4.7 Article

A dose-response evaluation of freeze-dried strawberries independent of fiber content on metabolic indices in abdominally obese individuals with insulin resistance in a randomized, single-blinded, diet-controlled crossover trial

期刊

MOLECULAR NUTRITION & FOOD RESEARCH
卷 60, 期 5, 页码 1099-1109

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mnfr.201500845

关键词

-

资金

  1. California Strawberry Commission (CSC) Nutrition Research Grant Program, CA, USA
  2. California Department of Food and Agriculture, Sacramento, CA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Scope: This study evaluated the dose-response relationship of strawberries, an anthocyanin-rich fruit, on postprandial glucose and insulin concentrations in individuals with insulin resistance (IR), including changes in plasma anthocyanins, markers of oxidative stress, and inflammation. Methods and Results: In a randomized controlled, four-arm, dose-response, crossover trial, 21 adults with IR consumed a high-carbohydrate, high-fat meal with one of four beverages containing 0 g freeze-dried whole strawberry powder (0g FDS, control), 10, 20, or 40 g FDS, controlled for fiber. Blood was collected at 0 min and at 30 min intervals postmeal until 2 h, then hourly until 6 h. Postmeal insulin concentrations (6 h) were significantly reduced after the 40-g FDS beverage compared to other beverages (p < 0.05). Postmeal 6 h glucose concentrations were not different, although mean insulin:glucose ratio was significantly different among beverages (p < 0.05). Pelargonidin-glucuronide was inversely associated with mean insulin concentrations after the 20 and 40 g FDS (p < 0.05). Oxidized low-density lipoprotein was reduced after 20 g FDS (p < 0.05) and IL-6 was not different among treatments. Strawberry intake reduced the insulin demand to manage postmeal glucose in obese individuals with IR, which was related to plasma anthocyanin/pelargonidin concentrations. Conclusion: The data support a role of strawberries in improving insulin sensitivity in people with IR.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据