samples at -30, 0, 30, 60, 90 and 120 minutes. The primary outcome measure was plasma glucose incremental area under the curve (iAUC). RESULTS: Allulose significantly reduced plasma glucose iAUC by 8% at 10 g compared with 0 g (717.4 ± 38.3 vs. 777.5 ± 39.9 mmol × min/L, P = 0.015) with a linear dose response gradient between the reduction in plasma glucose iAUC and dose (P = 0.016). Allulose also significantly reduced several related secondary and exploratory outcome measures at 5 g (plasma glucose absolute mean and total AUC) and 10 g (plasma glucose absolute mean, absolute and incremental maximum concentration [Cmax ], and total AUC) (P < .0125). There was no effect of fructose at any dose. Although allulose showed statistically significant reductions in plasma glucose iAUC compared with fructose at 5 g, 10 g and pooled doses, these reductions were within the pre-specified equivalence margins of ±20%. CONCLUSION: Allulose, but not fructose, led to modest reductions in the postprandial blood glucose response to oral glucose in individuals with type 2 diabetes. There is a need for long-term randomized trials to confirm the sustainability of these improvements.

Weight management using meal replacements and cardiometabolic risk reduction in individuals with pre-diabetes and features of metabolic syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

This review synthesized the evidence from randomized controlled trials comparing the effect of meal replacements (MRs) as part of a weight loss intervention with conventional food-based weight loss diets on cardiometabolic risk in individuals with pre-diabetes and features of metabolic syndrome. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched through January 16, 2024. Data were pooled using the generic inverse variance method and expressed as mean difference [95% confidence intervals]. The overall certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. Ten trials (n = 1254) met the eligibility criteria. MRs led to greater reductions in body weight (-1.38 kg [-1.81, -0.95]), body mass index (BMI, -0.56 kg/m2 [-0.78, -0.34]), waist circumference (-1.17 cm [-1.93, -0.41]), HbA1c (-0.11% [-0.22, 0.00]), LDL-c (-0.18 mmol/L [-0.28, -0.08]), non-HDL-c (-0.17 mmol/L [-0.33, -0.01]), and systolic blood pressure (-2.22 mmHg [-4.20, -0.23]). The overall certainty of the evidence was low to moderate owing to imprecision and/or inconsistency. The available evidence suggests that incorporating MRs into a weight loss intervention leads to small important reductions in body weight, BMI, LDL-c, non-HDL-c, and systolic blood pressure, and trivial reductions in waist circumference and HbA1c, beyond that seen with conventional food-based weight loss diets.

The importance of molecular weight in determining the minimum dose of oat ß-glucan required to reduce the glycaemic response in healthy subjects without diabetes: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis.

To determine the minimum amount of oat ß-glucan (OBG) required to reduce glycaemic responses (MinDose), we conducted a systematic review and meta-regression analysis of acute, crossover, single-meal feeding trials that examined the effects of adding OBG or oat bran to a carbohydrate-containing test-meal versus a control test-meal containing an equivalent amount of available-carbohydrate (avCHO) from the same or similar source. Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched up to 18 August 2021. The primary outcome was glucose incremental-area-under-the-curve (iAUC). Secondary outcomes included insulin iAUC, and glucose and insulin incremental peak-rise (iPeak). Two independent reviewers extracted data. Results were expressed as ratio-of-means (RoM) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Linear associations were assessed by random effects meta-regression. MinDose was defined as the dose at which the upper 95% CI of the regression line cut the line of no effect (i.e., RoM = 1). Fifty-nine comparisons (n = 340) were included; 57 in healthy subjects without diabetes and two in subjects with diabetes; 24 high-MW (>1000 kg/mol), 22 medium-MW (300-1,000 kg/mol), and 13 low-MW (<300 kg/mol). In healthy subjects without diabetes the associations between OBG dose and glucose iAUC and iPeak were linear (non-linear p value >0.05). MinDoses for glucose iAUC for high-MW, medium-MW and low-MW OBG, respectively, were estimated to be 0.2 g, 2.2 g and 3.2 g per 30 g avCHO; MinDoses for glucose iPeak were less than those for iAUC. Insufficient data were available to assess MinDose for insulin, however, there was no evidence of a disproportionate increase in insulin. More high-quality trials are needed to establish MinDose in individuals with diabetes.

