The glycemic index: similarity of values derived in insulin-dependent and non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients.

Wolever, Thomas M. S.; Jenkins, David; Josse, Robert G.; Wong, Gina; Lee, R

doi:10.1080/07315724.1987.10720191

Cited by 56 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 33 publications

(50 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This value is consistent with the calculated CVs from other reports with healthy volunteers, which ranged from 12 to 53% (3,(15)(16)(17). From a report evaluating the glycemic response to white bread (18), the mean among-subject CV for the AUC was calculated as 33% for subjects with type 2 diabetes and 39% for subjects with type 1 diabetes. Similarly, from a comparison of glycemic index values from different pasta foods in a sample of subjects with type 1 (57 Ϯ 20, n ϭ 6, CV ϭ 34%) and type 2 (49 Ϯ 23, n ϭ 11, CV ϭ 47%) diabetes, CVs were 34 and 47%, respectively (19).…”

Section: Conclusion -D E S P I T E T H Esupporting

confidence: 78%

Interindividual Variability and Intra-Individual Reproducibility of Glycemic Index Values for Commercial White Bread

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE -We sought to assess the intra-and interindividual variability of glycemic index value determinations for white bread using glucose as the reference food.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS -A total of 23 healthy adults (aged 20 -70 years) completed up to three sets of two visits per set. Each pair of visits assessed the glycemic response to 50 g available carbohydrates from commercial white bread and glucose, administered in random order. Glycemic index values were calculated by dividing the 2-h incremental area under the serum glucose response curve after each commercial white bread challenge by the mean area under the curve (AUC) for glucose.RESULTS -The mean Ϯ SE ratio of the AUC after white bread intake by the AUC after glucose intake for the first set of determinations was 78 Ϯ 15 (n ϭ 23; coefficient of variation [CV] 94%). When using glycemic index values calculated with the subset of participants who completed three sets of tests (n ϭ 14), glycemic index values for each of the three sets of determinations were 78 Ϯ 10, 60 Ϯ 5, and 75 Ϯ 10, respectively. CVs were 50, 28, and 50%, respectively. The mean glycemic index value of these three sets was 71 Ϯ 6, with a CV of 30%. When an ANOVA approach was applied to these data, the interindividual CV was 17.8%, and the intra-individual variation was 42.8%.CONCLUSIONS -These data suggest that in response to a challenge of white bread relative to glucose, within-individual variability is a greater contributor to overall variability than amongindividual variability. Further understanding of all the sources of variability would be helpful in better defining the utility of glycemic index values.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion -D E S P I T E T H Esupporting

confidence: 78%

Interindividual Variability and Intra-Individual Reproducibility of Glycemic Index Values for Commercial White Bread

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have shown that GI values are similar in healthy control vs T2DM (Jenkins et al, 1983), individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) vs individuals with T2DM (Wolever et al, 1987), adults vs children with T1DM (Wolever et al, 1988), T2DM on oral agents vs insulin and T2DM in good vs poor metabolic control . We showed here that the GI values of foods in hyperinsulinemic subjects were similar to those in healthy control and T2DM subjects.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many foods have been tested for their GI values in healthy control or diabetic subjects (Foster-Powell et al, 2002). As the GI values of foods are similar in healthy control and diabetic subjects (Jenkins et al, 1983, Wolever et al, 1987, 1988, GI values tested in healthy control subjects can be applied in the nutritional management of diabetes (Atkinson, 2008). However, as GI has never been tested in non-diabetic subjects with insulin resistance/hyperinsulinemia, it is unknown whether GI is valid in this population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are the glycemic and insulinemic index values of carbohydrate foods similar in healthy control, hyperinsulinemic and type 2 diabetic patients?

