HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Muir, J. G Articles by Macrae, F. A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Muir, J. G Articles by Macrae, F. A Agricola Articles by Muir, J. G Articles by Macrae, F. A

Combining wheat bran with resistant starch has more beneficial effects on fecal indexes than does wheat bran alone^1,2,3

¹ From the Department of Gastroenterology, Monash University, Box Hill Hospital, Victoria, Australia (JGM); the Andrew Love Cancer Centre, The Geelong Hospital, Geelong, Victoria, Australia (EGWY); CSIRO Health Sciences and Nutrition, Adelaide, Australia (JK and ARB); the Department of Colorectal Medicine and Genetics, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Victoria, Australia (CP and FAM); the Department of Mathematics & Statistics, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia (KS); and the Menzies School of Health Research, Casuarina, Northern Territory, Australia (KO).

² Supported by grants from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and Meat and Livestock Australia. Starch Australasia (Lane Cove, Australia) supplied the Hi-maize, waxy maize, and wheat bran and Meat and Livestock Australia donated meat.

³ Reprints not available. Address correspondence to J Muir, Department of Gastroenterology, Monash University, Box Hill Hospital, Level 8, Clive Ward Centre, Arnold St, Box Hill, Victoria, Australia, 3128. E-mail: jane.muir{at}med.monash.edu.au.

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION SUBJECTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Background: Wheat bran (WB) increases fecal bulk and hastens colonic transit, whereas resistant starch (RS) has effects on colonic fermentation, including increasing concentrations of butyrate.

Objective: We hypothesized that a diet combining WB with RS would produce more favorable changes in fecal variables (eg, fecal bulk, rapid transit time, lower pH, and higher butyrate) than would WB alone.

Design: This was a randomized crossover block-design study for which 20 volunteers with a family history of colorectal cancer were recruited. The study included 3 diets: control, WB (12 g fiber/d), and WBRS (12 g WB fiber/d plus 22 g RS/d), each continued for 3 wk. In each diet, the major source of protein was lean red meat. During 5 consecutive days (days 15–19) of each dietary period, the subjects collected their total fecal output for analysis.

Results: The WB diet resulted in greater fecal output (by 23% and 21% for wet and dry weights, respectively) and a lesser transit time (–11 h) than did the control diet but did not have major effects on fermentation variables. Compared with the control diet, the WBRS diet resulted in greater fecal output (by 56%) and a shorter transit time (–10 h), lower fecal pH (–0.15 units), higher fecal concentration (by 14%) and daily excretion (by 101%) of acetate, higher fecal concentration (by 79%) and daily excretion (by 162%) of butyrate, a higher fecal ratio of butyrate to total short-chain fatty acids (by 45%), and lower concentrations of total phenols (–34%) and ammonia (–27%).

Conclusions: Combining WB with RS had more benefits than did WB alone. This finding may have important implications for the dietary modulation of luminal contents, especially in the distal colon (the most common site of tumor formation).

Key Words: Wheat bran • resistant starch • fecal bulk • colonic transit • luminal butyrate • colonic fermentation

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION SUBJECTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
The effects of wheat bran (WB) on reducing transit time, fecal bulking, and dilution of potentially carcinogenic compounds are well established (1, 2). WB has been shown to be effective at protecting against tumor formation in animal models (3, 4). Intervention trials monitoring the occurrence of new colorectal adenomas in human volunteers, however, have been less conclusive (5), with the Australian Polyp Prevention Project being the most convincing positive trial to date (6). Fermentation of WB by colonic microflora produces short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), including acetate, propionate, and butyrate (7), which are rapidly absorbed by the colonic mucosa (7). Butyrate, the preferred energy source of the colonocyte (8), has a range of effects relevant to reducing colorectal cancer risk (7, 9–12). In contrast, when protein is fermented in the colon, the byproducts ammonia and phenols (p-cresol and phenol) may be deleterious (13). These tend to accumulate when protein is fermented in a carbohydrate-deficient environment. WB can dilute the concentration of these byproducts (14).

