| Literature DB >> 29211757 |
Pieter F de Groot1, Clara Belzer2, Ömrüm Aydin1, Evgeni Levin1, Johannes H Levels1, Steven Aalvink2, Fransje Boot1, Frits Holleman1, Daniël H van Raalte3,4, Torsten P Scheithauer1,3,4, Suat Simsek5, Frank G Schaap6,7,8, Steven W M Olde Damink6, Bart O Roep9,10, Joost B Hoekstra1, Willem M de Vos2,11, Max Nieuwdorp1,3,4,12.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Environmental factors driving the development of type 1 diabetes (T1D) are still largely unknown. Both animal and human studies have shown an association between altered fecal microbiota composition, impaired production of short-chain fatty acids (SCFA) and T1D onset. However, observational evidence on SCFA and fecal and oral microbiota in adults with longstanding T1D vs healthy controls (HC) is lacking. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We included 53 T1D patients without complications or medication and 50 HC matched for age, sex and BMI. Oral and fecal microbiota, fecal and plasma SCFA levels, markers of intestinal inflammation (fecal IgA and calprotectin) and markers of low-grade systemic inflammation were measured.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29211757 PMCID: PMC5718513 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0188475
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Baseline characteristics.
| Baseline characteristics | T1D (n = 53) | HC (n = 50) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 35 ± 9 | 36 ± 13 | NS |
| Sex (% male) | 53 | 52 | NS |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 22.8 ± 1.9 | 22.2 ± 2.0 | NS |
| Diabetes duration (years) | 9 [5–16] | ||
| Insulin use (IU/day) | 44 ± 16 | ||
| HbA1c (mmol/mol,%) | 59, 7.5 [52–64, 6.9–8.0] | ||
| C-reactive protein (mg/l) | 0.6 [0.3–1.2] | 0.5 [0.3–0.8] | NS |
| Leukocytes (·109/l) | 5.3 [4.6–6.1] | 5.4 [4.7–6.5] | NS |
| LPS-binding protein (μg/ml) | 13.7 [12.3–17.8] | 15.0 [12.2–19.8] | NS |
| Fecal calprotectin (μg/g) | 22.0 [1–53] | 9.5 [1.0–29.0] | NS |
| Fecal IgA (ng/ml) | 1154 [676–1989] | 856 [382–2116] | NS |
| Fecal acetate (mmol/g) | 36.4 [23.3–47.8] | 37.2 [22.6–44.9] | NS |
| Fecal propionate (mmol/g) | 223 [150–329] | 227 [149–397] | NS |
| Fecal butyrate (mmol/g) | 66.2 [42.4–118] | 76.3 [53.3–113.9] | NS |
| Total fecal SCFA (mmol/g) | 341 [250–507] | 348 [240–534] | NS |
| Plasma acetate (μmol/l) | 29.7 [17.4–54.3] | 44.4 [20.9-69-2] | 0.034 |
| Plasma propionate (μmol/l) | 0.85 [0.53–1.41] | 1.12 [0.75–1.48] | 0.032 |
| Plasma butyrate(μmol/l) | 0.79 [0.60–1.11] | 0.84 [0.61–1.05] | NS |
| Total calories (kcal/day) | 1998 [1712–2388] | 1956 [1725–2507] | NS |
| Protein intake (g/day) | 81 [69–92] | 74 [64–88] | NS |
| Carbohydrate intake (g/day) | 212 [164–252] | 224 [167–275] | NS |
| Fat intake (g/day) | 79 [69–101] | 77 [66–96] | NS |
| Fiber intake (g/day) | 23.0 [18.1–29.2] | 20.6 [16.4–24.7] | 0.060 |
Group characteristics expressed as mean ± SD or median [IQR] with p-value using independent T-test for parametric and Mann-Whitney test for non-parametric data.
Fig 1Plasma SCFA and dietary fiber intake.
The figure shows that (A) despite higher fiber intake, we (B) found decreased plasma levels of acetate and (C) propionate and (D) similar levels of plasma butyrate in controls vs T1D subjects.
Fig 2Fecal microbiota composition.
Differences in (A) fecal and (B) oral microbiota composition as depicted by a biplot of Redundancy Analysis (RDA axis 1 vs. axis 2) constrained by T1D or controls.
