The effect of expectancy versus actual gluten intake on gastrointestinal and extra-intestinal symptoms in non-coeliac gluten sensitivity: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international, multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Many individuals without coeliac disease or wheat allergy reduce their gluten intake because they believe that gluten causes their gastrointestinal symptoms. Symptoms could be affected by negative expectancy. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the effects of expectancy versus actual gluten intake on symptoms in people with non-coeliac gluten sensitivity (NCGS). METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, international, multicentre study was done at the University of Leeds (Leeds, UK), Maastricht University (Maastricht, the Netherlands), and Wageningen University and Research (Wageningen, the Netherlands). People aged 18-70 years with self-reported NCGS (ie, gastrointestinal symptoms within 8 h of gluten consumption) without coeliac disease and wheat allergy were recruited. Participants had to follow a gluten-free or gluten-restricted diet for at least 1 week before (and throughout) study participation and had to be asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic (overall gastrointestinal symptom score ≤30 mm on the Visual Analogue Scale [VAS]) while on the diet. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1; blocks of eight; stratified by site and gender) to one of four groups based on the expectation to consume gluten-containing (E+) or gluten-free (E-) oat bread for breakfast and lunch (two slices each) and actual intake of gluten-containing (G+) or gluten-free (G-) oat bread. Participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were masked to the actual gluten assignment, and participants were also masked to the expectancy part of the study. The primary outcome was overall gastrointestinal symptom score on the VAS, which was measured at and corrected for baseline (before breakfast) and hourly for 8 h, with lunch served after 4 h, and analysed per-protocol. Safety analysis included all participants incorporated in the per-protocol analysis. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05779358, and has ended. FINDINGS: Between Oct 19, 2018, and Feb 14, 2022, 165 people were screened and 84 were randomly assigned to E+G+ (n=21), E+G- (n=21), E-G+ (n=20), or E-G- (n=22). One person in the E+G+ group was excluded due to not following test day instructions, leaving 83 participants in the per-protocol analysis. Median age was 27·0 years (IQR 21·0-45·0), 71 (86%) of 83 people were women, and 12 (14%) were men. Mean overall gastrointestinal symptom score was significantly higher for E+G+ (16·6 mm [95% CI 13·1 to 20·0]) than for E-G+ (6·9 mm [3·5 to 10·4]; difference 9·6 mm [95% CI 3·0 to 16·2], p=0·0010) and E-G- (7·4 mm [4·2 to 10·7]; difference 9·1 mm [2·7 to 15·6], p=0·0016), but not for E+G- (11·7 mm [8·3 to 15·1]; difference 4·9 mm [-1·7 to 11·5], p=0·28). There was no difference between E+G- and E-G+ (difference 4·7 mm [-1·8 to 11·3], p=0·33), E+G- and E-G- (difference 4·2 mm [-2·2 to 10·7], p=0·47), and E-G+ and E-G- (difference -0·5 mm [-7·0 to 5·9], p=1·0). Adverse events were reported by two participants in the E+G- group (itching jaw [n=1]; feeling lightheaded and stomach rumbling [n=1]) and one participant in the E-G+ group (vomiting). INTERPRETATION: The combination of expectancy and actual gluten intake had the largest effect on gastrointestinal symptoms, reflecting a nocebo effect, although an additional effect of gluten cannot be ruled out. Our results necessitate further research into the possible involvement of the gut-brain interaction in NCGS. FUNDING: Government of the Netherlands Topsector Agri & Food Top Consortium for Knowledge and Innovation, AB Mauri Global Bakery Ingredients, Baking Industry Research Trust, Borgesius-Albert Heijn, CSM Innovation Centre, the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), DSM Food Specialties, Fazer, Healthgrain Forum, the International Association for Cereal Science and Technology, the International Wheat Gluten Association, Lantmännen, Mondelez International, Nederlands Bakkerij Centrum, Nutrition & Santé, Puratos, Rademaker, Sonneveld Group, and Zeelandia HJ Doeleman.

Diet Quality and Dietary Inflammatory Index in Dutch Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Irritable Bowel Syndrome Patients.

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) share common culprit foods and potential pathophysiological factors. However, how diet may contribute to disease course and whether this differs between both entities is unclear. We therefore investigated the association of dietary indices with intestinal inflammation and gastrointestinal symptoms in both IBD and IBS patients. Food frequency questionnaires from 238 IBD, 261 IBS and 195 healthy controls (HC) were available to calculate the overall diet quality by the Dutch Healthy Diet-Index 2015 (DHD-2015) and its inflammatory potential by the Adapted Dietary Inflammatory Index (ADII). Intestinal inflammation and symptoms were evaluated by faecal calprotectin and the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale, respectively. The DHD-2015 was lower in IBD and IBS versus HC (p < 0.001), being associated with calprotectin levels in IBD (b = −4.009, p = 0.006), and with abdominal pain (b = −0.012, p = 0.023) and reflux syndrome (b = −0.016, p = 0.004) in IBS. ADII scores were comparable between groups and were only associated with abdominal pain in IBD (b = 0.194, p = 0.004). In this side-by-side comparison, we found a lower diet quality that was differentially associated with disease characteristics in IBD versus IBS patients. Longitudinal studies are needed to further investigate the role of dietary factors in the development of flares and predominant symptoms.

The Intake of Dicarbonyls and Advanced Glycation Endproducts as Part of the Habitual Diet Is Not Associated with Intestinal Inflammation in Inflammatory Bowel Disease and Irritable Bowel Syndrome Patients.

A Western diet comprises high levels of dicarbonyls and advanced glycation endproducts (AGEs), which may contribute to flares and symptoms in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). We therefore investigated the intake of dietary dicarbonyls and AGEs in IBD and IBS patients as part of the habitual diet, and their association with intestinal inflammation. Food frequency questionnaires from 238 IBD, 261 IBS as well as 195 healthy control (HC) subjects were used to calculate the intake of dicarbonyls methylglyoxal, glyoxal, and 3-deoxyglucosone, and of the AGEs Nε-(carboxymethyl)lysine, Nε-(1-carboxyethyl)lysine and methylglyoxal-derived hydroimidazolone-1. Intestinal inflammation was assessed using faecal calprotectin. The absolute dietary intake of all dicarbonyls and AGEs was higher in IBD and HC as compared to IBS (all p < 0.05). However, after energy-adjustment, only glyoxal was lower in IBD versus IBS and HC (p < 0.05). Faecal calprotectin was not significantly associated with dietary dicarbonyls and AGEs in either of the subgroups. The absolute intake of methylglyoxal was significantly higher in patients with low (<15 µg/g) compared to moderate calprotectin levels (15−<50 µg/g, p = 0.031). The concentrations of dietary dicarbonyls and AGEs generally present in the diet of Dutch patients with IBD or IBS are not associated with intestinal inflammation, although potential harmful effects might be counteracted by anti-inflammatory components in the food matrix.