| Literature DB >> 27438825 |
Carmen W H Chan1, Rosa S Wong2, Patrick T W Law3, Cho Lee Wong4, Stephen K W Tsui5, Winnie P Y Tang6, Janet W H Sit7.
Abstract
Eczema is a common skin condition that impairs children's daily life activities and quality of life. Previous research shows that gut microbiome composition plays an important role in the development of eczema. The present review summarizes evidence on environmental factors related to altered gut microbiota in children with eczema. We searched Medline, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane database of Systematic Reviews through October 2015. The search strategy focused on articles published in peer-reviewed, English-language journals with no publication year limit. Only original studies and review articles that reported environmental factors on gut microbiome specific to eczema were included in this review. We selected six studies (total 1990 participants) for full review and identified that the composition of gut microbiota specific to eczema could be influenced by the following environmental factors: length of gestation, mode of delivery, type of feeding, method of treatment, number of older siblings, and other lifestyle factors. There has been inconsistent empirical evidence as to the modulatory effects of gut microbiota on immunological functions in children with eczema. Further research on the environmental-host-microbial interaction is needed to develop a strong base of knowledge for the development and implementation of prevention strategies and policies for eczema.Entities:
Keywords: allergy development; childhood eczema; environmental-host-microbial interaction; gene-environment interaction; gut microbiota; immune system; microbiome diversity
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27438825 PMCID: PMC4964520 DOI: 10.3390/ijms17071147
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Flow diagram.
Characteristics of original studies.
| Study | Study Type | Study Place | Participants | Data Collection Time | Outcome Measures | Techniques Used to Determine the Microbial Diversity | Results | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evaluation of Eczema | Collection of Samples | |||||||
| Penders et al. (2007) [ | Prospective cohort study | The Netherlands | 957 infants | Postpartum questionnaires on child eczema status in the seven, 12 and 24 months | Infant feces collected at age one month; | Bacteria counts, total and specific IgE, atopic manifestations and sensitization | Quantitative real-time PCR | (1) More |
| Adlerberth et al. (2007) [ | Prospective cohort study | Multiple | 116 Goteborg children, 108 London children, 100 Rome children | Atopic eczema and total and food-specific IgE levels assessed at age 18 months | Rectal swab collected at age three days; | Atopic eczema diagnosis according to Williams’ criteria, SCORAD, Serum total and specific IgE levels against common food antigens | Subculture, Gram staining and biochemical/genetic tests | (1) No association between atopic eczema or food-specific IgE by age 18 months and any particular bacterial group acquisition time after adjusting for mode of delivery, parity, and breastfeeding at six months; |
| Storrø et al. (2011) [ | Prospective cohort study | Norway | 94 infants | Eczema survey assessment at six weeks after delivery and at age one and two years | Infant venous blood for slgE quantification collected at age two years; | Eczema diagnosis using UK Working Party (UKWP) criteria, slgE concentrations, microbiome composition analyzed through feces samples | Quantitative real-time PCR | (1) Less |
| Ismail et al. (2012) [ | Case-control study | Australia | cases: 33 (33.7%) infants with eczema; controls: 65 (66.3%) healthy infants | Infants evaluated at three, six, and 12 months for the presence of eczema | Infant fecal samples collected at day three, seven, 28, 90 and 180 of life | Skin prick testing, the Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) scale, bacterial DNA from infant fecal specimens | Terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP) | (1) At day seven, higher microbial diversity in healthy infants than infants with eczema at age 12 months after adjusting for mode of delivery, number of siblings, antibiotics use during pregnancy, breastfeeding, household pets, and maternal allergy |
| Penders et al. (2013) [ | Prospective cohort study | Germany | 497 infants | Infants evaluated regularly by a pediatrician for atopic dermatitis (AD) signs from the start of intervention until age three years | Fecal samples collected at age five weeks, 13 weeks and 31 weeks | Bacterial DNA from faeces, AD diagnosis | Quantitative real-time PCR | (1) Higher colonization rates of lactobacilli and bacteroides but lower rates of clostridia at age five weeks were associated with more older siblings; |
| West et al. (2015) [ | Case-control study | Australia | cases: 10 children with IgE-associated eczema; controls: 10 non-allegic children | Infants evaluated at age six and 12 months and 2.5 years | Stool samples collected from pregnant mother at inclusion and infant at age one week, one month, and 12 months | Skin prick testing, the Scoring Atopic Dermatitis (SCORAD) scale, bacterial DNA from infant fecal specimens | 16S rRNA 454 pyrosequencing | (1) Association between reduced relative abundance of potentially immunomodulatory gut bacteria and exaggerated inflammatory cytokine responses to TLR-ligands and subsequent development of IgE-associated eczema; |
Quality assessment of original studies. * means the study received 1 mark for that selected item.