The Effect of Non-Nutritive Sweetened Beverages on Postprandial Glycemic and Endocrine Responses: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Background: There has been an emerging concern that non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) can increase the risk of cardiometabolic disease. Much of the attention has focused on acute metabolic and endocrine responses to NNS. To examine whether these mechanisms are operational under real-world scenarios, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of acute trials comparing the effects of non-nutritive sweetened beverages (NNS beverages) with water and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in humans. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were searched through to January 15, 2022. We included acute, single-exposure, randomized, and non-randomized, clinical trials in humans, regardless of health status. Three patterns of intake were examined: (1) uncoupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed alone without added energy or nutrients; (2) coupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed together with added energy and nutrients as carbohydrates; and (3) delayed coupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed as a preload prior to added energy and nutrients as carbohydrates. The primary outcome was a 2 h incremental area under the curve (iAUC) for blood glucose concentration. Secondary outcomes included 2 h iAUC for insulin, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), gastric inhibitory polypeptide (GIP), peptide YY (PYY), ghrelin, leptin, and glucagon concentrations. Network meta-analysis and confidence in the network meta-analysis (CINeMA) were conducted in R-studio and CINeMA, respectively. Results: Thirty-six trials involving 472 predominantly healthy participants were included. Trials examined a variety of single NNS (acesulfame potassium, aspartame, cyclamate, saccharin, stevia, and sucralose) and NNS blends (acesulfame potassium + aspartame, acesulfame potassium + sucralose, acesulfame potassium + aspartame + cyclamate, and acesulfame potassium + aspartame + sucralose), along with matched water/unsweetened controls and SSBs sweetened with various caloric sugars (glucose, sucrose, and fructose). In uncoupling interventions, NNS beverages (single or blends) had no effect on postprandial glucose, insulin, GLP-1, GIP, PYY, ghrelin, and glucagon responses similar to water controls (generally, low to moderate confidence), whereas SSBs sweetened with caloric sugars (glucose and sucrose) increased postprandial glucose, insulin, GLP-1, and GIP responses with no differences in postprandial ghrelin and glucagon responses (generally, low to moderate confidence). In coupling and delayed coupling interventions, NNS beverages had no postprandial glucose and endocrine effects similar to controls (generally, low to moderate confidence). Conclusions: The available evidence suggests that NNS beverages sweetened with single or blends of NNS have no acute metabolic and endocrine effects, similar to water. These findings provide support for NNS beverages as an alternative replacement strategy for SSBs in the acute postprandial setting.

Total Diet Replacement Within an Integrated Intensive Lifestyle Intervention for Remission of Type 2 Diabetes: Lessons From DiRECT.

The prognosis for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains concerning, yet its seriousness is often underestimated. T2D is a manifestation, in susceptible individuals, of the disease-process of obesity, and at diagnosis, 10-year survival rates for T2D are around 50%. Here, we will examine: (a) the role of weight loss in T2D, (b) use of total diet replacements (TDRs) to induce weight loss, (c) the Diabetes Remission Clinical Trial (DiRECT) protocol and key results, (d) other dietary interventions related to T2D remission, (e) remission in real life, and (f) future directions. Remission of short-duration T2D will usually require 10-15% body weight loss, and results from the DiRECT trial demonstrated that this can be achieved within routine care in nearly half of all people undertaking a supported, TDR-led behavioural weight management programme. In light of these findings, which have since been replicated in the Diabetes Intervention Accentuating Diet and Enhancing Metabolism (DIADEM-I) trial conducted in the Middle East and North Africa, it is now time to prioritize weight loss programmes for T2D remission from diagnosis, and with increasing acceptance and availability of digital healthcare, there is an opportunity to scale up delivery of remission programmes in a cost effective manner.