Most discriminating fecal genera from elastic net analysis.
| Genus | mean | In % | mean | In % | Ratio | Weight | p-value | q-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Genus of Bacteriodales | 0.0044 | 38 | 0.0011 | 20 | 4.0 | 0.64 | 0.093 | 0.653 |
| 0.0002 | 16 | 0.0000 | 0 | Inf | 0.515 | 0.015 | 0.311 | |
| 0.0057 | 60 | 0.0022 | 43 | 2.6 | 0.463 | 0.248 | 0.311 | |
| 0.0540 | 98 | 0.0417 | 89 | 1.3 | 0.345 | 0.464 | 0.320 | |
| Genus of Christensenellaceae | 0.0267 | 89 | 0.0165 | 80 | 1.6 | 0.306 | 0.385 | 0.392 |
| 0.0068 | 93 | 0.0282 | 91 | 0.2 | -0.152 | 0.764 | 0.390 | |
| 0.0023 | 73 | 0.0039 | 77 | 0.6 | -0.292 | 0.371 | 0.318 | |
| 0.0001 | 56 | 0.0040 | 51 | 0.0 | -0.304 | 0.664 | 0.390 | |
| 0.0113 | 7 | 0.0159 | 17 | 0.7 | -0.342 | 0.122 | 0.306 | |
| 0.0000 | 76 | 0.0004 | 89 | 0 | -0.401 | 0.348 | 0.318 | |
| Genus of Rhodospirillales | 0.0000 | 0 | 0.0005 | 14 | 0.1 | -0.585 | 0.009 | 0.193 |
| 0.0044 | 2 | 0.0011 | 11 | 4.0 | -0.817 | 0.089 | 0.311 |
Mean relative abundance, percentage of subjects harboring species and ratio of most discriminating fecal microbiota from our predictive models analysis. Taxa are ordered by weight in the predictive model from highest positive to lowest negative.
*Taxa shown are discriminatory between cases and controls as a group and not on the individual level. Nevertheless, calculated p and q values (using Mann-Whitney U-test and q-value package in R) are included for completeness.
**“T1D” type 1 diabetes, “HC” healthy controls, “inf” infinite.
Fig 3Most discriminating fecal species.
Relative abundances of most discriminating fecal microbiota resulting from our elastic net analysis for (A) T1D patients and (B) healthy controls (B).
Most discriminating oral genera from elastic net analysis.
| Genus | Mean | In % | Mean | In % | Ratio | Weight | p-value | q-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0005 | 14 | 0.0000 | 14 | 16.2 | 0.133 | 0.064 | 0.116 | |
| 0.0002 | 8 | 0.0000 | 8 | Inf | 0.126 | 0.079 | 0.116 | |
| 0.5337 | 100 | 0.4306 | 100 | 1.2 | 0.106 | 0.007 | 0.035 | |
| 0.0027 | 39 | 0.0009 | 39 | 3.1 | 0.088 | 0.006 | 0.035 | |
| 0.0044 | 33 | 0.0002 | 33 | 18.5 | 0.069 | 0.007 | 0.035 | |
| Genus of Pasteurellaceae | 0.0029 | 61 | 0.0035 | 61 | 0.8 | -0.051 | 0.28 | 0.146 |
| 0.0010 | 27 | 0.0017 | 27 | 0.6 | -0.058 | 0.117 | 0.130 | |
| 0.0270 | 53 | 0.0530 | 53 | 0.5 | -0.091 | 0.1 | 0.130 | |
| 0.0011 | 20 | 0.0032 | 20 | 0.3 | -0.144 | 0.615 | 0.203 | |
| 0.0225 | 78 | 0.0481 | 78 | 0.5 | -0.157 | 0.072 | 0.116 |
Mean relative abundance, percentage of subjects harboring species and ratio of most discriminating oral microbiota from our predictive models analysis. Taxa are ordered by weight in the predictive model from highest positive to lowest negative.
*Taxa shown are discriminatory between cases and controls as a group and not on the individual level. Nevertheless, calculated p and q values (using Mann-Whitney U-test and q-value package in R) are included for completeness.
**“T1D” type 1 diabetes, “HC” healthy controls, “inf” infinite.
Fig 4Most discriminating oral species.
Relative abundances of most discriminating oral microbiota resulting from our elastic net analysis for (A) T1D patients and (B) healthy controls (B). Please note that the y-axes differ between figures and that Streptococcus abundance was relatively very large (0.53 in T1D and 0.43 in healthy controls) and did not fit in the figure.