Background: Fructose providing excess calories in the form of sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs) increases markers of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Whether this effect holds for other important food sources of fructose-containing sugars is unclear. To investigate the role of food source and energy, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials of the effect of fructose-containing sugars by food source at different levels of energy control on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) markers. Methods and Findings: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched through 7 January 2022 for controlled trials ≥7-days. Four trial designs were prespecified: substitution (energy-matched substitution of sugars for other macronutrients); addition (excess energy from sugars added to diets); subtraction (excess energy from sugars subtracted from diets); and ad libitum (energy from sugars freely replaced by other macronutrients). The primary outcome was intrahepatocellular lipid (IHCL). Secondary outcomes were alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST). Independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE. We included 51 trials (75 trial comparisons, n = 2059) of 10 food sources (sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs); sweetened dairy alternative; 100% fruit juice; fruit; dried fruit; mixed fruit sources; sweets and desserts; added nutritive sweetener; honey; and mixed sources (with SSBs)) in predominantly healthy mixed weight or overweight/obese younger adults. Total fructose-containing sugars increased IHCL (standardized mean difference = 1.72 [95% CI, 1.08 to 2.36], p < 0.001) in addition trials and decreased AST in subtraction trials with no effect on any outcome in substitution or ad libitum trials. There was evidence of influence by food source with SSBs increasing IHCL and ALT in addition trials and mixed sources (with SSBs) decreasing AST in subtraction trials. The certainty of evidence was high for the effect on IHCL and moderate for the effect on ALT for SSBs in addition trials, low for the effect on AST for the removal of energy from mixed sources (with SSBs) in subtraction trials, and generally low to moderate for all other comparisons. Conclusions: Energy control and food source appear to mediate the effect of fructose-containing sugars on NAFLD markers. The evidence provides a good indication that the addition of excess energy from SSBs leads to large increases in liver fat and small important increases in ALT while there is less of an indication that the removal of energy from mixed sources (with SSBs) leads to moderate reductions in AST. Varying uncertainty remains for the lack of effect of other important food sources of fructose-containing sugars at different levels of energy control.

Background: Fructose-containing sugars as sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) may increase inflammatory biomarkers. Whether this effect is mediated by the food matrix at different levels of energy is unknown. To investigate the role of food source and energy, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials on the effect of different food sources of fructose-containing sugars on inflammatory markers at different levels of energy control. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched through March 2022 for controlled feeding trials ≥ 7 days. Four trial designs were prespecified by energy control: substitution (energy matched replacement of sugars); addition (excess energy from sugars added to diets); subtraction (energy from sugars subtracted from diets); and ad libitum (energy from sugars freely replaced). The primary outcome was C-reactive protein (CRP). Secondary outcomes were tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-α) and interleukin-6 (IL-6). Independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. GRADE assessed certainty of evidence. Results: We identified 64 controlled trials (91 trial comparisons, n = 4094) assessing 12 food sources (SSB; sweetened dairy; sweetened dairy alternative [soy]; 100% fruit juice; fruit; dried fruit; mixed fruit forms; sweetened cereal grains and bars; sweets and desserts; added nutritive [caloric] sweetener; mixed sources [with SSBs]; and mixed sources [without SSBs]) at 4 levels of energy control over a median 6-weeks in predominantly healthy mixed weight or overweight/obese adults. Total fructose-containing sugars decreased CRP in addition trials and had no effect in substitution, subtraction or ad libitum trials. No effect was observed on other outcomes at any level of energy control. There was evidence of interaction/influence by food source: substitution trials (sweetened dairy alternative (soy) and 100% fruit juice decreased, and mixed sources (with SSBs) increased CRP); and addition trials (fruit decreased CRP and TNF-α; sweets and desserts (dark chocolate) decreased IL-6). The certainty of evidence was moderate-to-low for the majority of analyses. Conclusions: Food source appears to mediate the effect of fructose-containing sugars on inflammatory markers over the short-to-medium term. The evidence provides good indication that mixed sources that contain SSBs increase CRP, while most other food sources have no effect with some sources (fruit, 100% fruit juice, sweetened soy beverage or dark chocolate) showing decreases, which may be dependent on energy control. Clinicaltrials.gov: (NCT02716870).

