Suppression of Energy Intake by Intragastric l-Tryptophan in Lean and Obese Men: Relations with Appetite Perceptions and Circulating Cholecystokinin and Tryptophan.

BACKGROUND: l-Tryptophan reduces energy intake in healthy men. The underlying mechanisms, including appetite, plasma cholecystokinin (CCK), tryptophan (Trp), and the ratio of Trp to large neutral amino acids (Trp:LNAAs ratio), and whether responses differ in lean and obese individuals, are uncertain. OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the effects of intragastric Trp on energy intake (primary outcome) and their potential mechanisms, pre- and postmeal, in lean men and those with obesity. METHODS: Twelve lean men [mean ± SD age: 30 ± 3 y; BMI (in kg/m2): 23 ± 1] and 13 men with obesity (mean ± SD age: 31 ± 3 y; BMI: 33 ± 1) received, on 3 separate occasions, in double-blind, randomized order, 3 g ("Trp-3") or 1.5 g ("Trp-1.5") Trp, or control ("C"), intragastrically, 30 min before a buffet-meal. Energy intake from the buffet-meal, hunger, fullness, and plasma CCK and amino acid concentrations were measured in response to Trp alone and for 2 h postmeal. Data were analyzed using maximum likelihood mixed-effects models, with treatment, group, and treatment-by-group interaction as fixed effects. RESULTS: Trp alone increased plasma CCK, Trp, and the Trp:LNAAs ratio (all P < 0.001), with no difference between groups. Trp suppressed energy intake (P < 0.001), with no difference between groups (lean, C: 1085 ± 102 kcal, Trp-1.5: 1009 ± 92 kcal, Trp-3: 868 ± 104 kcal; obese, C: 1249 ± 98 kcal, Trp-1.5: 1217 ± 90 kcal, Trp-3: 1012 ± 100 kcal). Postmeal, fullness was greater after Trp-3 than after C and Trp-1.5 (all P < 0.05), and in men with obesity than in lean men (P < 0.05). Plasma Trp and the Trp:LNAAs ratio were greater after Trp-3 and Trp-1.5 than after C (all P < 0.001), and tended to be less in men with obesity than in the lean (P = 0.07) (Trp:LNAAs ratio: lean, C: 1.5 ± 0.2, Trp-1.5: 6.9 ± 0.7, Trp-3: 10.7 ± 1.4; obese, C: 1.4 ± 0.1, Trp-1.5: 4.6 ± 0.7, Trp-3: 7.8 ± 1.3). There were inverse correlations of energy intake with plasma Trp and the Trp:LNAAs ratio in both groups (lean, both r = -0.50, P < 0.01; obese, both r = -0.40, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Intragastric Trp has potent energy intake-suppressant effects, in both lean men and those with obesity, apparently related to the Trp:LNAAs ratio.

Intragastric Lysine Lowers the Circulating Glucose and Insulin Responses to a Mixed-Nutrient Drink without Slowing Gastric Emptying in Healthy Adults.

Background: Lysine is reported to lower the glycemic response to oral glucose in humans and, albeit at high loads, to slow gastric emptying of glucose and decrease food intake in rats.Objective: We investigated the effects of intragastrically administered lysine on early (15 min) and later (60 min) blood glucose and insulin responses to and gastric emptying of a mixed-nutrient drink, and effects on subsequent energy intake.Methods: Twelve healthy volunteers (7 men and 5 women; mean ± SEM age: 24 ± 2 y) received intragastric infusions (200 mL) containing 5 or 10 g l-lysine or a control solution within 2 min on 3 different occasions in randomized order. Fifteen minutes later, participants consumed a mixed-nutrient drink (300 mL, 400 kcal, and 56 g carbohydrates) within 1 min. For the next hour (t = 0-60 min), we collected blood samples every 15 min (to measure blood glucose, plasma insulin, and plasma glucagon) and breath samples every 5 min (to measure gastric emptying via a 13C-acetate breath test). We then quantified subjects' energy intake from a buffet-style meal (t = 60-90 min).Results: There were no differences between the 2 lysine treatments; hence, data were pooled for further analysis. Lysine did not affect blood glucose at 15 min or the blood glucose area under the curve from 0 to 60 min (AUC0-60min) but it decreased blood glucose at 60 min compared with the control solution (-9.1% ± 3.1%, P < 0.01). Similarly, the early insulin response and insulin AUC0-60min were not affected by lysine, but plasma insulin at 60 min was 20.9% ± 5.6% lower than after the control (P < 0.05). Plasma glucagon at both 15 min (20.7% ± 4.7%, P < 0.001) and 60 min (14.1% ± 5.4%, P < 0.05) and the glucagon AUC0-60min (P < 0.01) were greater after lysine than after the control. Lysine did not slow gastric emptying, and there was no effect on energy intake.Conclusion: In healthy adults, lysine slightly reduced the glycemic response to an oral mixed-macronutrient drink, an effect that was apparently independent of insulin or slowing of gastric emptying. This trial was registered at www.anzctr.orgau as 12614000837628.

Intragastric administration of leucine or isoleucine lowers the blood glucose response to a mixed-nutrient drink by different mechanisms in healthy, lean volunteers.

BACKGROUND: The branched-chain amino acids leucine and isoleucine lower blood glucose after oral glucose ingestion, and the intraduodenal infusion of leucine decreases energy intake in healthy, lean men. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the effects of the intragastric administration of leucine and isoleucine on the gastric emptying of, and blood glucose responses to, a physiologic mixed-macronutrient drink and subsequent energy intake. DESIGN: In 2 separate studies, 12 healthy, lean subjects received on 3 separate occasions an intragastric infusion of 5 g leucine (leucine-5g) or an intragastric infusion of 10 g leucine (leucine-10g), an intragastric infusion of 5 g isoleucine (isoleucine-5g) or an intragastric infusion of 10 g isoleucine (isoleucine-10g), or a control. Fifteen minutes later, subjects consumed a mixed-nutrient drink (400 kcal, 56 g carbohydrates, 15 g protein, and 12 g fat), and gastric emptying (13C-acetate breath test) and blood glucose, plasma insulin, C-peptide, glucagon, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP), and cholecystokinin (leucine study only) were measured for 60 min. Immediately afterward, energy intake from a cold, buffet-style meal was assessed. RESULTS: Compared with the control, leucine-10g decreased the blood glucose area under the curve (AUC) (P < 0.05) and tended to reduce peak blood glucose (P = 0.07), whereas effects of leucine-5g were NS. Leucine-10g, but not leucine-5g, increased plasma insulin and C-peptide AUCs (P < 0.01 for both), but neither dose affected glucagon, GLP-1, GIP, cholecystokinin, gastric emptying, or energy intake. Compared with the control, isoleucine-10g reduced the blood glucose AUC and peak blood glucose (P < 0.01), whereas effects of isoleucine-5g were NS. Neither load affected insulin, C-peptide, glucagon, GLP-1, or GIP. Isoleucine-10g, but not isoleucine-5g, slowed gastric emptying (P < 0.05), but gastric emptying was not correlated with the blood glucose AUC. Isoleucine did not affect energy intake. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy subjects, both leucine and isoleucine reduced blood glucose in response to a mixed-nutrient drink but did not affect subsequent energy intake. The mechanisms underlying glucose lowering appear to differ; leucine stimulated insulin, whereas isoleucine acted insulin independently. These trials were registered at www.anzctr.org.au as 12613000899741 and 12614000837628.