Rationale, Design and Participants Baseline Characteristics of a Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial of the Effect of Replacing SSBs with NSBs versus Water on Glucose Tolerance, Gut Microbiome and Cardiometabolic Risk in Overweight or Obese Adult SSB Consumer: Strategies to Oppose SUGARS with Non-Nutritive Sweeteners or Water (STOP Sugars NOW) Trial and Ectopic Fat Sub-Study.

BACKGROUND: Health authorities are near universal in their recommendation to replace sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) with water. Non-nutritive sweetened beverages (NSBs) are not as widely recommended as a replacement strategy due to a lack of established benefits and concerns they may induce glucose intolerance through changes in the gut microbiome. The STOP Sugars NOW trial aims to assess the effect of the substitution of NSBs (the "intended substitution") versus water (the "standard of care substitution") for SSBs on glucose tolerance and microbiota diversity. DESIGN AND METHODS: The STOP Sugars NOW trial (NCT03543644) is a pragmatic, "head-to-head", open-label, crossover, randomized controlled trial conducted in an outpatient setting. Participants were overweight or obese adults with a high waist circumference who regularly consumed ≥1 SSBs daily. Each participant completed three 4-week treatment phases (usual SSBs, matched NSBs, or water) in random order, which were separated by ≥4-week washout. Blocked randomization was performed centrally by computer with allocation concealment. Outcome assessment was blinded; however, blinding of participants and trial personnel was not possible. The two primary outcomes are oral glucose tolerance (incremental area under the curve) and gut microbiota beta-diversity (weighted UniFrac distance). Secondary outcomes include related markers of adiposity and glucose and insulin regulation. Adherence was assessed by objective biomarkers of added sugars and non-nutritive sweeteners and self-report intake. A subset of participants was included in an Ectopic Fat sub-study in which the primary outcome is intrahepatocellular lipid (IHCL) by 1H-MRS. Analyses will be according to the intention to treat principle. BASELINE RESULTS: Recruitment began on 1 June 2018, and the last participant completed the trial on 15 October 2020. We screened 1086 participants, of whom 80 were enrolled and randomized in the main trial and 32 of these were enrolled and randomized in the Ectopic Fat sub-study. The participants were predominantly middle-aged (mean age 41.8 ± SD 13.0 y) and had obesity (BMI of 33.7 ± 6.8 kg/m2) with a near equal ratio of female: male (51%:49%). The average baseline SSB intake was 1.9 servings/day. SSBs were replaced with matched NSB brands, sweetened with either a blend of aspartame and acesulfame-potassium (95%) or sucralose (5%). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline characteristics for both the main and Ectopic Fat sub-study meet our inclusion criteria and represent a group with overweight or obesity, with characteristics putting them at risk for type 2 diabetes. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed open-access medical journals and provide high-level evidence to inform clinical practice guidelines and public health policy for the use NSBs in sugars reduction strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03543644.

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.

Important food sources of fructose-containing sugars and adiposity: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled feeding trials.

BACKGROUND: Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) providing excess energy increase adiposity. The effect of other food sources of sugars at different energy control levels is unclear. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect of food sources of fructose-containing sugars by energy control on adiposity. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched through April 2022 for controlled trials ≥2 wk. We prespecified 4 trial designs by energy control: substitution (energy-matched replacement of sugars), addition (energy from sugars added), subtraction (energy from sugars subtracted), and ad libitum (energy from sugars freely replaced). Independent authors extracted data. The primary outcome was body weight. Secondary outcomes included other adiposity measures. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: We included 169 trials (255 trial comparisons, n = 10,357) assessing 14 food sources at 4 energy control levels over a median 12 wk. Total fructose-containing sugars increased body weight (MD: 0.28 kg; 95% CI: 0.06, 0.50 kg; PMD = 0.011) in addition trials and decreased body weight (MD: -0.96 kg; 95% CI: -1.78, -0.14 kg; PMD = 0.022) in subtraction trials with no effect in substitution or ad libitum trials. There was interaction/influence by food sources on body weight: substitution trials [fruits decreased; added nutritive sweeteners and mixed sources (with SSBs) increased]; addition trials [dried fruits, honey, fruits (≤10%E), and 100% fruit juice (≤10%E) decreased; SSBs, fruit drink, and mixed sources (with SSBs) increased]; subtraction trials [removal of mixed sources (with SSBs) decreased]; and ad libitum trials [mixed sources (with/without SSBs) increased]. GRADE scores were generally moderate. Results were similar across secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Energy control and food sources mediate the effect of fructose-containing sugars on adiposity. The evidence provides a good indication that excess energy from sugars (particularly SSBs at high doses ≥20%E or 100 g/d) increase adiposity, whereas their removal decrease adiposity. Most other food sources had no effect, with some showing decreases (particularly fruits at lower doses ≤10%E or 50 g/d). This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02558920 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02558920).

