Original Article

European Journal of Clinical Nutrition (2008) 62, 1364–1371; doi:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602890; published online 22 August 2007

Effects of sucromalt on postprandial responses in human subjects

The study was conceived by TC and TMSW with all authors contributing equally to the final design, statistical analysis and interpretation of the results. AG collected the data for experiment 2 and wrote the first draft of the manuscript that was edited by TMSW and reviewed by AG and TC.

A Grysman1, T Carlson2 and T M S Wolever1,3,4,5

  1. 1Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  2. 2Cargill Inc., Dayton, OH, USA
  3. 3Glycemic Index Laboratories, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  4. 4Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  5. 5Glycaemic Index Testing Inc., Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Correspondence: Dr TMS Wolever, Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 3E2, Canada. E-mail: thomas.wolever@utoronto.ca

Received 8 February 2007; Revised 22 May 2007; Accepted 20 July 2007; Published online 22 August 2007.





To compare postprandial responses elicited by sucromalt, a nutritive sweetener produced by treating a blend of sucrose and corn syrup with an enzyme from Leuconostoc mesenteroides, with those after 42% of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), and to see if the reduced responses after sucromalt could be accounted for by carbohydrate malabsorption.

Subject and Methods:


Three experiments were performed in separate groups of normal subjects studied after overnight fasts using double-blind, randomized, cross-over designs. HFCS was used as the control because it contained a similar amount of fructose as sucromalt. Experiment 1 (n=10): plasma glucose and insulin were measured after 50g sucromalt and 50g HFCS. Experiment 2 (n=10): metabolic profiles were measured after 80g HFCS, 80g sucromalt or 56g fructose/glucose blend plus 24g inulin. Experiment 3 (n=20): the glycaemic indices of sucromalt and HFCS were determined.



Mean glucose and insulin responses after sucromalt were 66 and 62%, respectively, of those after HFCS (P<0.05). The inulin treatment, used to mimic the effects of carbohydrate malabsorption, elicited higher breath hydrogen (H2), lower glucose and insulin responses, and a significantly earlier rise in serum free fatty acids (FFA) than those of HFCS (all P<0.05). Sucromalt elicited no rise in breath H2, and delayed falls in glucose and insulin, and a delayed rebound of FFA compared to HFCS (all P<0.05).



The reduced glucose and insulin responses elicited by sucromalt are not explained by malabsorption and are more likely related to differences in either rate of digestion and absorption or postabsorptive handling by body.


humans, sucromalt, glycaemic index, insulin delayed absorption, nutritive sweeteners

Extra navigation