| Literature DB >> 33238618 |
Xuhuiqun Zhang1, Anqi Zhao1, Amandeep K Sandhu1, Indika Edirisinghe1, Britt M Burton-Freeman1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gut microbiota metabolize select dietary (poly)phenols to absorbable metabolites that exert biological effects important in metabolic health. Microbiota composition associated with health/disease status may affect its functional capacity to yield bioactive metabolites from dietary sources. Therefore, this study assessed gut microbiome composition and its related functional capacity to metabolize fruit (poly)phenols in individuals with prediabetes and insulin resistance (PreDM-IR, n = 26) compared to a metabolically healthy Reference group (n = 10).Entities:
Keywords: (poly)phenolic metabolites; UHPLC-QQQ; gut microbiome; prediabetes; red raspberries; shotgun sequencing
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33238618 PMCID: PMC7700645 DOI: 10.3390/nu12113595
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Figure 1Postprandial study day schema.
Nutrient composition of red raspberry-based test drink (RRBtest) 1.
| Item Name | RRBtest Drink |
|---|---|
| Quantity (g) | 414 |
| Energy (kcal) | 361 |
| Protein (g) | 2.1 |
| Fat (g) | 1.4 |
| Carbohydrate (g) | 85 |
| Fiber (g) | 8 |
| Sugar (g) | 75 |
| RRB sugar | 10 |
| Added sugar | 65 |
| Total (poly)phenols (mg) | 388 |
| Anthocyanin (mg) | 237 |
| Ellagitannin/ellagic acid (mg) | 125 |
1 Protein, carbohydrate, fiber and sugar contents derived from USDA Food Composition Databases. Total (poly)phenols, anthocyanin and ellagitannin/ellagic acid contents were quantified using the method described in Zhang et al. [12].
Figure 2Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) flow diagram of the study. * Fail in blood collection.
Dietary intake assessment of PreDM-IR (prediabetes and insulin-resistance) and Reference groups 1.
| Nutrient and Food Group | PreDM-IR ( | Reference ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Energy (kcal) | 1917 ± 142 | 1832 ± 193 | NS |
| Protein (g) | 86 ± 6 | 93 ± 14 | NS |
| Total fat (g) | 80 ± 7 | 62 ± 8 | NS |
| Carbohydrate (g) | 213 ± 18 | 233 ± 22 | NS |
| Sugars, total (g) | 84 ± 10 | 70 ± 7 | NS |
| Added sugar (g) | 12 ± 2 | 6 ± 1 | NS |
| Fiber, total dietary (g) | 16 ± 2 | 24 ± 4 | 0.02 |
| Total fruits (cup) | 0.8 ± 0.2 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | NS |
| Total vegetable (cup) | 1.6 ± 0.2 | 2.0 ± 0.5 | NS |
| Total fruit and vegetable (cup) | 2.3 ± 0.3 | 3.0 ± 0.5 | 0.05 |
1 Data were collected by the Automated Self-Administered 24-h (ASA24) Dietary Assessment Tool.
Subject demographic and metabolic health characteristics 1.