Meal Replacements for Weight-Related Complications in Type 2 Diabetes: What Is the State of the Evidence?

Comprehensive lifestyle management is a fundamental aspect of diabetes care. Clinical practice guidelines for the nutritional management of diabetes have evolved considerably over the last 25 years shifting from a focus on single nutrients to food- and dietary pattern-based recommendations. Use of meal replacements as a temporary short-term strategy to induce weight loss and then transitioning to a healthier dietary pattern (e.g., Mediterranean or Portfolio) for weight loss maintenance fits well with this new shift in focus of clinical practice guidelines. As adherence is the most important determinant for attaining the benefits of any diet, health professionals should recommend evidence-based dietary patterns (including meal replacements) that align best with the patient's values, preferences, and treatment goals.

Is There a Role for Diabetes-Specific Nutrition Formulas as Meal Replacements in Type 2 Diabetes?

Nutrition therapy plays an integral role in the prevention and management of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). A potential strategy is the utilization of diabetes-specific nutrition formulas (DSNFs) as meal replacements. In this article, we distinguish DSNFs from standard nutrition formulas, review the clinical data examining the effectiveness of DSNFs, and propose an evidence-based algorithm for incorporating DSNFs as part of nutrition therapy in T2D. DSNFs contain slowly-digestible carbohydrates, healthy fats (e.g., monounsaturated fatty acids), and specific micronutrients, which provide added benefits over standard nutrition formulas. In short- and long-term clinical trials, DSNFs demonstrate improvements in postprandial glycemic responses translating into sustainable benefits in long-term glycemic control (e.g., hemoglobin A1c and glycemic variability) and various cardiometabolic outcomes. To facilitate the delivery of DSNFs in a clinical setting, the transcultural diabetes nutrition algorithm can be utilized based on body weight (underweight, normal weight, or overweight) and level of glycemic control (controlled or uncontrolled).

Association of Low- and No-Calorie Sweetened Beverages as a Replacement for Sugar-Sweetened Beverages With Body Weight and Cardiometabolic Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: There are concerns that low- and no-calorie sweetened beverages (LNCSBs) do not have established benefits, with major dietary guidelines recommending the use of water and not LNCSBs to replace sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs). Whether LNCSB as a substitute can yield similar improvements in cardiometabolic risk factors vs water in their intended substitution for SSBs is unclear. Objective: To assess the association of LNCSBs (using 3 prespecified substitutions of LNCSBs for SSBs, water for SSBs, and LNCSBs for water) with body weight and cardiometabolic risk factors in adults with and without diabetes. Data Sources: Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception through December 26, 2021. Study Selection: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with at least 2 weeks of interventions comparing LNCSBs, SSBs, and/or water were included. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were extracted and risk of bias was assessed by 2 independent reviewers. A network meta-analysis was performed with data expressed as mean difference (MD) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% CIs. The GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) system was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was body weight. Secondary outcomes were other measures of adiposity, glycemic control, blood lipids, blood pressure, measures of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and uric acid. Results: A total of 17 RCTs with 24 trial comparisons were included, involving 1733 adults (mean [SD] age, 33.1 [6.6] years; 1341 women [77.4%]) with overweight or obesity who were at risk for or had diabetes. Overall, LNCSBs were a substitute for SSBs in 12 RCTs (n = 601 participants), water was a substitute for SSBs in 3 RCTs (n = 429), and LNCSBs were a substitute for water in 9 RCTs (n = 974). Substitution of LNCSBs for SSBs was associated with reduced body weight (MD, -1.06 kg; 95% CI, -1.71 to -0.41 kg), body mass index (MD, -0.32; 95% CI, -0.58 to -0.07), percentage of body fat (MD, -0.60%; 95% CI, -1.03% to -0.18%), and intrahepatocellular lipid (SMD, -0.42; 95% CI, -0.70 to -0.14). Substituting water for SSBs was not associated with any outcome. There was also no association found between substituting LNCSBs for water with any outcome except glycated hemoglobin A1c (MD, 0.21%; 95% CI, 0.02% to 0.40%) and systolic blood pressure (MD, -2.63 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.71 to -0.55 mm Hg). The certainty of the evidence was moderate (substitution of LNCSBs for SSBs) and low (substitutions of water for SSBs and LNCSBs for water) for body weight and was generally moderate for all other outcomes across all substitutions. Conclusions and Relevance: This systematic review and meta-analysis found that using LNCSBs as an intended substitute for SSBs was associated with small improvements in body weight and cardiometabolic risk factors without evidence of harm and had a similar direction of benefit as water substitution. The evidence supports the use of LNCSBs as an alternative replacement strategy for SSBs over the moderate term in adults with overweight or obesity who are at risk for or have diabetes.

