Cited by 38Regulation of Appetite and ObesityEating Disorders and BehaviorsNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Differences in brain responses between lean and obese women to a sweetened drink

Open access
Connolly, L., Coveleskie, K., Kilpatrick, L. A., Labus, J. S., Ebrat, B., Stains, J., Jiang, Z., Tillisch, K. +2 more·2013·Neurogastroenterology & Motility

Abstract

Background: Ingestion of sweet food is driven by central reward circuits and restrained by endocrine and neurocrine satiety signals. The specific influence of sucrose intake on central affective and reward circuitry and alterations of these mechanisms in the obese are incompletely understood. For this, we hypothesized that (i) similar brain regions are engaged by the stimulation of sweet taste receptors by sucrose and by non‐nutrient sweeteners and (ii) during visual food‐related cues, obese subjects show greater brain responses to sucrose compared with lean controls. Methods: In a double‐blind, crossover design, 10 obese and 10 lean healthy females received a sucrose or a non‐nutrient sweetened beverage prior to viewing food or neutral images. BOLD signal was measured using a 1.5 Tesla MRI scanner. Key Results: Viewing food images after ingestion of either drink was associated with engagement of similar brain regions (amygdala, hippocampus, thalamus, anterior insula). Obese differed from lean subjects in behavioral and brain responses rating both beverages as less tasteful and satisfying, yet demonstrating greater brain responses. Obese subjects also showed engagement of an additional brain network (including anterior insula, anterior cingulate, hippocampus, and amygdala) only after sucrose ingestion. Conclusions & Inferences: Obese subjects had a reduced behavioral hedonic response, yet a greater engagement of affective brain networks, particularly after sucrose ingestion, suggesting that in obese subjects, lingual and gut‐derived signaling generate less central hedonic effects than food‐related memories in response to visual cues, analogous to response patterns implicated in food addiction.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/nmo.12125

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 52 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Connolly, L., Coveleskie, K., Kilpatrick, L. A., Labus, J. S., Ebrat, B., Stains, J., Jiang, Z., Tillisch, K., Raybould, H. E., & Mayer, E. A.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Oppenheimer Family Center for Neurobiology of Stress Los Angeles CA USA
  • University of California, Davis (US)
Corresponding author
Mayer, E. A.
Venue
Neurogastroenterology & Motility
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-04-09
Volume
25
Issue
7
Pages
579
ISSN
  • 1350-1925 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2982
OpenAlex
W2050085989
Cited by
38
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurogastroenterology & Motility (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K08DK071626, R01DK048351, P50DK064539, P30DK041301)
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (R24AT002681)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Eating Disorders and Behaviors
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
obesity, sucrose, sweet taste, food reward, brain responses, hedonic response, satiety, amygdala, hippocampus, anterior insula, anterior cingulate cortex, food addiction, women
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Beverages, Brain, Brain Mapping, Double-Blind Method, Female, Food Preferences, Humans, Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Obesity, Sweetening Agents, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review