Resistant starch (RS) is another carbohydrate to reach the colon undigested (15). The 3 main types of RS are RS₁ (physically inaccessible starch), RS₂ (ungelatinized starch granules), and RS₃ (retrograded starch polymers) (15). The major physiologic effects of RS on the colon of humans include increased concentrations of SCFAs (16–19), lowered pH (17, 19), and lowered concentrations of ammonia, phenols, and secondary bile acids (20–22). RS, however, has little (19, 23) or only modest effects on fecal bulking (16–18, 21) and tends to delay rather than hasten intestinal transit time (18, 23). Particular interest has been focused on the observation that fermentation of RS produces more butyrate than does fermentation of nonstarch polysaccharides, including cereal brans (19, 24). Yet not all reported effects of RS are positive. For example, RS (from raw potato starch) was found to cause colonocyte hyperproliferation and increased tumor formation in animal models (25). Moreover, a recent human study found that a high-RS diet [based on the high amylose maize starch Hylon V11 (National Starch Chemical Company, Bridgewater, NJ)] increased the formation of DNA adducts (26). These adverse outcomes may be prevented by using a mix of dietary fiber types. We have shown that combining WB with RS from potato starch attenuates the RS-induced increase in tumor formation in rats (25). We suggested that this effect may relate to the extent and location of fermentation events in the colon (25, 27, 28).

In humans, most tumors occur in the distal portion of the colon. To reduce the incidence of colorectal cancer, it may be important to focus on fermentation-dependent events, including butyrate production, at this site. Earlier work in pigs (29) found that the addition of WB to the diet can shift the site of RS fermentation more distally, thereby improving luminal conditions, including higher butyrate and lower ammonia concentrations. In the present study, we studied a WB plus RS diet in human volunteers with a family history of colorectal cancer. Red meat provided the major source of dietary protein. We hypothesized that combining WB with RS would produce more favorable changes in the fecal variables (eg, bulking, rapid transit, lower pH, higher butyrate, lower phenols, and lower ammonia) than would WB alone.

	SUBJECTS AND METHODS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION SUBJECTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Subjects
Twenty healthy volunteers (9 women, 11 men) aged 42 ± 2 y ( ± SEM; range: 22-67 y) with a mean body mass index (BMI; in kg/m²) of 26 ± 1 (range: 19–31) were recruited. Eighteen subjects had a close family history of colorectal cancer (first-degree relative), and 2 subjects had previously had colonic adenomas removed. One male subject had well-controlled type 2 diabetes. No subject reported any history of carbohydrate intolerance (eg, lactose intolerance), any history of gastrointestinal problems, or taking antibiotics or other medications known to affect bowel function for 4 wk before or during the study. The study was approved by the Human Ethics Committees of Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia, and The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.

Experimental design
This study was conducted over an 11-wk period (including 3 x 3 wk of test diets and 2 x 1-wk washout periods between each 3-wk dietary period). The 3 test diets were as follows: control (C: low RS, no added WB), WB (low RS, added WB), and WB plus RS (WBRS: WB plus moderate RS). The subjects were randomly assigned to 6 possible diet orders, with as close to a balanced design as possible. The subjects consumed each test diet for 3 wk, followed by a 1-wk break before crossing over to the next diet, until all 3 test diets had been consumed. At the end of each dietary period, the subjects were weighed and completed a questionnaire to assess gastrointestinal symptoms relating to each diet. During the study, no more than 4 standard drinks of alcohol per week were allowed.

The subjects completed food and drink diaries throughout the entire study. Dietary records were analyzed by using the FOODWORKS database (Xyris Software, Highgate Hill, Queensland, Australia), which is based on the Australian food-composition tables.

Experimental diets
During the test dietary periods, macronutrient intake was kept constant while the amounts of WB and RS were varied by the use of specially prepared foods. Background intakes of dietary fiber and RS were kept low throughout the study. Intake of WB and RS was based on energy intake, with the men consuming more WB- and RS-containing foods than did the women.

