4.7 Article

Glucose Appearance Rate Rather than the Blood Glucose Concentrations Explains Differences in Postprandial Insulin Responses between Wholemeal Rye and Refined Wheat Breads-Results from A Cross-Over Meal Study

Journal

MOLECULAR NUTRITION & FOOD RESEARCH
Volume 63, Issue 7, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mnfr.201800959

Keywords

glucose flux; rye factor; stable isotope labeled glucose; time-of-flight mass spectrometry; wholemeal rye bread

Funding

  1. FORMAS, The Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning
  2. Dr. P. Hakansson's Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Scope Ingestion of rye bread leads to lower postprandial plasma insulin concentrations than wheat bread ingestion, but most often not too different glucose profiles. The mechanism behind this discrepancy is still largely unknown. This study investigates whether glucose kinetics may explain the observed discrepancy. Methods and results Nine healthy men participated in a crossover study, eating 50 g of available carbohydrates as either refined wheat (WB) or traditional wholemeal rye bread (WMR) during d-[6,6-H-2(2)]glucose infusion. Labeled glucose enrichment is measured by an HPLC-TOF-MS method. The calculated rate of glucose appearance (RaE) is significantly lower after ingestion of WMR during the initial 15 min postprandial period. Additionally, the 0-90 min RaE area under the curve (AUC) is significantly lower after ingestion of WMR, as is plasma gastric inhibitory polypeptide (GIP) at 60 and 90 min. Postprandial glycemic responses do not differ between the breads. Postprandial insulin is lower after ingestion of WMR at 45 and 60 min, as is the 0-90 min AUC. Conclusion Ingestion of WMR elicits a lower rate of glucose appearance into the bloodstream compared with WB. This may explain the lower insulin response observed after rye bread ingestion, commonly known as the rye factor.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available