Summary
Background
Recently there has been increasing interest in the production of gluten–free (GF) foods and studies on minor cereals and pseudocereals without celiac activity in order to fulfill the specific needs of people affected by celiac disease. GF bread, pasta, biscuits are usually manufactured using different combinations of thickenings and particular food processing procedures that could affect starch digestibility. Carbohydrates, mainly starch from cereals, play an important part in a balanced diet, and dietary guidelines suggest a diet with low glycemic index foods, that is to say rich in slowly digested carbohydrates.
Aim
The present study was aimed at evaluating: 1) the importance of some GF food characteristics in relation to their effects on in vitro starch accessibility to digestion, in comparison with traditional gluten products; 2) the in vivo metabolic responses to GF foods.
Methods
Firstly, starch digestibility of several products was evaluated in vitro. Then, an in vivo study was performed on a group of healthy volunteers. Postprandial glucose and insulin responses were evaluated after administration of three GF foods and traditional bread. Triglycerides and free fatty acids (FFA) were also evaluated. Attempts were also made to explore differences in metabolic responses to GF foods in healthy subjects with respect to celiac subjects.
Results
The area under the curve (AUC) of digested starch of GF bread was slightly higher than that of the traditional counterpart. No significant difference was observed in AUCs of digested starch between GF pasta and the traditional pasta. The AUCs of digested starch of quinoa and the two samples of pasta were not statistically different. Significant differences were observed between GF bread and bread–like products. Statistic differences in glucose responses to GF pasta were observed between healthy and celiac subjects. In healthy subjects, the AUCs of glucose response after GF bread were higher than those after bread with gluten. No significant differences were observed between the AUCs of insulin responses to all products tested. Glycemic index (GI) for GF pasta was similar to GI for GF bread while GI for quinoa was slightly lower than that of GF pasta and bread. Two–way ANOVA revealed that quinoa induced lower FFA levels with respect to GF pasta. In addition, triglyceride concentrations were significantly reduced for quinoa with respect to GF bread and bread.
Conclusions
Our results indicate that the different formulations and the food processing procedures used in the manufacturing of GF products may affect the rate of starch digestion both in vitro and in vivo. It may be worthwhile improving the formulation of these products. Furthermore, quinoa seems to represent a potential alternative to traditional foods, even if further and larger studies are required to demonstrate its hypoglycemic effects.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Catassi C, Fabiani E (1999) La malattia celiaca: come diagnosticarla, perché trattarla. In: Gentile MG (ed) Aggiornamenti in nutrizione clinica. Il Pensiero Scientifico Editore, Roma, pp 293–309
Murray J (1999) The widening spectrum of celiac disease. Am J Clin Nutr 69:354–365
Gutzmán-Maldonado SH, Paredes- Lopez O (1999) Functional products of plants indigenous to Latin America: amaranth, quinoa, common beans, and botanicals. In:Mazza G (ed) Functional Foods. Biochemical & Processing aspects. Technomic Publishing, Lancaster, pp 293–328
Brand JC, Nicholson PL, Thorburn AW, Truswell AS (1985) Food processing and the glycemic index. Am J Clin Nutr 42:1192–1196
Behall KM, Scholfield DK, Canary JC (1988) Effect of starch structure on glucose and insulin responses in adults. Am J Clin Nutr 47:428–432
Jenkins DJA, Taylor RH, Wolever TMS (1982) The diabetic diet, dietary carbohydate and differences in digestibility. Diabetologia 23:477–484