Three sets of foods were prepared, and the composition is given in Table 1. During the C diet, the subjects were supplied with cornbread, muffins, cakes, cereals, and desserts containing finely ground (<1 mm) low-amylose maize and no added WB. For the C diet, RS intakes ranged from 2 to 5 g/d. During the WB diet, the same foods were supplemented with unprocessed WB, which provided 10-15 g fiber/d (particle size: 1-3 mm); RS intakes ranged from 2 to 5 g/d. During the WBRS diet, the same foods were prepared with a high-amylose (85% amylose) maize [Hi-maize; Starch Australasia Ltd, Lane Cove, Australia (currently National Starch and Chemical Co, Bridgewater, NJ)]) that had been ground coarsely (particles ranging from <1 to 3 mm). The WBRS diet provided 20-30 g RS/d in addition to the 10-15 g fiber/d from WB. Preparation of similar low- and high-RS dietary foods have been described in detail previously (17). The amounts of RS in cooked ready-to-eat foods were measured with an in vitro assay developed in this laboratory and validated previously in an ileostomy model (30). In addition to these dietary foods, the subjects were supplied with 250 g raw lean red meat (5-7% fat) and requisite cooking instructions or were given frozen preprepared dishes containing this meat (150-250 g/d).

Table 2

Feces were analyzed for pH, SCFA, ammonia, and starch by established procedures (23). Fecal samples for each subject were thawed overnight at 4°C and were then weighed, pooled, and homogenized on ice before further storage in aliquots at –45°C. Samples of pooled fecal homogenate in sealed tubes were brought to 37°C before fecal pH was determined. An average of 3 readings was taken. Samples were processed quickly to minimize exposure to air. SCFA content was analyzed by gas chromatography. Fecal ammonia was estimated colorimetrically. Aliquots of fecal homogenate were freeze-dried to a constant weight for estimation of fecal dry weight. Fecal starch content was determined by using a commercially available kit (Megazyme Australia, Warriewood, Sydney, Australia) and involved first solubilizing the starch by boiling in dimethyl sulfoxide followed by enzymatic hydrolysis to quantitatively release glucose. This assay accurately quantifies starch in both fecal and food samples. The content of fecal phenols (ie, phenol and p-cresol) was determined by HPLC by the method described previously (31), except that a vacuum distillation procedure and ultraviolet light detection (270 nm) were used. Fecal and not urinary phenols were measured here, because an earlier study (20) showed that fecal phenols are more responsive to RS-induced change.

Statistical analyses
Each subject undertook each of the 3 diets at different time periods. Comparisons made between diets are therefore within subjects with allowance made for possible period effects. Two analyses were carried out for each outcome variable: one using diet as a nominal factor with 3 levels (an intention-to-treat analysis) and one using the actual amounts of WB and RS consumed, as derived from each subject’s food diary. The intention-to-treat analyses also considered possible carryover effects between study periods and sex-by-diet interactions; neither of these effects was found to be significant for any of the outcome variables, and they are excluded from the analyses reported below. Some of the outcome variables were transformed by using either a square-root or log transformation to allow for heterogeneity in the variability of the raw data. Repeated-measures analysis of variance followed by Tukey’s multiple comparisons was used throughout, with diet as a factor for some analyses and the actual amounts of WB and RS as covariates in others. In most cases, the analyses that used the actual amounts of WB and RS consumed merely confirmed the results of the intention-to-treat analyses, and thus only limited details are reported. For many of the outcome variables, usually one, but up to 3, outliers were identified. However, the conclusions were largely unaffected by the outliers and the analyses reported here are those without any of the outliers omitted. Data were analyzed with the SPLUS (version 6) statistical package [Lucent Technology (formerly Bell Laboratories), Murray Hill, NJ].

	RESULTS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION SUBJECTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Dietary intake
The subjects consumed similar amounts of energy and macronutrients during all 3 dietary periods (Table 3). Throughout the study, red meat contributed >50% of dietary protein; the men consumed 21% more meat ( ± SD: 212 ± 26 g/d) than did the women (166 ± 40 g/d). The consumption of total dietary fiber was higher by 7.2 g/d with the WB and WBRS diets than with the C diet because of the WB. Background fiber intake was higher during the C diet than during either of the test diets. This may have been due to a slightly greater intake of fruit and vegetables by individuals experiencing difficulties with constipation during the low-fiber C diet. Also, subjects reported greater satiety during the high-fiber diets, which in turn may have resulted in less consumption of fruit and vegetables during the WB and WBRS dietary periods.

Changes in fecal variables
Less than 7% of the RS supplied in the diet could be recovered in the feces. Eighteen of the 20 subjects excreted more starch in feces during the WBRS diet than during the C and WB periods, suggesting good adherence to the dietary prescription (Table 4).

The median fecal concentration of total phenols (phenol, p-cresol) and ammonia was significantly lower after the WBRS diet than after the C or WB diet (Table 5). The effect of diet on the concentration of phenols and ammonia may be accounted for by the increase in fecal output during the WBRS diet.

