| Literature DB >> 29764499 |
Mie Korslund Wiinblad Crusell1, Tue Haldor Hansen1, Trine Nielsen1, Kristine Højgaard Allin1,2, Malte C Rühlemann3, Peter Damm4,5, Henrik Vestergaard1,6, Christina Rørbye7, Niklas Rye Jørgensen8,9, Ole Bjarne Christiansen10,11,12, Femke-Anouska Heinsen3, Andre Franke3, Torben Hansen1, Jeannet Lauenborg13, Oluf Pedersen14.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Imbalances of gut microbiota composition are linked to a range of metabolic perturbations. In the present study, we examined the gut microbiota of women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and normoglycaemic pregnant women in late pregnancy and about 8 months postpartum.Entities:
Keywords: Bacterial species; Body mass index; Gestational diabetes; Gestational hyperglycaemia; Glycaemic traits; Gut microbiota; Pregnancy
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29764499 PMCID: PMC5952429 DOI: 10.1186/s40168-018-0472-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microbiome ISSN: 2049-2618 Impact factor: 14.650
Clinical variables of GDM and normoglycaemic women in the third trimester pregnancy
| GDM ( | Normoglycaemic ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Descriptive measurements | |||
| Age (years) | 34.4 (4.4) | 33.3 (4.6) | 0.1 |
| Gestational week at examination | 28.7 (1.4) | 28.4 (1.1) | 0.1 |
| Systolic BP (mmHg) | 118 (11.2) | 111 (10.6) | 0.001 |
| Diastolic BP (mmHg) | 71 (8.1) | 67 (8.5) | 0.001 |
| Height (cm) | 168.6 (6.6) | 169.7 (5.6) | 0.2 |
| Weight (kg) | 91.8 (14.1) | 87.3 (14.6) | 0.06 |
| Pre-pregnancy weight (kg) ( | 83.5 (16.0) ( | 78.48 (15.2) ( | 0.06 |
| Pre-pregnancy BMI kg/m2( | 29.3 (5.6) ( | 27.1 (4.8) ( | 0.02 |
| Weight gain (kg) | 7.4 (4.7) | 8.8 (7.5) | 0.3 |
| Normal and excessive weight gain ( | 3 excessive (13.0%) | 17 excessive (16.2%) | 1 |
| Biochemistry | |||
| Glucose at time 0 min (mmol/L) | 5.2 (0.4) | 4.6 (0.2) | 5.8 × 10−31 |
| Glucose at time 30 min (mmol/L) | 8.1 (1.0) | 6.9 (0.9) | 2.7 × 10−12 |
| Glucose at time 60 min (mmol/L) | 8.9 (1.3) | 7.1 (1.2) | 1.9 × 10−15 |
| Glucose at time 120 min (mmol/L) | 7.9 (1.4) | 6.2 (1.0) | 5.0 × 10−17 |
| Insulin at time 0 min (pmol/L) | 112.1 (40.6) | 82.7 (39.6) | 3.3 × 10−5 |
| Insulin at time 30 min (pmol/L) | 519.7 (1.6) | 504.3 (1.7) | 0.7 |
| Insulin at time 60 min (pmol/L) | 698.0 (1.8) | 583.9 (1.7) | 0.058 |
| Insulin at time 120 min (pmol/L) | 750.5 (1.8) | 482.2 (1.7) | 6.3 × 10−6 |
| HbA1c (mmol/mol) | 34.0 (3.1) | 33.0 (2.8) | 0.02 |
| HOMA-IR | 2.1 (0.8) | 1.5 (0.7) | 1.3 × 10−6 |
| Matsuda index | 3.5 (1.5) | 5.3 (1.6) | 3.0 × 10−8 |
| Disposition index | 4.1 (1.6) | 7.8 (1.6) | 9.2 × 10−12 |
| Insulinogenic index | 1.2 (1.6) | 1.5 (1.6) | 0.004 |
| hsCRP (mg/L) | 4.4 (1.9) | 3.8 (2.2) | 0.2 |
Data presented as mean (SD). For continuous variables, P was calculated by two-tailed t test, and for categorical variables, P was calculated by chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test
BMI body mass index, BP blood pressure, GA gestational age, HbA1c glycated haemoglobin, HOMA-IR homeostatic model of insulin resistance, hsCRP high sensitive C-reactive protein
Clinical variables of GDM and normoglycaemic women at postpartum approximately 8 months after delivery
| Previous GDM ( | Previous normoglycaemic ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Descriptive measurements | |||
| Systolic BP (mmHg) | 120 (11.2) | 116 (8.7) | 0.04 |
| Diastolic BP (mmHg) | 79 (8.2) | 75 (8.0) | 0.03 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 30.0 (5.9) | 29.2 (5.0) | 0.4 |
| Weight (kg) | 85.3 (16.9) | 84.6 (15.4) | 0.8 |
| Fat (%) | 41.3 (6.6) | 40.2 (6.4) | 0.3 |
| Biochemistry | |||
| Glucose at time 0 min (mmol/L) | 5.4 (0.4) ( | 5.1 (0.3) ( | 3.7 × 10−5 |
| Glucose at time 30 min (mmol/L) | 7.7 (1.1) | 7.0 (1.0) | 0.001 |
| Glucose at time 60 min (mmol/L) | 7.7 (1.9) | 6.6 (1.4) | 0.004 |
| Glucose at time 120 min (mmol/L) | 6.5 (1.2) | 6.0 (1.0) | 0.025 |
| Insulin at time 0 min (pmol/L) | 63.7 (1.7) | 54.1 (2.1) | 0.1 |
| Insulin at time 30 min (pmol/L) | 376.8 (1.7) | 307.1 (1.8) | 0.05 |
| Insulin at time 60 min (pmol/L) | 433.9 (1.9) | 303.8 (1.9) | 0.004 |
| Insulin at time 120 min (pmol/L) | 298.0 (1.8) | 235.9 (2.0) | 0.05 |
| HOMA2-IR | 1.4 (0.7) | 1.3 (0.9) | 0.4 |
| Matsuda Index | 5.8 (1.6) | 7.6 (1.8) | 0.01 |
| Disposition Index | 6.6 (2.1) | 8.9 (2.0) | 0.05 |
| Insulinogenic index | 1.15 (1.9) | 1.17 (1.9) | 0.9 |
Data presented as mean (SD) and range. For continuous variables, P was calculated by two-tailed t test, and for categorical variables, P was calculated by chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test. Two women from the GDM group only had fasting blood samples taken at the follow-up visit. Eleven samples of fasting glucose were coagulated and rejected by the department investigating glucose
BMI body mass index, BP blood pressure, GA gestational age, HOMA-IR homeostatic model of insulin resistance
