| Literature DB >> 32731505 |
Emanuele Rinninella1, Marco Cintoni2, Pauline Raoul3, Gianluca Ianiro4, Lucrezia Laterza4, Loris Riccardo Lopetuso4,5,6, Francesca Romana Ponziani4, Antonio Gasbarrini4,7, Maria Cristina Mele3,7.
Abstract
In recent decades, there has been a growing interest in dietary restrictions for their promising effects on longevity and health span. Indeed, these strategies are supposed to delay the onset and burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) such as obesity, diabetes, cancer and neurological and gastrointestinal inflammatory diseases. At the same time, the gut microbiota has been shown to play a crucial role in NCDs since it is actively involved in maintaining gut homeostasis through its impact on nutrients metabolism, gut barrier, and immune system. There is evidence that dietary restrictions could slow down age-related changes in the types and numbers of gut bacteria, which may counteract gut dysbiosis. The beneficial effects on gut microbiota may positively influence host metabolism, gut barrier permeability, and brain functions, and subsequently, postpone the onset of NCDs prolonging the health span. These new insights could lead to the development of novel strategies for modulating gut microbiota with the end goal of treating/preventing NCDs. This review provides an overview of animal and human studies focusing on gut microbiota variations during different types of dietary restriction, in order to highlight the close relationship between gut microbiota balance and the host's health benefits induced by these nutritional regimens.Entities:
Keywords: aging; caloric restriction; fasting-mimicking diet; gut microbiota; intermittent fasting; non-communicable diseases
Year: 2020 PMID: 32731505 PMCID: PMC7465033 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms8081140
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Overview of studies investigating the possible correlations between gut microbiota variations, gut barrier permeability, and health benefits induced by dietary restrictions.
| Study | Dietary Restriction Regimen | Study Model | Gut Microbiota Variations Induced by Dietary Restrictions | Effects on Gut Barrier Functions | Potential Health Benefits | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Firmicutes | Bacteroidetes | Proteobacteria | Verrucomicrobia | Actinobacteria | |||||
|
| |||||||||
| Zhang, 2013 [ | 30% CR based on a low-fat AL diet | Mid-life mice | ↓ Lactococcus | ↓ Prevotellaceae | ↑ Helicobacter | / | ↑Bifidobacterium | / | ↓ Serum levels of LPS-binding |
| 30% CR based on a low-fat AL diet | Late-life mice | ↓ Lactococcus | ↓ Bacteroides | ↓ Bilophila | / | ↑ Bifidobacterium | |||
| 30% CR based on a high-fat AL diet | Mid-life mice | ↓ Peptostreptococcaceae | / | ↓ Bilophila | / | / | |||
| Russo, 2016 [ | ALF | Mice | ↑ Lactobacillus (CR group) | ↑ Bacteroidetes | / | / | ↑ Actinobacteria in CR and CR-Lf groupscompared to ALF group | / | ↓ Triglyceride levels |
| Bartley, 2017 [ | 30% CR based on a normal AL diet | Mice with flu infection | / | / | ↑ Proteobacteria | ↑ Verrucomicrobia | / | / | ↓ Flu-induced systemic inflammation |
| Duszka, 2018 [ | 25% CR based on a normal AL diet for 14 days | Mice | ↓ Clostridiales | ↑ Bacteroidaceae | / | / | / | Downregulation of the metabolic and | / |
| Fabbiano, 2018 [ | 40% CR based on a standard diet for 30 days | Mice | ↑ Lactobacillaceae | ↑ Bacteroidaceae | / | ↑ | / | / | ↑ Glucose tolerance |
| Fraumene, 2018 [ | 30% CR based on a normal AL diet | Rats | ↑ Lactobacillus | / | / | / | / | / | ↓ Total cholesterol levels |
| Pan, 2018 [ | 30% CR based on a normal AL diet | Mice | ↑ Lactobacillus | / | / | / | / | ↓ Gut barrier permeability | ↓ Aging-associated inflammation |