Table 6

Changes in SCFA excretion in feces were also expressed as a percentage of total SCFAs (Table 7). The relative proportions of the SCFAs changed significantly during the WBRS diet. The WBRS diet produced a marked and significant increase in the percentage of butyrate (45%) and a decrease in the percentage of propionate (–25%) produced. There was also a significant decrease in the proportion of iso-SCFAs, iso-butyrate (–18%), and iso-valerate (–33%) excreted during the WBRS diet.

	DISCUSSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION SUBJECTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

We are confident that the observed effects of the WBRS diet were due to the combination of WB with RS and not to the RS component alone. A group consuming RS only was not included in the present study because earlier work (16–23) showed that RS alone does not produce the wide range of luminal changes considered essential for improving colonic health and reducing colorectal cancer risk. Even at high doses (30-48 g/d), RS has only modest bulking ability and tends to delay rather than hasten intestinal transit time (17, 18, 21). RS does, however, have a major effect on fermentation-dependent events such as increasing the fecal excretion of the SCFAs acetate and butyrate and lowering pH. Furthermore, a study by Noakes et al (19) that was conducted in human volunteers used a similar quantity and source of RS as in the current study. Those authors found that this moderate amount of RS had no effect on fecal bulking but did lower fecal pH. The RS also increased the concentration of fecal butyrate without significantly changing the excretion of acetate or the molar ratio of butyrate to total SCFAs excreted. The molar ratio is a more reliable indicator of dietary induced change because >95% of the SCFAs produced are rapidly absorbed by the colon (16, 19). In the present study, the WBRS diet significantly increased the percentage of butyrate to total SCFAs, whereas the percentage of propionate to total SCFAs decreased, a finding that suggests a major shift in the products of fermentation. This may have implications for colorectal cancer risk, because a higher ratio of acetate to total SCFAs and a lower ratio of butyrate to total SCFAs has been reported in enema samples from patients with adenomatous polyps and colon cancer than in samples from healthy control subjects (32).

The present study extends earlier studies conducted by our group in pigs (29) and rats (25). In pigs, 4 diets (control, RS, WB, and WBRS) were examined. The RS (Hi-maize) was shown to be fermented in the proximal region of the colon, whereas addition of WB moved the site of fermentation further down the colon, improving conditions in the distal lumen by increasing concentrations of butyrate and lowering concentrations of ammonia (29). Tumor formation was studied in rats after a 10-wk course of dimethylhydrazine (25). The RS diet (raw potato starch) increased the number and size of tumors (25). Importantly, this negative effect of RS was reversed when the RS was combined with WB (25). Similar results were found for the highly fermentable fibers guar gum and pectin (33). The finding that diets high in RS without other fiber may not be protective against tumor formation is also borne out by a recent study by Wacker et al (26). Human volunteers were fed a diet containing RS from high-amylose maize (Hylon VII) and effects on lipid-peroxidation-induced DNA damage and proliferation in the colon were assessed. A significant increase in DNA adduct formation was evident during the high-RS period compared with the low-RS period (26). Formation of DNA adducts is thought to be important in the process of carcinogenesis. Precisely how intake of RS in the context of a fiber-poor diet relates to risk of colorectal cancer in humans remains unknown. Combining different fiber types (particularly more slowly fermented fibers with the rapidly fermented fibers) may be required for maximum benefits.

Red meat has been implicated as a risk factor for colorectal cancer in some (34) but not all (35) population studies. In the present study, we chose a background diet in which lean red meat contributed >50% of daily protein intake. When protein reaches the colon undigested, it can be processed by the microflora to potentially deleterious compounds, including ammonia and phenols (p-cresol, phenol) (13, 36-38). These products tend to accumulate in a carbohydrate-deficient environment. We showed previously that the fermentation of RS is effective at reducing fecal phenols and ammonia in humans (20). In the present study, the combination of WB and RS was effective at lowering concentrations of phenols and ammonia, principally through dilution effects from the increased fecal bulk. Fecal iso-SCFAs can be used as markers for amino acid fermentation in the colon (7, 14). In the present study, there was a significant decrease in the proportion of iso-SCFAs excreted during the WBRS diet, which is consistent with a decrease in colonic protein fermentation (7, 14).