| Study | Methods | Results | Total Quality Score | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study Design (Report Key Elements?) | Setting (Report Study Setting Details?) | Participants (Give Eligibility Criteria?) | Variables (Define All Variables?) | Data Sources/Measurement (Give Sources of Data?) | Bias (Address Potential Bias?) | Sample Size (How to Measure Study Size?) | Statistical Methods (Describe Statistical Methods Used?) | Participants (Report the Numbers of Individuals at Each Study Stage?) | Descriptive Data (Report Study Subject Characteristics?) | Outcome Data (Report Number in Each Exposure Category?) | Main Results (Report Unadjusted Estimates?) | ||
| Penders et al. (2007) [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | – | * | * | * | * | * | 11 |
| Adlerberth et al. (2007) [ | * | * | * | * | * | – | – | * | * | * | * | * | 10 |
| Storrø et al. (2011) [ | * | * | * | * | * | – | – | * | * | * | * | – | 9 |
| Ismail et al. (2012) [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | – | * | * | * | * | * | 11 |
| Penders et al. (2013) [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | – | * | * | * | * | * | 11 |
| West et al. (2015) [ | * | * | * | * | * | * | – | * | * | * | * | – | 10 |
Sequence of 16S rRNA primers and probes.
| Study | Target Organisms | Primer/Probe | Sequence (5′-3′) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Penders et al. (2007) [ | Forward primer | GCGTGCTTAACACATGCAAGTC | |
| Reverse primer | CACCCGTTTCCAGGAGCTATT | ||
| Probe | TCACGCATTACTCACCCGTTCGCC | ||
| Forward primer | CATGCCGCGTGTATGAAGAA | ||
| Reverse primer | CGGGTAACGTCAATGAGCAAA | ||
| Probe | TATTAACTTTACTCCCTTCCTCCCCGCTGAA | ||
| Forward primer | TTGAGCGATTTACTTCGGTAAAGA | ||
| Reverse primer | TGTACTGGCTCACCTTTGATATTCA | ||
| Probe | CCACGCGTTACTCACCCGTCCG | ||
| Forward primer | CGGAGGATCCGAGCGTTA | ||
| Reverse primer | CCGCAAACTTTCACAACTGACTTA | ||
| Probe | CGCTCCCTTTAAACCCAATAAATCCGG | ||
| Forward primer | AGCAGTAGGGAATCTTCCA | ||
| Reverse primer | CACCGCTACACATGGAG | ||
| Storrø, et al. (2011b) [ | Bacteria | Forward primer | TCCTACGGGAGGCAGCAGT |
| Probe | FAM-CTGATTACCGCGGCTGCTGGCAC-TAMRA | ||
| Reverse primer | GGACTACCAGGGTATCTAATCCTGTT | ||
| Forward primer | GAAAGCATTAAGTATTCCACCTG | ||
| Probe | FAM-TGAAACTCAAAGGAATTGACGGGG-TAMRA | ||