The effect of oat ß-glucan on postprandial blood glucose and insulin responses: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

To determine the effect of oat ß­glucan (OBG) on acute glucose and insulin responses and identify significant effect modifiers we searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases through October 27, 2020 for acute, crossover, controlled feeding trials investigating the effect of adding OBG (concentrate or oat-bran) to carbohydrate-containing test-meals compared to comparable or different carbohydrate-matched control-meals in humans regardless of health status. The primary outcome was glucose incremental area-under-the-curve (iAUC). Secondary outcomes were insulin iAUC, and glucose and insulin incremental peak-rise (iPeak). Two reviewers extracted the data and assessed risk-of-bias and certainty-of-evidence (GRADE). Data were pooled using generic inverse-variance with random-effects model and expressed as ratio-of-means with [95% CIs]. We included 103 trial comparisons (N = 538). OBG reduced glucose iAUC and iPeak by 23% (0.77 [0.74, 0.81]) and 28% (0.72 [0.64, 0.76]) and insulin by 22% (0.78 [0.72, 0.85]) and 24% (0.76 [0.65, 0.88]), respectively. Dose, molecular-weight, and comparator were significant effect modifiers of glucose iAUC and iPeak. Significant linear dose-response relationships were observed for all outcomes. OBG molecular-weight >300 kg/mol significantly reduced glucose iAUC and iPeak, whereas molecular-weight <300 kg/mol did not. Reductions in glucose iAUC (27 vs 20%, p = 0.03) and iPeak (39 vs 25%, p < 0.01) were significantly larger with different vs comparable control-meals. Outcomes were similar in participants with and without diabetes. All outcomes had high certainty-of-evidence. In conclusion, current evidence indicates that adding OBG to carbohydrate-containing meals reduces glycaemic and insulinaemic responses. However, the magnitude of glucose reduction depends on OBG dose, molecular-weight, and the comparator.

Effect of a Snack Bar Optimized to Reduce Alcohol Bioavailability: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial in Healthy Individuals.

Alcohol intoxication impairs judgment and reaction times and the level of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is highly correlated with accidents and injury. We hypothesized that a food optimized to delay gastric emptying, a reduced alcohol bioavailability bar (RABB), would decrease postprandial BAC and alcohol bioavailability with greater caloric-efficiency than control foods. Therefore, we evaluated the RABB in a randomized, crossover trial in 21 overnight fasted healthy adults (10 male, 11 female). Just before consuming a moderate dose of alcohol (0.3-0.35 g/kg body weight), participants ate either (1) no food (NF, 0 kcal), (2) the RABB (210 kcal), (3) a savory snack mix (SSM, 210 kcal), or (4) a multicomponent meal (MCM, 635 kcal) and their BAC was measured over 90 minutes using a breathalyzer, the primary endpoint being peak BAC (pBAC). pBACs were analyzed by repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) (F = 107.5, P < .0001) with the differences between means assessed using Tukey's honestly significant difference test. The pBAC of each group was different (P < .001) from all other groups (NF = 0.064 ± 0.003, SSM = 0.047 ± 0.002, RABB = 0.031 ± 0.002, MCM = 0.020 ± 0.002%; mean ± standard error of the mean). Furthermore, the bioavailability of alcohol over 90 minutes (BA90) was reduced compared to the NF group by similar margins (SSM = 22.0 ± 2.2, RABB = 45.0 ± 3.8, MCM = 67.9 ± 3.1%) with the mean BA90 of each group different from all other groups (P < .001). Compared to the NF condition, the average reduction of pBAC per 100 calories of food consumed was higher for the RABB (24.0%) than either the SSM (11.8%) or the MCM (10.7%). This study demonstrates that the RABB can reduce both pBAC and alcohol bioavailability with high caloric-efficiency.