The effects of WB on fecal variables are well reported (1, 2). The quantity of WB used here was similar (12 g fiber/d) to that used in the Australian Polyp Prevention Project (6). Effects on fecal bulking in the current study were less than anticipated, which may have been because the higher background amount of dietary fiber in the C diet masked some of the WB effects. Nevertheless, the WB diet did have a marked effect on hastening intestinal transit time (by 11 h), which was not enhanced further by the addition of RS. Bulking and faster transit have been suggested as 2 major protective characteristics of fiber against colorectal cancer (39). In contrast with the results of many animal studies, WB in the present study did not have major effects on the SCFA profile, especially butyrate (3, 27, 28). Other studies using higher doses of WB (18 g nonstarch polysaccharides/d) in humans, however, produced results similar to those observed here (18).

The increase in SCFAs during the WBRS diet resulted in more acidic feces (7). Lower luminal pH affects several processes relevant to reducing colorectal cancer risk (40, 41). Production of butyrate was also enhanced. Butyrate has been reported to have several important effects relevant to normal cellular function and protection against malignant transformation. For example, butyrate stabilizes DNA, induces differentiation (9, 10), reduces the growth rate of mammalian colorectal cell lines (10, 11), and induces apoptosis (12). RS has been shown, both in vitro and in animal studies, to be a better substrate for the production of butyrate than other nonstarch polysaccharide sources (7, 19, 24). Not all published studies of the effects of RS in humans, however, have shown this effect on butyrate production (18, 21). This variability may be due to the type and quantity of RS used or the quantity and nature of the background dietary fiber. These factors in turn may affect the location of RS fermentation along the bowel and whether it persists to the distal end.

In humans, the distal colon is the most common site of tumor formation (42); consequently, the site of fermentation may have important implications for colorectal cancer risk. Stable production of butyrate along the entire length of the colon may be important for protection against malignant change (43). Studies in rats have shown that differences in regional patterns of fermentation have different effects on outcomes of tumor formation (27). Perrin et al (43) showed that fibers that produce a stable production of butyrate along the length of the colon were more effective at decreasing the rate of aberrant crypt foci formation in azoxymethane-treated rats. Furthermore, RS₃ was more effective than starch-free WB (43).

The strategy of combining WB with RS was effective at producing beneficial changes in fecal bulking, transit time, and fermentation-dependent indexes that persisted to the distal regions of the human colon. The WBRS combination clearly produced more benefits than did the WB diet alone (as shown here) or the RS diet alone (as shown in previous studies). Moreover, combining WB with RS may attenuate any potentially negative effects of RS. This work suggests that to maximize the health benefits of dietary fiber in the gastrointestinal tract, a combination of different fiber types may be required.

	ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 
We thank the Kingston Centre for providing the cooking facilities, the volunteers who took part in this study, radiographers Cassie Cooper and Dana Jackson of the Radiology Department at Monash Medical Centre for radiography of fecal samples, and Debbie Davies and Corinna Flory for their assistance in performing phenol analyses. We also thank Karen Walker for reading the manuscript.

JGM, KO, and FAM designed the study and contributed to the interpretation of the results and preparation of the manuscript. JGM, EGWY, JK, and CP carried out the study. ARB carried out the analysis of the phenols and contributed to the interpretation of the results and preparation of the manuscript. KS conducted the statistical analysis of the data. JGM, EGWY, JK, CP, ARB, and KS had no financial or personal interests in the National Health and Medical Research Council or Meat and Livestock Australia. KO is a member of the Council of the National Health and Medical Research Council but had no role in funding decisions and had no affiliations with Meat and Livestock Australia. FAM participates as a member of the Scientific Advisory Board of Meat and Livestock Australia but had no role in funding decisions and had no affiliations with the National Health and Medical Research Council.

