| Literature DB >> 30728283 |
Kristi Biswas1, Raewyn Cavubati1, Shan Gunaratna1, Michael Hoggard2, Sharon Waldvogel-Thurlow1, Jiwon Hong1,2, Kevin Chang3, Brett Wagner Mackenzie1, Michael W Taylor2, Richard G Douglas4.
Abstract
Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a heterogeneous condition characterized by persistent sinus inflammation and microbial dysbiosis. This study aimed to identify clinically relevant subgroups of CRS patients based on distinct microbial signatures, with a comparison to the commonly used phenotypic subgrouping approach. The underlying drivers of these distinct microbial clusters were also investigated, together with associations with epithelial barrier integrity. Sinus biopsy specimens were collected from CRS patients (n = 23) and disease controls (n = 8). The expression of 42 tight junction genes was evaluated using quantitative PCR together with microbiota analysis and immunohistochemistry for measuring mucosal integrity and inflammation. CRS patients clustered into two distinct microbial subgroups using probabilistic modelling Dirichlet (DC) multinomial mixtures. DC1 exhibited significantly reduced bacterial diversity and increased dispersion and was dominated by Pseudomonas, Haemophilus, and Achromobacter DC2 had significantly elevated B cells and incidences of nasal polyps and higher numbers of Anaerococcus, Megasphaera, Prevotella, Atopobium, and Propionibacterium In addition, each DC exhibited distinct tight junction gene and protein expression profiles compared with those of controls. Stratifying CRS patients based on clinical phenotypic subtypes (absence or presence of nasal polyps [CRSsNP or CRSwNP, respectively] or with cystic fibrosis [CRSwCF]) accounted for a larger proportion of the variation in the microbial data set than with DC groupings. However, no significant differences between CRSsNP and CRSwNP cohorts were observed for inflammatory markers, beta-dispersion, and alpha-diversity measures. In conclusion, both approaches used for stratifying CRS patients had benefits and pitfalls, but DC clustering provided greater resolution when studying tight junction impairment. Future studies in CRS should give careful consideration to the patient subtyping approach used.IMPORTANCE Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is a major human health problem that significantly reduces quality of life. While various microbes have been implicated, there is no clear understanding of the role they play in CRS pathogenesis. Another equally important observation made for CRS patients is that the epithelial barrier in the sinonasal cavity is defective. Finding a robust approach to subtype CRS patients would be the first step toward unravelling the pathogenesis of this heterogeneous condition. Previous work has explored stratification based on the clinical presentation of the disease (with or without polyps), inflammatory markers, pathology, or microbial composition. Comparisons between the different stratification approaches used in these studies have not been possible due to the different cohorts, analytical methods, or sample sites used. In this study, two approaches for subtyping CRS patients were compared, and the underlying drivers of the heterogeneity in CRS were also explored.Entities:
Keywords: epithelial barrier; inflammation; microbiota; mucosal integrity; sinusitis; tight junctions
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30728283 PMCID: PMC6365615 DOI: 10.1128/mSphere.00679-18
Source DB: PubMed Journal: mSphere ISSN: 2379-5042 Impact factor: 4.389
FIG 1Bacterial community composition and alpha diversity for the CRS cohorts and disease controls. Grouped and patient-level profiles at the genus level are shown in the bar graphs for DC groupings (A) and phenotypic groupings (C). Box-and-whisker plots represent group summaries for bacterial richness, Shannon diversity, and Simpson diversity for DC groupings (B) and phenotypic groupings (D). Horizontal lines represent significant differences (P < 0.05) between cohorts.
FIG 2Mean OTU relative abundances per sample (when present in a sample) plotted against prevalence (occurrence) across all samples (A), each DC and controls (B), and each phenotypic CRS subtype and controls (C). All OTUs are plotted. The 14 most abundant OTUs are color coded, and all other OTUs are presented as black dots.
FIG 3Nonmetric multidimensional scaling plot using Bray-Curtis dissimilarity distances (weighted) for all samples for DC clustering (A) and phenotypic subtyping (C). Ellipses represent the 95% confidence interval (CI) spread from centroids. (B and D) Box-and-whisker plot of distances between each subject to the centroid of their respective groups. Beta-dispersion was significantly different between DC1 and controls (P = 0.0114 by Tukey’s multiple comparisons of means).
FIG 4Tight junction genes that were significantly different in expression for DC groups (A) and phenotypic subgroups (B) compared with that in controls are displayed in the heatmap. Blue represents genes that have low-level expression, and red represents higher expression. Values displayed are log transformed mean fold change (2−ΔΔ). *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01.