Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

In vitro starch digestibility and in vivo glucose response of gluten–free foods and their gluten counterparts

  • ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
  • Published:
European Journal of Nutrition Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. 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

  2. Murray J (1999) The widening spectrum of celiac disease. Am J Clin Nutr 69:354–365

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 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

  4. Brand JC, Nicholson PL, Thorburn AW, Truswell AS (1985) Food processing and the glycemic index. Am J Clin Nutr 42:1192–1196

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jenkins DJA, Taylor RH, Wolever TMS (1982) The diabetic diet, dietary carbohydate and differences in digestibility. Diabetologia 23:477–484

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Holm J, Björck I (1988) Effects of thermal processing of wheat on starch: II. Enzymic availability. J Cereal Sci 8:105–112

    Google Scholar 

  10. 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

    Google Scholar 

  11. 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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Special report Committee, Canadian Diabetes Association (1981) Guidelines for the nutritional management of diabetes mellitus. J Can Diat Assoc 42: 110–118

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cronin C, Shanahan F (1997) Insulindependent diabetes mellitus and celiac disease. Lancet 349:1096–1097

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 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

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wolever TMS (2000) Dietary carbohydrates and insulin action in humans. Br J Nutr 83:S97–S102

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 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

  18. 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Packer SC, Dornhorst A, Frost GS (2000) The glycaemic index of a range of gluten-free foods. Diabetes 17:657–660

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Ross SW, Brand JC, Thorburn AW, Truswell AS (1987) Glycemic index of processed wheat products. Am J Clin Nutr 46:631–635

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. 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

    Google Scholar 

  24. Wolever TMS, Jenkins DJA, Jenkins AL, Robert GJ (1991) The glycemic index: methodology and clinical implications. Am J Clin Nutr 54:846–854

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Coulter L, Lorenz K (1990) Quinoa – Composition, nutritional value, food applications. Lebensm WissTechnol 23:203–207

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Chauhan GS, Eskin NAM, Tkachuk R (1992) Nutrients and antinutrients in quinoa seed. Cereal Chem 69:85–88

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Ranhotra GS, Gelroth JA, Glaser BK, Lorenz KJ, Johnson DL (1993) Composition and protein nutritional quality of quinoa. Cereal Chem 70:303–305

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. 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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bruce DG, Storlien LH, Furler SM, Chrisholm DJ (1987) Chephalic phase metabolic response in normal weight adult. Metabolism 8:721–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Lodwing D (2000) Dietary glycemic index and obesity. J Nutr 130:280S–283S

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Food Science & Microbiology , Division of Human Nutrition University of Milan, Via G. Celoria 2, 20133, Milan, Italy

    C. Berti, P. Riso & M. Porrini

  2. Intermediate Metabolism Laboratory, Unit IV Diabetology, Endocrinology, Metabolic Disease Unit Medicine Division Fondazione Centro San Raffaele del Monte Tabor, Milan, Italy

    L. D. Monti

Authors
  1. C. Berti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. Riso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. D. Monti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M. Porrini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Berti.

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00394-004-0459-1

Key words

Search

Navigation