	REFERENCES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION SUBJECTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 

1. Cummings JH, Southgate DAT, Branch W, Houston H, Jenkins DJA, James WPT. Colonic response to dietary fibre from carrot, cabbage, apple, bran and guar gum. Lancet 1978;1:5–9.[Medline]
2. Cummings JH. The effect of dietary fiber on fecal weight and composition. In: Spiller GA, ed. CRC handbook of dietary fiber in human nutrition. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 1993:263–349.
3. McIntyre A, Gibson PR, Young GP. Fermentation products of dietary fiber and protection against large bowel cancer in a rat model. Gut 1993;34:386–91.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. Alabaster O, Tang Z, Shivapurkar N. Inhibition by wheat bran cereals of development of aberrant crypt foci and colon tumours. Food Chem Toxicol 1997;35:517–22.[Medline]
5. Alberts DS, Martinez ME, Roe DJ, et al. The Phoenix Colon Cancer Prevention Physicians Network. Lack of effect of a high-fibre cereal supplement on the recurrence of colorectal adenoma N Engl J Med 2000;342:1156–62.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. MacLennan R, Macrae FA, Bain C, et al. Randomized trial of intake of fat, fiber, and beta carotene to prevent colorectal adenomas. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1760–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7. Topping DL, Clifton PM. Short-chain fatty acids and human colonic function: roles of resistant starch and nonstarch polysaccharides. Physiol Rev 2001;81:1031–64.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8. Roediger WEW. Utilization of nutrients by isolated epithelial cells of the rat colon. Gastronenterology 1982;85:1307–12.
9. Candido EP, Reeves R, Davie JR. Sodium butyrate inhibits histone deacetylation in cells. Cell 1978;14:105–13.[Medline]
10. Whitehead RH, Young GP, Bhathal PS. Effects of short chain fatty acids on a new human colon carcinoma cell line (LIM1215). Gut 1986;27:1457–63.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11. Augeron C, Laboisse CL. Emergence of permanently differentiated cell clones in a human colonic cancer cell line after treatment with sodium butyrate. Cancer Res 1984;44:3961–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Hague A, Manning AM, Hanlon LI, Huschtscha LI, Hart D, Paraskeva C. Sodium butyrate induced apoptosis in human colonic tumor cell lines in a p53-independent pathway: implications for the possible role of dietary fibre in the prevention of large-bowel cancer. Int J Cancer 1993;55:498–505.[Medline]
13. Bingham SA. Meat, starch and non-starch polysaccharides and large-bowel cancer. Am J Clin Nutr 1988;48:762–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Cummings JH, Hill MJ, Bones ES, Branch WJ, Jenkins DJA. The effect of meat protein and dietary fiber on colonic function and metabolism. II. Bacterial metabolites in feces and urine Am J Clin Nutr 1979;32:2094–101.[Free Full Text]
15. Englyst HN, Kingman SM, Cummings JH. Classification and measurement of nutritionally important starch fractions. Eur J Clin Nutr 1992;46;S33–50.
16. Scheppach W, Fabian C, Sachs M, Kasper H. The effect of starch malabsorption on fecal short-chain fatty acid excretion in man. Scand J Gastroenterol 1988;23:755–9.[Medline]
17. Phillips J, Muir JG, Birkett A, et al. Effect of resistant starch on fecal bulk and fermentation-dependent events in humans. Am J Clin Nutr 1995;62:121–30.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Cummings JH, Beatty ER, Kingman SM, Bingham SA, Englyst HN. Digestion and physiological properties of resistant starch in the human large bowel. Br J Nutr 1996;75:733–47.[Medline]
19. Noakes M, Clifton PM, Nestel PJ, Le Leu R, McIntosh G. Effect of high-amylose starch and oat bran on metabolic variables and bowel function in subjects with hypertriglyceridemia. Am J Clin Nutr 1996;64:944–51.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
20. Birkett A, Muir JG, Phillips J, Jones GP, O’Dea K. Resistant starch lowers fecal concentrations of ammonia and phenols in humans. Am J Clin Nutr 1996;63:766–72.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Hylla S, Gostner A, Dusel G, et al. Effects of resistant starch on the colon in healthy volunteers: possible implications for cancer prevention. Am J Clin Nutr 1998;67:136–42.[Abstract]
22. van Munster IP, Tangerman A, Nagengast FM. Effect of resistant starch on colonic fermentation, bile acid metabolism, and mucosal proliferation. Dig Dis Sci 1994;39:834–42.[Medline]
