Redefining health at the cellular level.
Track order →
Broccoli Sprout and Sulforaphane Research

Blood glucose and metabolism

Glucose Metabolism

Twelve week fasting glucose change in adults with prediabetes

In a 12 week trial, fasting glucose averaged 0.2 mmol/L lower than placebo. This fell short of the prespecified 0.3 mmol/L reduction target. The study also explored how individual metabolic and gut microbiome features related to response.

89 participants
Random allocation
74 participants
Final analysis
12 weeks
Duration of extract intake
Concept image of blood glucose and metabolism using scales and sprouts

Fasting Glucose · Difference Versus Placebo

Adjusted mean difference · mmol/L

Fasting Glucose · Difference Versus Placebo chart. Exact values and units appear in the data table below.

Point: estimated difference / line: 95% confidence interval

Did not meet the prespecified 0.3 mmol/L reduction target

Read Dwibedi · 2025 →
View values and units
Adjusted mean difference · mmol/L
GroupEstimate95% confidence interval
Difference versus placebo-0.2-0.44 ~ -0.01

Study Population and Conditions

Prediabetes · randomized, placebo-controlled

Randomized
89 participants
Final analysis
74 participants

Extract group 35 / placebo group 39 · 12 weeks

Sulforaphane 150 μmol/day · extract study

Read Dwibedi · 2025 →

Blood glucose and metabolism · research results at a glance

5 studies

Key human studies · glucose and insulin resistance

Key human studies · glucose and insulin resistance
Study and participantsIntake and observationFindings and context
Dwibedi · 2025

89 adults with prediabetes assigned
74 analyzed · placebo controlled

SFN 150μmol/day · 12 weeks
extract 35 / placebo 39 participants

Fasting glucose 0.2 mmol/L lower than placebo

Finding: Fasting glucose was 0.2 mmol/L lower than placebo. The 95% confidence interval was −0.44 to −0.01 mmol/L.

Context: The prespecified 0.3 mmol/L target was not reached. Differences in HbA1c and BMI were also not significant.

Axelsson · 2017

Adults with type 2 diabetes
analysis of a specific patient subgroup

Concentrated broccoli sprout extract
placebo comparison · subgroup assessment

Blood glucose change observed in a specific patient subgroup

Finding: Fasting glucose and HbA1c were lower in the subgroup with obesity and poor glucose control.

Context: A result from this subgroup. Hepatic glucose production was studied in separate cell and animal research.

Bahadoran · 2012

81 assigned / 63 analyzed

Sprout powder 5 or 10g/day
4 weeks · placebo controlled

Lower insulin and HOMA-IR in the 10 g/day group

Finding: Insulin and the insulin resistance measure HOMA-IR decreased in the 10 g/day group (between group effect p = 0.05).

Context: A four week trial in people with type 2 diabetes comparing short term insulin resistance markers.

Related human studies · metabolic markers measured alongside

Related human studies · metabolic markers measured alongside
Study and participantsIntake and observationFindings and context
Bahadoran · 2012

81 patients with type 2 diabetes assigned
72 completed · placebo controlled

Sprout powder 5 or 10g/day
4 weeks · placebo controlled

Finding: In the 10 g/day group, triglycerides and the oxidized LDL/LDL ratio fell, while HDL rose.

Context: A blood lipid assessment using the same recruitment criteria as the insulin resistance and oxidative stress reports.

Bahadoran · 2011

81 assigned / 63 analyzed

Sprout powder 5 or 10 g/day; four weeks; oxidative stress measurement

Finding: Antioxidant capacity rose, while lipid oxidative damage and oxidative stress markers fell.

Context: An antioxidant assessment with the same sample size and intake conditions as a 2012 report.

Sources

  1. Dwibedi, et al. Nat Microbiol. 2025;10.DOI 10.1038/s41564-025-01932-w
  2. Axelsson, et al. Sci Transl Med. 2017;9:eaah4477.DOI 10.1126/scitranslmed.aah4477
  3. Bahadoran, et al. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2012;63.DOI 10.3109/09637486.2012.665043
  4. Bahadoran, et al. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2012;96:348-354.DOI 10.1016/j.diabres.2012.01.009
  5. Bahadoran, et al. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2011;65.DOI 10.1038/ejcn.2011.59