J D He1, C Kong1, R Y Gao2, F Yin3, Y Zhang3, H L Qin4. 1. Department of General Surgery, the Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai 200072, China; Research Institute of Intestinal Diseases, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China. 2. Research Institute of Intestinal Diseases, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China; Department of Difficult Diagnosis and Treatment Center of Abdominal Surgery, The Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai 200072, China. 3. Research Institute of Intestinal Diseases, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China. 4. Department of General Surgery, the Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai 200072, China; Research Institute of Intestinal Diseases, Tongji University School of Medicine, Shanghai 200072, China; Department of Difficult Diagnosis and Treatment Center of Abdominal Surgery, The Tenth People's Hospital, Tongji University, Shanghai 200072, China.
Abstract
Objective: To establish the mice colorectal cancer (CRC) model induced by AOM/DSS with the intervention of high fat diet and probiotics, and to explore the potential mechanism of probiotics intervention in regulating intestinal flora disturbance and antitumor efficiency. Methods: Forty 8-week-old male C57BL/6J mice were randomly divided into 4 groups with 10 mice in each group: HFD group, HDF with probiotics intervention (HFD+P) group, normal diet (ND) group, normal diet with probiotics intervention (ND+P) group. The probiotic groups were administered with probiotics preparation by gavage. During the experiment, AOM/DSS was used to induce mouse colorectal cancer model. The mouse body weight was regularly recorded and the body status was evaluated weekly. High-throughput 16S rDNA sequencing was used to analyze the changes of fecal flora in bacterial structure before and after cancer induction. At the end of the experiment, intestinal tissues of mice were collected and the epididymis adipose mass (EAM) and tumor burden were recorded. The Alpha diversity index was used to analyze the abundance and diversity of the intestinal flora (higher chaol index means higher abundance of bacteria and greater Simpson index means lower diversity in flora structure). The Beta diversity index was used to analyze the significance of the difference in the distribution of intestinal flora among the four groups (When R>0, the difference in the distribution of bacteria among the groups is greater than the difference within the group). Results: After 15 weeks of experiment, the body weight of mice in HFD group, HFD+P group, ND group and ND+P group was (33.70±0.52) g, (28.70±0.32) g, (25.90±0.34) g and (25.60±0.40) g, whose difference was statistically significant (F=700.89, P<0.01). The body weight of HFD group was higher than that of ND group and HFD+P group while the body weight of HFD+P group was still higher than that of ND group, and the differences were statistically significant (all P<0.017). The average EAM of HFD group, HFD+P group, ND group and ND+P group was (1.36±0.15) g, (0.67±0.08) g, (0.58±0.10) g and (0.54±0.05) g, whose difference was statistically significant (F=114.03, P<0.01). Pairwise comparisons showed that EAM in HFD group was higher than that in ND group and HFD+P group respectively, with statistically significant difference (both P<0.01), while average EAM of HFD+P group was similar to ND group (P=0.09). Under the diet intervention, the Chao1 index of HFD group, HFD+P group, ND group and ND+P group was 217.62, 235.32, 301.51 and 305.71 respectively, and the Simpson index was 0.93, 0.89, 0.91 and 0.90. At the same time, the Anosim analysis of Beta diversity analysis showed that the difference in the flora distribution among four groups was greater than the difference with in each group with statistically significant difference (R=0.655, P=0.001). Species abundance analysis revealed that, compared with ND group, at phylum level, HFD group had a higher proportion of Bacteroides phylum and Firmicutes phylum in the intestinal flora and lower proportion of Verrucomicrobia; at genus level, the proportion of Bacteroides and Oscillibacter in HFD group was higher while the proportion of Akkermansia and Alloprevotella was lower. After the intervention of probiotics, the flora mentioned above was improved significantly except for Alloprevotella. The average number of tumor in HFD group, HFD+P group, ND group and ND+P group was 4.63±1.19, 2.33±0.52, 2.56±0.73 and 2.38±0.52 with statistically significant difference (F=14.92, P<0.01). Conclusion: Probiotics therapy can reduce obesity and flora imbalance caused by HFD and reduce the incidence of CRC by regulating intestinal flora disturbance.
Objective: To establish the micecolorectal cancer (CRC) model induced by AOM/DSS with the intervention of high fat diet and probiotics, and to explore the potential mechanism of probiotics intervention in regulating intestinal flora disturbance and antitumor efficiency. Methods: Forty 8-week-old male C57BL/6J mice were randomly divided into 4 groups with 10 mice in each group: HFD group, HDF with probiotics intervention (HFD+P) group, normal diet (ND) group, normal diet with probiotics intervention (ND+P) group. The probiotic groups were administered with probiotics preparation by gavage. During the experiment, AOM/DSS was used to induce mousecolorectal cancer model. The mouse body weight was regularly recorded and the body status was evaluated weekly. High-throughput 16S rDNA sequencing was used to analyze the changes of fecal flora in bacterial structure before and after cancer induction. At the end of the experiment, intestinal tissues of mice were collected and the epididymis adipose mass (EAM) and tumor burden were recorded. The Alpha diversity index was used to analyze the abundance and diversity of the intestinal flora (higher chaol index means higher abundance of bacteria and greater Simpson index means lower diversity in flora structure). The Beta diversity index was used to analyze the significance of the difference in the distribution of intestinal flora among the four groups (When R>0, the difference in the distribution of bacteria among the groups is greater than the difference within the group). Results: After 15 weeks of experiment, the body weight of mice in HFD group, HFD+P group, ND group and ND+P group was (33.70±0.52) g, (28.70±0.32) g, (25.90±0.34) g and (25.60±0.40) g, whose difference was statistically significant (F=700.89, P<0.01). The body weight of HFD group was higher than that of ND group and HFD+P group while the body weight of HFD+P group was still higher than that of ND group, and the differences were statistically significant (all P<0.017). The average EAM of HFD group, HFD+P group, ND group and ND+P group was (1.36±0.15) g, (0.67±0.08) g, (0.58±0.10) g and (0.54±0.05) g, whose difference was statistically significant (F=114.03, P<0.01). Pairwise comparisons showed that EAM in HFD group was higher than that in ND group and HFD+P group respectively, with statistically significant difference (both P<0.01), while average EAM of HFD+P group was similar to ND group (P=0.09). Under the diet intervention, the Chao1 index of HFD group, HFD+P group, ND group and ND+P group was 217.62, 235.32, 301.51 and 305.71 respectively, and the Simpson index was 0.93, 0.89, 0.91 and 0.90. At the same time, the Anosim analysis of Beta diversity analysis showed that the difference in the flora distribution among four groups was greater than the difference with in each group with statistically significant difference (R=0.655, P=0.001). Species abundance analysis revealed that, compared with ND group, at phylum level, HFD group had a higher proportion of Bacteroides phylum and Firmicutes phylum in the intestinal flora and lower proportion of Verrucomicrobia; at genus level, the proportion of Bacteroides and Oscillibacter in HFD group was higher while the proportion of Akkermansia and Alloprevotella was lower. After the intervention of probiotics, the flora mentioned above was improved significantly except for Alloprevotella. The average number of tumor in HFD group, HFD+P group, ND group and ND+P group was 4.63±1.19, 2.33±0.52, 2.56±0.73 and 2.38±0.52 with statistically significant difference (F=14.92, P<0.01). Conclusion: Probiotics therapy can reduce obesity and flora imbalance caused by HFD and reduce the incidence of CRC by regulating intestinal flora disturbance.