| Reverse primer | CGGTGATTGGTCACTGACA | ||
| Forward primer | GTGTGATATCTACCCGCTTCGC | ||
| Probe | FAM-TCGGCATCCGGTCAGTGGCAGT-TAMRA | ||
| Reverse primer | AGAACGGTTTGTGGTTAATCAGGA | ||
| Forward primer | GTGGTGGCTTGAGAACTGGATAG | ||
| Probe | FAM-TGATTCCTCGTTCTTGCTGT-MGB | ||
| Reverse primer | CAAAACGATCGAAACAAACACTAAA | ||
| Forward primer | AGAACCACGGCGGCGTC | ||
| Probe | FAM-TGCGCTCGCCGACG-MGB | ||
| Reverse primer | CGCGGTCTTCTCGAGCACT | ||
| Forward primer | TGGAAGACGTCGTTGGCTTT | ||
| Probe | FAM-CGCACCCACCGCA-MGB | ||
| Reverse primer | ATCGCGCCAGGCAAAA | ||
| Forward primer | GGGATGCTGGTGTGGAAGAGA | ||
| Probe | FAM-TCAAACCACCACGCGCCA-MGB | ||
| Reverse primer | TGCTCGCGTCCACTATCCAGT | ||
| Forward primer | ATGGCTTTTGTTTGAAAGATGGC | ||
| Probe | FAM-TGGCTATCACTCTGGGATG-MGB | ||
| Reverse primer | CCTTACCAACTAGCTAATGCACCG | ||
| Forward primer | CATAAATCCAAGAACCGCATGG | ||
| Probe | FAM-CTTGGCTGAAAGATG-MGB | ||
| Reverse primer | CACGCCGACAACAGTTACTCTGC | ||
| Forward primer | ATATCAGAGACTGATGAG | ||
| Probe | FAM-TGGAGAATCTATATTTGTAGAAAC-MGB | ||
| Reverse primer | TAGCATATTCAGAGAATATTGT | ||
| Forward primer | TTCTATCTTGGAGAGGCTATGCACTATTTT | ||
| Probe | FAM-TAGATACTCCATATCATCCTGCTAATGTTACTGCCGTTGA-TAMRA | ||
| Reverse primer | TTTCAAACTTAACATGTCCTGCGC | ||
| Forward primer | TGGACCGCATGGTCCGAG | ||
| Probe | FAM-TCCCGCGGCGTATTA-MGB | ||
| Reverse primer | GTGAGCCGTTACCCCACCAT | ||
| Forward primer | CGTGGCAAGCATGATCCAT | ||
| Probe | FAM-TCAGGAAACATCGCTTCAATACCCACTT-TAMRA | ||
| Reverse primer | GGGTATGCACGGTTACGAGTTT | ||
| Penders et al. (2013) [ | Forward primer | GCGTGCTTAACACATGCAAGTC | |
| Reverse primer | CACCCGTTTCCAGGAGCTATT | ||
| Probe | TCACGCATTACTCACCCGTTCGCC | ||
| Forward primer | CATGCCGCGTGTATGAAGAA | ||
| Reverse primer | CGGGTAACGTCAATGAGCAAA | ||
| Probe | TATTAACTTTACTCCCTTCCTCCCCGCTGAA | ||
| Forward primer | TTGAGCGATTTACTTCGGTAAAGA | ||
| Reverse primer | TGTACTGGCTCACCTTTGATATTCA | ||
| Probe | CCACGCGTTACTCACCCGTCCG | ||
| Forward primer | CGGAGGATCCGAGCGTTA | ||
| Reverse primer | CCGCAAACTTTCACAACTGACTTA | ||
| Probe | CGCTCCCTTTAAACCCAATAAATCCGG | ||
| Forward primer | AGCAGTAGGGAATCTTCCA | ||
| Reverse primer | CACCGCTACACATGGAG | ||
| Forward primer | TACCHRAGGAGGAAGCCAC | ||
| Reverse primer | GTTCTTCCTAATCTCTACGCAT | ||
| Probe | GTGCCAGCAGCCGCGGTAATACG |