Effect of fructose and its epimers on postprandial carbohydrate metabolism: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

AIMS: To synthesize the evidence of the effect of small doses (≤30-g/meal) of fructose and its epimers (allulose, tagatose, and sorbose) on the postprandial glucose and insulin response to carbohydrate-containing meals. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through to April 9, 2019. We included randomized (RCTs) and non-randomized acute, single-meal, controlled feeding trials that added ≤30-g of fructose or its epimers either prior to or with a carbohydrate-containing meal compared with the same meal alone. Outcomes included the incremental area under the curve (iAUC) for glucose and insulin, the Matsuda Insulin Sensitivity Index, and the Early Insulin Secretion Index. Data were expressed as ratio of means (RoM) with 95% CIs and pooled using the inverse variance method. The overall certainty of the evidence was evaluated using GRADE. RESULTS: Forty trial comparisons (n = 400) were included (none for sorbose). Allulose significantly reduced the postprandial iAUC glucose response by 10% (0.90 [0.84 to 0.96], P < 0.01). Tagatose significantly reduced the postprandial iAUC insulin response by 25% (0.75 [0.62 to 0.91], P < 0.01) and showed a non-significant 3% reduction in the postprandial iAUC glucose response (0.97 [0.94 to 1.00], P = 0.07). There was no effect of fructose on any outcome. The certainty of the evidence was graded as low to moderate for fructose, moderate for allulose, and low for tagatose. CONCLUSIONS: Small doses of allulose and tagatose, but not fructose, lead to modest improvements on postprandial glucose and insulin regulation. There is a need for long-term RCTs to confirm the sustainability of these improvements.

The Effect of Liquid Meal Replacements on Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in Overweight/Obese Individuals With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: The evidence for liquid meal replacements in diabetes has not been summarized. Our objective was to synthesize the evidence of the effect of liquid meal replacements on cardiometabolic risk factors in overweight/obese individuals with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data sources included MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library through 10 December 2018. We included randomized trials of ≥2 weeks assessing the effect of liquid meal replacements in weight loss diets compared with traditional weight loss diets on cardiometabolic risk factors in overweight/obese subjects with type 2 diabetes. Two independent reviewers extracted relevant data and assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled using the inverse variance method. The overall certainty of the evidence was evaluated using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation). RESULTS: Nine trial comparisons (N = 961 [median follow-up 24 weeks]) met eligibility criteria. Mean differences were for body weight -2.37 kg (95% CI -3.30 to -1.44), BMI -0.87 kg/m2 (-1.31 to -0.42), body fat -1.66% (-2.17 to -1.15), waist circumference -2.24 cm (-3.72 to -0.77), HbA1c -0.43% (-0.66 to -0.19) (-4.7 mmol/mol [-7.2 to -2.1]), fasting glucose -0.63 mmol/L (-0.99 to -0.27), fasting insulin -11.83 pmol/L (-23.11 to -0.54), systolic blood pressure -4.97mmHg (-7.32 to -2.62), and diastolic blood pressure -1.98 mmHg (-3.05 to -0.91). There was no effect on blood lipids. The overall certainty of the evidence was low to moderate owing to imprecision and/or inconsistency. CONCLUSIONS: Liquid meal replacements in weight loss diets lead to modest reductions in body weight, BMI, and systolic blood pressure, and reductions of marginal clinical significance in body fat, waist circumference, HbA1c, fasting glucose, fasting insulin, and diastolic blood pressure. More high-quality trials are needed to improve the certainty in our estimates.