| Wang, 2018 [ | 70% of | Mice | ↑ Lactobacillus | ↑ Bacteroidetes | ↓ Helicobacter | ↓ Verrucomicrobia | ↑Bifidobacterium | / | ↓ Weight gain |
| Fabersani, 2019 [ | 25% CR based on a standard diet | Male mice | ↑ Lactobacillus (CR + | ↑ Bacteroidetes | ↓Proteobacteria | / | ↑ Actinobacteria | / | ↓ Blood glucose levels |
| Zeng, 2019 [ | 30% CR based on a standard diet | Young | ↓ Firmicutes | / | / | / | / | / | ↓ Fat accumulation |
| Zhang, 2019 [ | 4-week 30% CR based on a normal AL diet | Mice | ↑ | ↑ Alistipes in CRL than CRD mice. | ↑ | / | / | Improved intestinal barrier function | ↓ Fat accumulation |
| Ott, 2017 [ | 4-week VLCD (800 kcal/ | Obese women | ↑ | / | ↓Proteobacteria | / | ↑ | ↓ Gut barrier permeability | ↓ High-sensitivity C-reactive protein |
| Ruiz, 2017 [ | 30% CR based on usual diet for one year | Obese adolescents | ↑ Roseburia | ↑ | / | / | ↓ Corobacterineae | / | ↓ Plasma LDL levels |
| Santa cruz 2009 [ | 10-40% CR diet and regular physical activity over 10 weeks | Overweight Adolescents | ↑ Lactobacillus | ↑ | / | / | ↓ | / | ↑ Body weight loss |
| Simoes, 2014 [ | 5-, 8- and 12- months of VLCD (800 kcal/day) | Obese adults | / | ↑ | / | / | ↓ | / | |
|
| |||||||||
| Beli, 2018 [ | 7-month IF regimen | Diabetic mice | ↑ Lactobacillus | ↓ Bacteroides | ↓ Akkermansia | ↓ Gut barrier permeability | Protective effect of the retina | ||
| Cignarella, 2018 [ | Every-other-day fasting regimen | Multiple sclerosis mice | ↑ Lactobacillaceae | ↑ Bacteroidaceae | / | / | ↑ | ↓ IL17 | ↓ Leptin levels |
| Li, 2017 [ | Every-other-day fasting regimen | Mice | ↑ Firmicutes | / | / | / | / | ↑Fermentation products acetate and lactate | Selective upregulation of beige cells |
| Li, 2020 [ | Daily fasting: 12, 16, or 20 h fasting per day for 1 month | Mice | ↓ Ruminococcaceae | ↓ Alistipes | / | ↑ Akkermansia | / | Alleviated intestinal inflammation | Metabolic improvements |
| Liu, 2020 [ | 28-day IF | Diabetic mice | ↑ Lactobacillus | ↑ Odoribacter | / | / | / | ↑ Gut barrier integrity | ↓ Plasma LPS levels |
| Merwe, 2020 [ | HF–TRF (6 h) | Mice | HF–TRF group: | ↑ Bacteroidetes (HF–CR 16%, HF–TRF 20%, and HF–IF 14%) | HF–TRF group: | ↑ Verrucomicrobia | HF–IF group: | / | ↓ Adiposity |
| Wei, 2018 [ | Every-other-day fasting regimen | Mice with type 2 diabetes | ↑ Blautia | ↑ Parabacteroides | / | / | / | / | ↓ Fasting blood glucose levels |
| Rangan, 2019 [ | 4-day FMD cycles | IBD mice | ↑ Lactobacillaceae | / | / | / | ↑ Bifidobacteriaceae | Inflammatory markers of intestinal inflammation | Partial reversal of intestinal inflammation |
| Ozkul, 2019 [ | 17 h of fasting/day during a 29-day period (fasting Ramadan) | Humans | / | ↑ | / | ↑ | / | ↓ Fasting blood glucose levels | |
| Remely, 2015 [ | 1-week fasting program followed by a probiotic administration | Humans | ↑ | / | / | ↑ | ↑ Bifidobacterium | Facilitated the adherence | |
Abbreviations: ↓ decrease of abundance; ↑ increase of abundance; AL, ad libitum; ALF, ad libitum fed; CR, caloric restricted; CRD, dark-fed caloric restriction; CRF, light-fed caloric restriction; FMD, fasting-mimicking diet; HF, high fat; IBD, intestinal bowel disease; IF, intermittent fasting; IL, interleukin; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; LPS, lipopolysaccharide; mTOR, mammalian target of rapamycin; Treg, regulatory T cell; TRF, time-restricted feeding; VLCD, very low calorie diet.
Figure 1The possible role of gut microbiota in the interplay between dietary restrictions, gut barrier functions, health benefits, and non-communicable diseases. Abbreviations: LPS, lipopolysaccharide; SCFAs, short-chain fatty acids.