| Literature DB >> 29367728 |
A Simon-Soro1, A Sherriff2, S Sadique2, G Ramage3, L Macpherson2, A Mira1, S Culshaw3,4, J Malcolm5.
Abstract
Understanding the triad of host response, microbiome and disease status is potentially informative for disease prediction, prevention, early intervention and treatment. Using longitudinal assessment of saliva and disease status, we demonstrated that partial least squares modelling of microbial, immunological and clinical measures, grouped children according to future dental disease status. Saliva was collected and dental health assessed in 33 children aged 4 years, and again 1-year later. The composition of the salivary microbiome was assessed and host defence peptides in saliva were quantified. Principal component analysis of the salivary microbiome indicated that children clustered by age and not disease status. Similarly, changes in salivary host defence peptides occurred with age and not in response to, or preceding dental caries. Partial least squares modelling of microbial, immunological and clinical baseline measures clustered children according to future dental disease status. These data demonstrate that isolated evaluation of the salivary microbiome or host response failed to predict dental disease. In contrast, combined assessment of both host response together with the microbiome revealed clusters of health and disease. This type of approach is potentially relevant to myriad diseases that are modified by host-microbiome interactions.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29367728 PMCID: PMC5784018 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-20085-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Demographics and clinical characteristics.
| N-N | N-Y | Y-Y | p | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n = 14 | n = 5 | n = 14 | |||
| Mean age | |||||
| (years) | Baseline | 4.8 (0.29) | 4.8 (0.44) | 4.5 (0.35) | 0.1a |
| Follow-up | 5.7 (0.27) | 5.8 (0.38) | 5.5 (0.34) | 0.1a | |
| Dentition | |||||
| (n) | Full primary dentition | 14 | 5 | 14 | — |
| 1 or more permanent teeth | 0 | 0 | 0 | — | |
| Gender | |||||
| (n) | Male | 13 | 0 | 6 | |
| Female | 1 | 5 | 8 | 0.01b | |
| Clinical characteristics | |||||
| AMR at baseline | 0 | 0δ | 2.9 (0.69)* | 0.0002a | |
| dmft at follow-up | 0 | 1.8 (0.59) | 3.9 (0.9)* | 0.0005a | |
| (CFE/ml) | Baseline | 2.5 (7.1) | 4 (31.6) | 138 (7.6) | 0.34a |
| Follow-up | 5 (6.3) | 7112 (2.3) | 1667 (4.6)* | 0.02a | |
Data shown are mean and standard error of the mean unless otherwise indicated.
aANOVA with overall p value reported. Statistically significant differences were followed up with Tukey multiple comparisons: p < 0.05 compared with *N-N or δN-Y.
bChi-square statistic.
AMR: active carious lesion, missing due to caries or restored due to caries
dmft: number of decayed, missing or filled teeth.
CFE/ml: Colony forming equivalents per ml saliva.
Figure 1Longitudinal changes in salivary oral microbiome by caries status. (A and B) Bar graphs indicate the average proportion of each bacterial genus at >1% at baseline (t1) and at the follow-up examination (t2), according to health status: N-N indicates children who remained caries free through the study (n = 14); Y-Y indicates children with caries at both time points (n = 14); N-Y indicates children who were caries-free at baseline and developed caries during the study (n = 5). (A) Total bacterial composition. (B) Detail of non-Streptococcus genera composition. (C) Bacterial composition for individual samples. The heatmap shows colour-coded frequencies for all genera found at >1%. Samples are clustered by their genus-level microbial profile. (D) Richness, number of OTUs in each group (E) Shannon Index of bacterial diversity in each group. (F) Line graphs depicting the change in the mean of each genera of >1% abundance at t1 and t2. The panel label N-N, N-Y, Y-Y indicates group. (G) Samples occupy a position in this Principal Coordinates Analysis (PCoA) according to their bacterial composition as estimated by 16S rRNA gene pyrosequencing. Unweighted Bray-Curtis distances were used (a weighted analysis provided very similar results). Samples are colour-coded according to the health status of children. Circles indicate t1, baseline; triangles indicated t2, follow-up.
Figure 2Longitudinal changes in salivary antimicrobials by caries status. Scatterplots comparing the baseline and follow-up concentrations (ng/ml) of (A) lactoferrin, (B) HNPs-1-3 and (C) LL37, grouped according to the change in caries status: N-N (n = 14 children who were caries free at baseline and remained caries free at the follow-up examination), N-Y (n = 5 children who were caries free at baseline but developed caries by the follow-up examination) and Y-Y (n = 14 children who had established caries into dentine at the baseline examination). Each data point represents the mean value for an individual child and the group mean and standard deviation are shown. A statistically significant two-way interaction was achieved for each antimicrobial by time and caries-status (p < 0.05). To test for differences between the concentrations of each antimicrobial at each time point ANOVA with Tukey comparison was used, ###p < 0.001 and #p < 0.05. Students t-test was used to test the differences between the concentration of each antimicrobial within each caries group ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01 and *p < 0.5. Raw data are shown. Statistical analyses used log10-transformed data.
Figure 3The interaction between salivary microbiome and salivary antimicrobials on caries progression.PLS-DA modeling plots. The PLS-DA model used caries-status at follow-up as the dependent variable with baseline salivary microbiome data, baseline salivary antimicrobial data, baseline S. mutans qPCR and baseline clinical data as the independent matrix. A model was generated with two significant components R2 = 0.623, Q2 = 0.207. This model clustered the children into those with established caries (Y-Y) and 2 subgroups of caries-free children, with those who developed caries by the time of the follow-up examination (N-Y) largely distinct from those who remained caries-free at follow-up (N-N) (A). PLS loading scatter plot illustrating important variables for clustering. Variables with VIP-values > 1.0 are highlighted: Clinical data at baseline (diamonds), health-associated VIPs in the upper right dimension (open circles), caries-associated VIPs in the upper left (closed triangles). Variables associated with divergence from health and caries are highlighted (grey circles). Small circles represent other variables used in the analysis but not influential for clustering (VIP < 1) (B).