The Effect of Small Doses of Fructose and Its Epimers on Glycemic Control: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Feeding Trials.

Objective: Contrary to the concerns that fructose may have adverse metabolic effects, an emerging literature has shown that small doses (≤10 g/meal) of fructose and its low-caloric epimers (allulose, tagatose, and sorbose) decrease the glycemic response to high glycemic index meals. Whether these acute reductions manifest as sustainable improvements in glycemic control is unclear. Our objective was to synthesize the evidence from controlled feeding trials that assessed the effect of small doses of fructose and its low-caloric epimers on glycemic control. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library through April 18, 2018. We included controlled feeding trials of ≥1 week that investigated the effect of small doses (≤50 g/day or ≤10% of total energy intake/day) of fructose and its low-caloric epimers on HbA1c, fasting glucose, and fasting insulin. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Data were pooled using the generic inverse variance method and expressed as mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran Q statistic and quantified using the I² statistic. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) assessed the certainty of the evidence. Results: We identified 14 trial comparisons (N = 337) of the effect of fructose in individuals with and without diabetes, 3 trial comparisons (N = 138) of the effect of allulose in individuals without diabetes, 3 trial comparisons (N = 376) of the effect of tagatose mainly in individuals with type 2 diabetes, and 0 trial comparisons of the effect of sorbose. Small doses of fructose and tagatose significantly reduced HbA1c (MD = -0.38% (95% CI: -0.64%, -0.13%); MD = -0.20% (95% CI: -0.34%, -0.06%)) and fasting glucose (MD = -0.13 mmol/L (95% CI: -0.24 mmol/L, -0.03 mmol/L)); MD = -0.30 mmol/L (95% CI: -0.57 mmol/L, -0.04 mmol/L)) without affecting fasting insulin (p > 0.05). Small doses of allulose did not have a significant effect on HbA1c and fasting insulin (p > 0.05), while the reduction in fasting glucose was of borderline significance (p = 0.05). The certainty of the evidence of the effect of small doses of fructose and allulose on HbA1c, fasting glucose, and fasting insulin was graded as low. The certainty of the evidence of the effect of tagatose on HbA1c, fasting glucose, and fasting insulin was graded as moderate. Conclusions: Our results indicate that small doses of fructose and tagatose may improve glycemic control over the long term. There is a need for long-term randomized controlled trials for all four sugars to improve our certainty in the estimates.

A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled, Acute Feeding Equivalence Trial of Small, Catalytic Doses of Fructose and Allulose on Postprandial Blood Glucose Metabolism in Healthy Participants: The Fructose and Allulose Catalytic Effects (FACE) Trial.

Recent literature suggests that catalytic doses (≤10 g/meal or 36 g/day) of D-fructose and D-allulose may reduce postprandial blood glucose responses to carbohydrate loads in people with and without type 2 diabetes by inducing glycogen synthesis. To assess the effect of small single doses of fructose and allulose on postprandial blood glucose regulation in response to a 75 g-oral glucose tolerance test (75 g-OGTT) in healthy individuals, we conducted an acute randomized, crossover, equivalence trial in healthy adults. Each participant randomly received six treatments, separated by a minimum one-week washout. Treatments consisted of a 75 g-OGTT with the addition of fructose or allulose at 0 g (control), 5 g or 10 g. A standard 75 g-OGTT protocol was followed with blood samples at −30, 0, 30, 60, 90, 120 min. The primary outcome was the difference in plasma glucose incremental area under the curve (iAUC). A total of 27 participants underwent randomization with data available from 25 participants. Small doses of fructose or allulose did not show a significant effect on plasma glucose iAUC or other secondary markers of postprandial blood glucose regulation in response to a 75 g-OGTT in healthy individuals. These results were limited by the low power to detect a significant difference, owing to greater than expected intra-individual coefficient of variation (CV) in plasma glucose iAUC. Overall, we failed to confirm the catalytic effects of small doses of fructose and allulose in healthy individuals. Future trials may consider recruiting larger sample sizes of healthy individuals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier, NCT02459834.