Jenkins DJA, Wolever TMS, Jenkins AL, Giordano C, Giudici S, Thompson LU, Kalmusky J, Josse RG, Wong GS (1986) Low glycemic response to traditionally processed wheat and rye products: bulgar and pumpernicked bread. Am J Clin Nutr 43:516–520
Jenkins DJA, Thorne MJ, Wolever TMS, Jenkins AL, Venketschwer R, Thompson LU (1987) The effect of starch-protein interaction in wheat on the glycemic response and rate of in vitro digestion. Am J Clin Nutr 45:946–951
Holm J, Björck I (1988) Effects of thermal processing of wheat on starch: II. Enzymic availability. J Cereal Sci 8:105–112
Collier GR, Giudici S, Kalmusky J, Wolever TMS, Helman G, Wesson V, Erlich RM, Jenkins DJA (1988) Low glycaemic index starchy foods improve glucose control and lower serum cholesterol in diabetic children. Diab Nutr Metab 1:1–9
Liljeber H, Björck I (2000) Effects of low-glycaemic index spaghetti meal on glucose tolerance and lipaemia at a subsequent meal in healthy subjects. Eur J Clin Nutr 54:24–28
Special report Committee, Canadian Diabetes Association (1981) Guidelines for the nutritional management of diabetes mellitus. J Can Diat Assoc 42: 110–118
Cronin C, Shanahan F (1997) Insulindependent diabetes mellitus and celiac disease. Lancet 349:1096–1097
Brighenti F, Pellegrini N, Casiraghi MC, Testolin G (1995) In vitro studies to predict physiological effects of dietary fibre. Eur J Clin Nutr 49:S81–S88
Wolever TMS (2000) Dietary carbohydrates and insulin action in humans. Br J Nutr 83:S97–S102
Wolever TMS, Jenkins DJA, Ocana AM, Rao VA, Collier GR (1988) Second-meal effect: low-glycemic-index foods eaten at dinner improve subsequent breakfast glycemic response. Am J Clin Nutr 48:1041–1047
Hetherington M, Rolls BJ (1987) Methods of investigating human eating behaviour. In: Toates F, Rowland N (eds) Feeding and Drinking. Elsevier Science Publishers BV, Amsterdam, pp 77–109
Rolls BJ, Castellanos VH, Halford JC, Kilara A, Panyam D, Pelkman CL, Smith GP, Thorwart ML (1998) Volume of food consumed affects satiety in men. Am J Clin Nutr 67:1170–1177
Wolever TMS, Jenkins DJA (1986) The use of the glycemic index in predicting the blood glucose response to mixed meals. Am J Clin Nutr 43:167–172
Foster-Powell K, Holt SHA, Brand- Miller JC (2002) International table of glycemic index and glycemic load values: 2002. Am J Clin Nutr 76:5–56
Packer SC, Dornhorst A, Frost GS (2000) The glycaemic index of a range of gluten-free foods. Diabetes 17:657–660
Ross SW, Brand JC, Thorburn AW, Truswell AS (1987) Glycemic index of processed wheat products. Am J Clin Nutr 46:631–635
Casiraghi MC, Brighenti F, Testolin G (1992) Lack of effect of high temperature drying on digestibility of starch in spaghetti. J Cereal Sci 15:165–174
Wolever TMS, Jenkins DJA, Jenkins AL, Robert GJ (1991) The glycemic index: methodology and clinical implications. Am J Clin Nutr 54:846–854
Coulter L, Lorenz K (1990) Quinoa – Composition, nutritional value, food applications. Lebensm WissTechnol 23:203–207
Chauhan GS, Eskin NAM, Tkachuk R (1992) Nutrients and antinutrients in quinoa seed. Cereal Chem 69:85–88
Ranhotra GS, Gelroth JA, Glaser BK, Lorenz KJ, Johnson DL (1993) Composition and protein nutritional quality of quinoa. Cereal Chem 70:303–305
Gannon MC, Nuttall FQ, Neil BJ,Westphal SA (1988). The insulin and glucose responses to meals of glucose plus various proteins in type II diabetic subjects. Metabolism 37:1081–108
Bruce DG, Storlien LH, Furler SM, Chrisholm DJ (1987) Chephalic phase metabolic response in normal weight adult. Metabolism 8:721–725
Lodwing D (2000) Dietary glycemic index and obesity. J Nutr 130:280S–283S
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Berti, C., Riso, P., Monti, L.D. et al. In vitro starch digestibility and in vivo glucose response of gluten–free foods and their gluten counterparts. Eur J Nutr 43, 198–204 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00394-004-0459-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00394-004-0459-1