Gastric Emptying of Maltodextrin versus Phytoglycogen Carbohydrate Solutions in Healthy Volunteers: A Quasi-Experimental Study.

Preoperative carbohydrate beverages have been shown to be beneficial in improving patient outcomes. There have been several investigations into the safety of maltodextrin as a preoperative carbohydrate. Although alternative preoperative carbohydrate sources have been proposed, there have been few investigations into the safety and gastric emptying of novel carbohydrate beverages. The present study aimed to compare the gastric emptying of phytoglycogen and maltodextrin to evaluate safety for use as presurgical carbohydrate beverages. In a quasi-experimental design, ten healthy participants orally consumed either a 12.5% maltodextrin or a 12.5% phytoglycogen solution. Gamma scintigraphy was used to evaluate gastric emptying at baseline at 45, 90, and 120 min. Serum insulin and serum glucose were measured at baseline at 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, and 120 min. Gastric volume was significantly lower in the phytoglycogen group at 45 min (p = 0.01) and 90 min (p = 0.01), but this difference lost significance at 120 min (p = 0.17). There were no significant differences between treatments for serum insulin or serum glucose at any time point. This study indicates that the gastric emptying of phytoglycogen is comparable to maltodextrin at 120 min after ingestion, opening the opportunity for the study of alternative carbohydrates for utilization as preoperative carbohydrates.

Relation of Change or Substitution of Low- and No-Calorie Sweetened Beverages With Cardiometabolic Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies.

BACKGROUND: Adverse associations of low- and no-calorie sweetened beverages (LNCSB) with cardiometabolic outcomes in observational studies may be explained by reverse causality and residual confounding. PURPOSE: To address these limitations we used change analyses of repeated measures of intake and substitution analyses to synthesize the association of LNCSB with cardiometabolic outcomes. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to 10 June 2021 for prospective cohort studies with ≥1 year of follow-up duration in adults. STUDY SELECTION: Outcomes included changes in clinical measures of adiposity, risk of overweight/obesity, metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes (T2D), cardiovascular disease, and total mortality. DATA EXTRACTION: Two independent reviewers extracted data, assessed study quality, and assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE. Data were pooled with a random-effects model and expressed as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 14 cohorts (416,830 participants) met the eligibility criteria. Increase in LNCSB intake was associated with lower weight (5 cohorts, 130,020 participants; MD -0.008 kg/year [95% CI -0.014, -0.002]). Substitution of LNCSB for sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) was associated with lower weight (three cohorts, 165,579 participants; MD, -0.12 [-0.14, -0.10,] kg/y) and lower incidence of obesity (OB) (one cohort, 15,765 participants; RR 0.88 [95% CI 0.88, 0.89]), coronary heart disease (six cohorts, 233,676 participants; 0.89 [0.81, 0.98]), cardiovascular disease mortality (one cohort, 118,363 participants; 0.95 [0.90, 0.99]), and total mortality (one cohort, 118,363 participants; 0.96 [0.94, 0.98]) with no adverse associations across other outcomes. Substitution of water for SSB showed lower weight (three cohorts, 165,579 participants; MD -0.10 kg/year [-0.13, -0.06]), lower waist circumference (one cohort, 173 participants; -2.71 cm/year [-4.27, -1.15]) and percent body fat (one cohort, 173 participants; -1.51% per year [-2.61, -0.42]), and lower incidence of OB (one cohort, 15,765 participants; RR 0.85 [0.75, 0.97]) and T2D (three cohorts, 281,855 participants; 0.96 [0.94, 0.98]). Substitution of LNCSB for water showed no adverse associations. LIMITATIONS: The evidence was low to very low certainty owing to downgrades for imprecision, indirectness, and/or inconsistency. CONCLUSIONS: LNCSB were not associated with cardiometabolic harm in analyses that model the exposure as change or substitutions. The available evidence provides some indication that LNCSB in their intended substitution for SSB may be associated with cardiometabolic benefit, comparable with the standard of care, water.

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.