Background: Health authorities are near universal in their recommendation to replace sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) with water. Non-nutritive sweetened beverages (NSBs) are not as widely recommended as a replacement strategy due to a lack of established benefits and concerns they may induce glucose intolerance through changes in the gut microbiome. The STOP Sugars NOW trial aims to assess the effect of the substitution of NSBs (the “intended substitution”) versus water (the “standard of care substitution”) for SSBs on glucose tolerance and microbiota diversity. Design and Methods: The STOP Sugars NOW trial (NCT03543644) is a pragmatic, “head-to-head”, open-label, crossover, randomized controlled trial conducted in an outpatient setting. Participants were overweight or obese adults with a high waist circumference who regularly consumed ≥1 SSBs daily. Each participant completed three 4-week treatment phases (usual SSBs, matched NSBs, or water) in random order, which were separated by ≥4-week washout. Blocked randomization was performed centrally by computer with allocation concealment. Outcome assessment was blinded; however, blinding of participants and trial personnel was not possible. The two primary outcomes are oral glucose tolerance (incremental area under the curve) and gut microbiota beta-diversity (weighted UniFrac distance). Secondary outcomes include related markers of adiposity and glucose and insulin regulation. Adherence was assessed by objective biomarkers of added sugars and non-nutritive sweeteners and self-report intake. A subset of participants was included in an Ectopic Fat sub-study in which the primary outcome is intrahepatocellular lipid (IHCL) by 1H-MRS. Analyses will be according to the intention to treat principle. Baseline results: Recruitment began on 1 June 2018, and the last participant completed the trial on 15 October 2020. We screened 1086 participants, of whom 80 were enrolled and randomized in the main trial and 32 of these were enrolled and randomized in the Ectopic Fat sub-study. The participants were predominantly middle-aged (mean age 41.8 ± SD 13.0 y) and had obesity (BMI of 33.7 ± 6.8 kg/m²) with a near equal ratio of female: male (51%:49%). The average baseline SSB intake was 1.9 servings/day. SSBs were replaced with matched NSB brands, sweetened with either a blend of aspartame and acesulfame-potassium (95%) or sucralose (5%). Conclusions: Baseline characteristics for both the main and Ectopic Fat sub-study meet our inclusion criteria and represent a group with overweight or obesity, with characteristics putting them at risk for type 2 diabetes. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed open-access medical journals and provide high-level evidence to inform clinical practice guidelines and public health policy for the use NSBs in sugars reduction strategies. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03543644.

Whether food source or energy mediates the effect of fructose-containing sugars on blood pressure (BP) is unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of different food sources of fructose-containing sugars at different levels of energy control on BP. We searched MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library through June 2021 for controlled trials ≥7-days. We prespecified 4 trial designs: substitution (energy matched substitution of sugars); addition (excess energy from sugars added); subtraction (excess energy from sugars subtracted); andad libitum(energy from sugars freely replaced). Outcomes were systolic and diastolic BP. Independent reviewers extracted data. GRADE assessed the certainty of evidence. We included 93 reports (147 trial comparisons, N = 5,213) assessing 12 different food sources across 4 energy control levels in adults with and without hypertension or at risk for hypertension. Total fructose-containing sugars had no effect in substitution, subtraction, orad libitumtrials but decreased systolic and diastolic BP in addition trials (P<0.05). There was evidence of interaction/influence by food source: fruit and 100% fruit juice decreased and mixed sources (with sugar-sweetened beverages [SSBs]) increased BP in addition trials and the removal of SSBs (linear dose response gradient) and mixed sources (with SSBs) decreased BP in subtraction trials. The certainty of evidence was generally moderate. Food source and energy control appear to mediate the effect of fructose-containing sugars on BP. The evidence provides a good indication that fruit and 100% fruit juice at low doses (up to or less than the public health threshold of ~10% E) lead to small, but important reductions in BP, while the addition of excess energy of mixed sources (with SSBs) at high doses (up to 23%) leads to moderate increases and their removal or the removal of SSBs alone (up to ~20% E) leads to small, but important decreases in BP in adults with and without hypertension or at risk for hypertension.Trial registration:Clinicaltrials.gov:NCT02716870.