Jørgen Valeur1, Milada Cvancarova Småstuen2, Torunn Knudsen3, Gülen Arslan Lied4,5, Arne Gustav Røseth6. 1. Unger-Vetlesen Institute, Lovisenberg Diaconal Hospital, Lovisenberggata 21, 0440, Oslo, Norway. jorgen.valeur@lds.no. 2. Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Oslo, Norway. 3. Department of Clinical Nutrition, Lovisenberg Diaconal Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 4. Department of Clinical Medicine, Center for Nutrition, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway. 5. Department of Medicine, Section of Gastroenterology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway. 6. Department of Medicine, Lovisenberg Diaconal Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A diet low in fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) may relieve symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). However, nutritional counseling is resource-demanding and not all patients will benefit. AIMS: To explore whether gut microbial composition may identify symptom response to a low-FODMAP diet in patients with IBS. METHODS: Patients were recruited consecutively to participate in a 4-week FODMAP-restricted diet. Response to diet was defined as ≥ 50% decrease in IBS symptom severity scores (IBS-SSS) compared to baseline. Fecal microbiota were analyzed by a commercially available method (the GA-map™ Dysbiosis Test), assessing 54 bacterial markers targeting more than 300 bacteria at different taxonomic levels. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients (54 F; 7 M) were included: 32 (29 F; 3 M) classified as responders and 29 (25 F; 4 M) as non-responders. Ten of the 54 bacterial markers differed significantly between responders and non-responders. Based on median values (used as cutoff) of responders for these 10 bacterial markers, we constructed a Response Index (RI): Each patient was given a point when the value for each selected bacterial marker differed from the cutoff. These points were summed up, giving an RI from 0 to 10. Patients with RI > 3 were 5 times more likely to respond (OR = 5.05, 95% CI [1.58; 16.10]), and the probability to respond was 83.4%, 95% CI [61.2-94%]. CONCLUSIONS: Gut microbial composition, assessed by using a new RI, may constitute a tool to identify patients that are likely to respond to dietary FODMAP restriction.
BACKGROUND: A diet low in fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides, monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) may relieve symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). However, nutritional counseling is resource-demanding and not all patients will benefit. AIMS: To explore whether gut microbial composition may identify symptom response to a low-FODMAP diet in patients with IBS. METHODS:Patients were recruited consecutively to participate in a 4-week FODMAP-restricted diet. Response to diet was defined as ≥ 50% decrease in IBS symptom severity scores (IBS-SSS) compared to baseline. Fecal microbiota were analyzed by a commercially available method (the GA-map™ Dysbiosis Test), assessing 54 bacterial markers targeting more than 300 bacteria at different taxonomic levels. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients (54 F; 7 M) were included: 32 (29 F; 3 M) classified as responders and 29 (25 F; 4 M) as non-responders. Ten of the 54 bacterial markers differed significantly between responders and non-responders. Based on median values (used as cutoff) of responders for these 10 bacterial markers, we constructed a Response Index (RI): Each patient was given a point when the value for each selected bacterial marker differed from the cutoff. These points were summed up, giving an RI from 0 to 10. Patients with RI > 3 were 5 times more likely to respond (OR = 5.05, 95% CI [1.58; 16.10]), and the probability to respond was 83.4%, 95% CI [61.2-94%]. CONCLUSIONS: Gut microbial composition, assessed by using a new RI, may constitute a tool to identify patients that are likely to respond to dietary FODMAP restriction.
Entities:
Keywords:
Clinical nutrition; Functional gastrointestinal disorders; Gut microbiome; Irritable bowel severity scoring system
Authors: Ami D Sperber; Dan Dumitrascu; Shin Fukudo; Charles Gerson; Uday C Ghoshal; Kok Ann Gwee; A Pali S Hungin; Jin-Yong Kang; Chen Minhu; Max Schmulson; Arkady Bolotin; Michael Friger; Tamar Freud; William Whitehead Journal: Gut Date: 2016-01-27 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Emma P Halmos; Claus T Christophersen; Anthony R Bird; Susan J Shepherd; Peter R Gibson; Jane G Muir Journal: Gut Date: 2014-07-12 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: Jonna Jalanka-Tuovinen; Jarkko Salojärvi; Anne Salonen; Outi Immonen; Klara Garsed; Fiona M Kelly; Abed Zaitoun; Airi Palva; Robin C Spiller; Willem M de Vos Journal: Gut Date: 2013-12-05 Impact factor: 23.059
Authors: C Casén; H C Vebø; M Sekelja; F T Hegge; M K Karlsson; E Ciemniejewska; S Dzankovic; C Frøyland; R Nestestog; L Engstrand; P Munkholm; O H Nielsen; G Rogler; M Simrén; L Öhman; M H Vatn; K Rudi Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2015-05-14 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: T N Hustoft; T Hausken; S O Ystad; J Valeur; K Brokstad; J G Hatlebakk; G A Lied Journal: Neurogastroenterol Motil Date: 2016-10-16 Impact factor: 3.598
Authors: Bruno P Chumpitazi; Kristi L Hoffman; Daniel P Smith; Ann R McMeans; Salma Musaad; James Versalovic; Joseph F Petrosino; Robert J Shulman Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2020-12-13 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: J R Swann; M Rajilic-Stojanovic; A Salonen; O Sakwinska; C Gill; A Meynier; P Fança-Berthon; B Schelkle; N Segata; C Shortt; K Tuohy; O Hasselwander Journal: Eur J Nutr Date: 2020-04-03 Impact factor: 5.614