23. Muir JG, Walker KZ, Kaimakamis MA, et al. Modulation of fecal markers relevant to colon cancer risk: a high-starch Chinese diet did not generate expected beneficial changes relative to a Western-type diet. Am J Clin Nutr 1998;68:372–9.[Abstract]
24. Englyst NH, Hay S, Macfarlane GT. Polysaccharide breakdown by mixed populations of human faecal bacteria. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 1987;95:163–71.
25. Young GP, McIntyre A, Albert V, Folino M, Muir JG, Gibson PR. Wheat bran suppresses potato starch—potentiated colorectal tumorigenesis at the aberrant crypt stage in a rat model. Gastroenterology 1996;110:508–14.[Medline]
26. Wacker M, Wanek P, Eder E, Hylla S, Gostner A, Scheppach W. Effect of enzyme-resistant starch on formation of 1,N(2)-propanadeoxyguanosine adducts of trans-4-hydroxy-2-nonenal-1 and cell proliferation in the colonic mucosa of healthy volunteers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:915–20.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
27. Folino M, McIntyre A, Young GP. Dietary fibers differ in their effects on large bowel epithelial proliferation and fecal fermentation-dependent events in rats. J Nutr 1995;125:1521–8.
28. Lu ZX, Gibson PR, Muir JG, Fielding M, O’Dea K. Fermentation-related factors that underlie the effects of wheat bran and soluble fiber on the distal colonic epithelium in normal rats. J Nutr 2000;130:1984–90.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29. Govers MJAP, Gannon NJ, Dunshea FR, Gibson PR, Muir JG. Wheat bran affects the site of fermentation of resistant starch and luminal indexes related to colon cancer risk: a study in pigs. Gut 1999;45:840–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
30. Muir JG, O’Dea. Validation of an in vitro assay for measuring starch escaping digestion in the small intestine. Am J Clin Nutr 1993;57:540–6.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Murray KE, Adams RF. Determination of simple phenols in faeces and urine by high-performance liquid chromatography. J Chromatogr 1988;431:143–9.[Medline]
32. Weaver GA, Krause JA, Miller TL, Wolin MJ. Short chain fatty acid distribution of enema samples from a sigmoidoscopy population: an association of high acetate and low butyrate ratios with adenomatous polyps and colon cancer. Gut 1988;29:1539–43.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
33. McIntyre A, Young GP, Taranto T, Gibson PR, Ward P. Different fibers have different regional effects on luminal contents of rat colon. Gastroenterology 1991;101:1274–81.[Medline]
34. Giovannucci E, Rimm EB, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA, Ascherio A, Willett WC. Intake of fat, meat and fiber in relation to risk of colon cancer in men. Cancer Res 1994;54:2390–7.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
35. Truswell AS. Meat consumption and colorectal cancer: critique of Norat and Riboli’s review. Nutr Rev 2001;59:375–7.[Medline]
36. Visek WJ. Diet and cell growth modulation by ammonia. Am J Clin Nutr 1978;31(suppl):S216–20.[Abstract]
37. Boutwell RK, Bosch DK. The tumor-promoting action of phenol and related compounds for mouse skin. Cancer Res 1959;19:413–27.
38. Ramakrishna BS, Roberts-Thomson IC, Pannall PR, Roediger WEW. Impaired sulphation of phenol by the colonic mucosa in quiescent and active ulcerative colitis. Gut 1991;32:46–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
39. Burkitt DP, Walker ARP, Painter NS. Effect of dietary fibre on stools and transit times, and its role in the causation of disease. Lancet 1972;2:1408–12.[Medline]
40. Thornton JR. High colonic pH promotes colorectal cancer. Lancet 1981;1:1081–2.[Medline]
41. Newmark HL, Lupton JR. Determinants and consequences of colonic luminal pH. Nutr Cancer 1990;16:75–7.
42. Bufill JA. Colorectal cancer: evidence for distinct genetic categories based on proximal or distal tumor location. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:779–88.
43. Perrin P, Pierre F, Patry Y, et al. Only fibres promoting a stable butyrate producing colonic ecosystem decrease the rate of aberrant crypt foci in rats. Gut 2001;48:53–61.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. K. Le Leu, I. L. Brown, Y. Hu, T. Morita, A. Esterman, and G. P. Young Effect of dietary resistant starch and protein on colonic fermentation and intestinal tumourigenesis in rats Carcinogenesis, February 1, 2007; 28(2): 240 - 245. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Muir, J. G Articles by Macrae, F. A Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Muir, J. G Articles by Macrae, F. A Agricola Articles by Muir, J. G Articles by Macrae, F. A