Fig. 1Community structure in women with and without gestational diabetes. For all analyses, samples were rarefied to an equal sequencing depth of 10,000 reads prior to principal coordinate (PCo) ordination based on weighted UniFrac distances. a Samples from pregnant women in the third trimester with (n = 50) or without (n = 157) gestational diabetes. Points are individual samples, and diamonds represent the average ordination scores and ellipses the 95% confidence intervals of a multivariate normal distribution of either group. R2 and P are from the permutational multivariate analysis of variance (PERMANOVA) as implemented in the adonis function of the vegan R package. b Community structure in pregnant women with gestational diabetes diagnosed by fasting hyperglycaemia (n = 25) or stimulated hyperglycaemia (2 h after an oral glucose challenge; n = 8), respectively, or by both (n = 15). Configuration is similar to panel a. c The association between glycaemic traits and community structure during pregnancy regardless of GDM status as determined by PERMANOVA. Vectors representing direction and magnitude of each trait were fitted onto the first and second PCo axes using the envfit function of the vegan R package. d Change in community structure from pregnancy to postpartum. Only samples from women examined at both time points are included (n = 43 and n = 79 for women with and without GDM, respectively). R2 and P are from PERMANOVA testing for a difference in community structure between samples collected during the third trimester and those collected postpartum and for a differential change in community structure in women with GDM compared to women without GDM
Fig. 2Taxonomic biomarkers of gestational diabetes during pregnancy and postpartum. Cladogram (a, c) and scores (b, d) of taxonomic biomarkers down to genus level identified by linear discriminant analysis (LDA) using LEfSe during pregnancy (a, b) and postpartum (c, d). Colour indicates the group in which a differentially abundant taxon is enriched (red: GDM and previous GDM; blue: normoglycaemic and previous normoglycaemic pregnancy)
Fig. 3Operational taxonomic units differentially abundant during pregnancy and postpartum in women with GDM and normal glucose regulation. Volcano plot of estimated log2 fold difference in operational taxonomic unit (OTU) abundance between women with (n = 50) and without (n = 157) gestational diabetes during pregnancy (a) and postpartum (b) between women with (n = 43) and without (n = 79) previous gestational diabetes and corresponding Benjamini-Hochberg adjusted P values (Q) from negative binomial Wald tests as implemented in the DESeq2 R package. Prevalence indicates the percentage of participants in which a given OTU is present. Abundance indicates mean relative abundance (ppm) of a given OTU during the third trimester and postpartum. Names of OTUs differentially abundant at a 10% false discovery rate are given at the genus level
Fig. 4Bacterial genera associated with glycaemic traits during pregnancy regardless of GDM status. Heatmap of correlations (Spearman’s rho) between bacterial genera and fasting plasma glucose, stimulated 2-h glucose, insulin sensitivity and disposition index, with and without adjustment for body mass index. Only taxa nominally associated with either of the four traits are depicted. Taxa are ordered taxonomically. Results for all taxa are presented in Additional file 2: Table S5. *P ≤ 0.05, **P ≤ 0.01, ***P ≤ 0.001
Fig. 5Change in alpha diversity from the third trimester to postpartum. Alpha diversity in pregnancy and postpartum as represented by observed richness (a), Shannon diversity (b) and Pielou evenness (c) based on the samples from GDM (n = 43) and normoglycaemic (n = 79) women with available faecal samples from the third trimester and 8 months postpartum. Samples were rarefied to an equal sequencing depth of 10,000 reads. Boxes represent interquartile range (IQR), with the inside line representing the median. Whiskers represent values within 1.5 × IQR of the first and third quartiles. Circles represent individual samples with lines connecting the samples from the same individual. Differences between GDM and normoglycaemic pregnancies within each time point were tested using Student’s t test. Difference in richness, Shannon diversity and Pielou evenness between time points in GDM and normoglycaemic women combined was tested using a mixed linear regression with a random effect of the subject in women with available samples at both time points
Fig. 6Operational taxonomic units exhibiting differential change from antepartum to postpartum in gestational diabetes and normoglycaemic women. Based on the samples from GDM (n = 43) and normoglycaemic (n = 79) women with available faecal samples from the third trimester and 8 months postpartum. Samples were rarefied to an equal sequencing depth of 10,000 reads. Boxes represent interquartile range (IQR), with the inside line representing the median. Whiskers represent values within 1.5 × IQR of the first and third quartiles. Circles represent individual samples. Change from the third trimester to 8 months postpartum between GDM and normoglycaemic women was modelled using mixed linear regression ANOVA of the interaction between GDM status and time, and a post hoc t test was used to test the difference in change between GDM and normoglycaemic women. Only the results significant at a false discovery rate of 10% are depicted. A full list of all nominally significant results is available in Additional file 2: Table S5