AIM OF THIS REVIEW: This review aims to succinctly collect information about medicinal plant extracts that exhibit antidiabetic potential through α-glucosidase inhibition using acarbose as a standard reference in Southeast Asia. The characteristics of this inhibition are based on in vitro studies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Relevant information on medicinal plants in Southeast Asia, along with α-glucosidase inhibition studies using acarbose as a positive control, was gathered from various scientific databases, including Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar.
RESULTS: About 49 papers were found from specific counties in Southeast Asia demonstrated notable α-glucosidase inhibitory potential of their medicinal plants, with several plant extracts showcasing activity comparable to or surpassing that of acarbose. Notably, 19 active constituents were identified for their α-glucosidase inhibitory effects.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings underscore the antidiabetic potential of the tested medicinal plant extracts, indicating their promise as alternative treatments for T2DM. This review can aid in the development of potent therapeutic medicines with increased effectiveness and safety for the treatment of T2DM.
OBJECTIVE: To characterize and evaluate the plant-based alternatives available on the market in Spain in comparison to animal products in terms of their nutritional composition and profile, and degree of processing.
METHODS: Nutritional information for PBAPs and homologs were obtained from the Spanish 'Veggie base', branded food composition database. Five PBAPs categories (cheese, dairy products, eggs, meat, and fish, n = 922) were compared to animal-based processed (n = 922) and unprocessed (n = 381) homologs, using the modified version of the Food Standard Agency Nutrient Profiling System (FSAm-NPS score) and NOVA classification criteria.
RESULTS: Compared to processed or unprocessed animal food, PBAPs contain significantly higher sugar, salt, and fiber. PBAPs for fish, seafood, and meat were lower in protein and saturated fatty acids. Overall, 68% of PBAPs, 43% of processed and 75% of unprocessed animal-homologs had Nutri-Score ratings of A or B (most healthy). About 17% of PBAPs, 35% of processed and 13% of unprocessed animal-based food were in Nutri-Score categories D or E (least healthy). Dairy, fish, and meat alternatives had lower FSAm-NPS scores (most healthy), while cheese alternatives scored higher (least healthy) than animal-based homologs. Unprocessed fish and meat were healthier than similar PBAPs based on FSAm-NPS criteria. Approximately 37% of PBAPs and 72% of processed animal-based products were ultra-processed food (NOVA group 4). Within the ultra-processed food group, Nutri-Score varied widely.
CONCLUSIONS: Most PBAPs had better nutrient profile than animal-based homologs. However, cheese, fish and meats PBAPs had poorer nutrient profile and were more processed. Given the high degree of processing and variable nutritional profile, PBAPs require a multi-dimensional evaluation of their health impact.