Lan-Pidhainy

Wolever

2011

Eur J Clin Nutr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Objectives: a criticism of glycemic index (GI) is that it does not indicate the insulin response of foods (insulinemic index, II). However, it is unknown if the GI and II values of foods are equivalent in all subjects, a necessary criterion for clinical utility. We compared GI and II values in non-diabetic subjects with fasting-serum-insulin (FSI) o40 pmol/l (healthy control) or with FSI X40 pmol/l (hyper [I]) and subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), and to see whether GI and II were related to the serum-glucose concentrations, insulin sensitivity, b-cell function and hepatic insulin extraction (HIE) of the subjects. Subjects/Methods: Serum-glucose, -insulin and -C-peptide responses after 50 g available-carbohydrate portions of glucose (tested three times by each subject), sucrose, instant mashed-potato, white-bread, polished-rice and pearled-barley were measured in healthy control (n ¼ 9), hyper[I] (n ¼ 12) and T2DM (n ¼ 10) subjects. Results: Food GI values did not differ significantly among the three subject groups, whereas II values were higher in T2DM (100 ± 7) than healthy controls (78 ± 5) and hyper[I] subjects (70 ± 5) (mean ± s.e.m., P ¼ 0.05). II was inversely associated with insulin sensitivity (r ¼ À0.66, Po0.0001) and positively related to fasting-and postprandial-glucose (both r ¼ 0.68, Po0.0001) and HIE (r ¼ 0.62, P ¼ 0.0002). In contrast, GI was not related to any of the biomarkers (P40.05). Conclusion: The GI is a valid property of foods because its value is similar in healthy control, hyper [I] and T2DM subjects, and is independent of subjects' metabolic status. However, II may depend upon the glycaemic control, insulin sensitivity and HIE of the subjects.

show abstract

“…The glucose and insulin responses of different rye breads and other rye products have been reported to be variably lower than those of wheat bread, as reviewed by Foster-Powell & Brand Miller (1995). The lowest GI-values (66 ± 80) have been reported for pumpernickel-type breads containing intact kernels (Jenkins et al, 1985(Jenkins et al, , 1986Wolever et al, 1987Wolever et al, , 1994. There is a consensus that intact botanical structure protects the encapsulated starch of the kernel against the hydrolysis (Brand et al, 1990;Granfeldt et al, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rye bread decreases postprandial insulin response but does not alter glucose response in healthy Finnish subjects

et al. 1999

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare if postprandial glucose and insulin responses to wholekernel rye bread are lower than to wheat bread, and to see if these responses to two types of rye breads are different. To explore starch digestion in more detail, rate of starch hydrolysis of same breads was measured in vitro. Design: Subjects were given test breads (43 ± 61 g available carbohydrates by analysis) with standardized breakfast in a random order after a fast. Eight postprandial blood samples were collected during the following three hours. Rate of starch hydrolysis was determined by an in vitro enzymatic hydrolysis method. Subjects: 10 men and 10 women, aged 32 AE 3 and 27 AE 5 y, BMI 24.5 AE 2.2 and 20.3 AE 1.1 kgam 2 , respectively, all had normal glucose tolerance. Results: Plasma insulin response to wholekernel rye bread was lower than to wheat bread (45 min P 0.025, 60 min P 0.002, 90 min P 0.0004, 120 min P 0.050, 150 min P 0.033), but there was no difference in glucose responses. In comparison of two types of rye breads, glucose response to wholemeal rye bread at 150 and 180 min was higher (P 0.018 and P 0.041, respectively) and insulin response at 60 min was lower (P 0.025) than those to wholemeal rye crispbread. Total sugar pro®les in vitro were similar for all breads. When free reducing sugars were subtracted, starch in wholekernel and wholemeal rye breads appeared to be hydrolysed slower than starch in wholemeal rye crispbread and wheat bread. Conclusions: Wholekernel rye bread produces lower postprandial insulin response than wheat bread, but there is no difference in glucose response. The latter is in accordance with in vitro results. Postprandial glucose and insulin may also be affected by type of rye bread. Characteristics of different types of rye breads must be further investigated to develop health properties of rye breads. Sponsorship:

show abstract

The glycemic index: similarity of values derived in insulin-dependent and non-insulin-dependent diabetic patients.

Cited by 56 publications

References 33 publications

Interindividual Variability and Intra-Individual Reproducibility of Glycemic Index Values for Commercial White Bread

Interindividual Variability and Intra-Individual Reproducibility of Glycemic Index Values for Commercial White Bread

Are the glycemic and insulinemic index values of carbohydrate foods similar in healthy control, hyperinsulinemic and type 2 diabetic patients?

Rye bread decreases postprandial insulin response but does not alter glucose response in healthy Finnish subjects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About