| Metabolic Health Indices | PreDM-IR ( | Reference ( | PreDM-Lean ( | Reference-Lean ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 34 ± 11 | 31 ± 9 | NS | 28 ± 12 | 30.5 ± 10 | NS |
| Female: Male | 12:14 | 7:3 | NS | 2:5 | 6:2 | NS |
| CAU/AA/AS/HIS | 8:6:9:3 | 3:2:3:2 | NS | 1:1:5:0 | 2:1:3:2 | NS |
| Fasting glucose (mmol/L) | 5.8 ± 0.1 | 4.9 ± 0.1 | <0.0001 | 5.6 ± 0.2 | 4.9 ± 0.1 | 0.008 |
| Fasting insulin (pmol/L) | 88.2 ± 8.7 | 34.0 ± 4.1 | <0.0001 | 67.0 ± 6.8 | 35.0 ± 4.5 | 0.01 |
| HOMA-IR | 3.3 ± 0.3 | 1.1 ± 0.1 | <0.0001 | 2.4 ± 0.3 | 1.1 ± 0.1 | 0.004 |
| HOMA-β% | 115.5 ± 11.3 | 70.1 ± 7.9 | 0.01 | 91.6 ± 9.2 | 72.5 ± 9.8 | NS |
| TC (mmol/L) | 4.7 ± 0.2 | 4.3 ± 0.2 | NS | 4.4 ± 0.1 | 4.4 ± 0.3 | NS |
| HDL-C (mmol/L) | 1.3 ± 0.1 | 1.5 ± 0.1 | NS | 1.3 ± 0.1 | 1.5 ± 0.2 | NS |
| LDL-C (mmol/L) | 2.9 ± 0.1 | 2.5 ± 0.1 | NS | 2.7 ± 0.1 | 2.5 ± 0.2 | NS |
| TG (mmol/L) | 1.1 ± 0.1 | 0.7 ± 0.1 | 0.03 | 0.9 ± 0.1 | 0.7 ± 0.1 | NS |
| TC/HDL-C | 3.7 ± 0.2 | 3.0 ± 0.2 | NS | 3.6 ± 0.4 | 3.0 ± 0.2 | NS |
| LDL-C/HDL-C | 2.3 ± 0.1 | 1.8 ± 0.1 | NS | 2.3 ± 0.3 | 1.8 ± 0.2 | NS |
| Atherogenic Index | 2.7 ± 0.2 | 2.0 ± 0.2 | 0.04 | 2.6 ± 0.4 | 2.0 ± 0.2 | NS |
| Systolic BP (mmHg) | 119.3 ± 2.1 | 110.0 ± 4.0 | 0.07 | 116.3 ± 3.2 | 106.3 ± 3.9 | NS |
| Diastolic BP (mmHg) | 74.9 ± 1.5 | 68.4 ± 3.5 | 0.08 | 70.5 ± 2.2 | 64.9 ± 2.9 | NS |
| Heart rate (beats per minute) | 71.6 ± 1.7 | 65.4 ± 2.6 | NS | 69.4 ± 3.0 | 66.6 ± 2.9 | NS |
| Weight (kg) | 84.2 ± 4.3 | 64.3 ± 4.9 | 0.005 | 66.4 ± 4.2 | 57.7 ± 2.8 | NS |
| BMI (kg·m2) | 28.7 ± 1.2 | 22.5 ± 1.2 | 0.001 | 22.8 ± 0.9 | 20.9 ± 0.7 | NS |
| Waist (cm) | 95.2 ± 3.1 | 78.8 ± 4.4 | 0.002 | 81.6 ± 4.3 | 73.2 ± 2.9 | NS |
| Whole body fat% | 30.1 ± 1.9 | 24.7 ± 3.1 | NS | 19.4 ± 2.2 | 22.3 ± 2.8 | NS |
| Whole body fat mass (kg) | 26.0 ± 2.3 | 16.3 ± 3 | 0.007 | 12.9 ± 1.7 | 12.9 ± 1.8 | NS |
| Fat-free mass (kg) | 57.9 ± 2.9 | 47.6 ± 3.3 | NS | 53.1 ± 3.2 | 44.6 ± 2.7 | NS |
| Trunk fat% | 30.4 ± 1.8 | 23.3 ± 3.1 | 0.05 | 19.4 ± 1.9 | 20.3 ± 2.6 | NS |
| Trunk fat mass (kg) | 14.4 ± 1.3 | 8.7 ± 1.8 | 0.02 | 7.2 ± 1.1 | 6.5 ± 1.0 | NS |
| Trunk fat-free mass (kg) | 31.3 ± 1.4 | 26.2 ± 1.5 | NS | 28.9 ± 1.7 | 24.6 ± 1.1 | NS |
| Predicted muscle mass (kg) | 29.7 ± 1.2 | 25.1 ± 1.5 | NS | 27.8 ± 1.7 | 23.6 ± 1.1 | NS |
1 Mean ± SEM for continuous variables (except age, mean ± SD). NS, non-significant. CAU, Caucasian; AA, African American; AS, Asian; HIS, Hispanics and Latino; HOMA-IR, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance; HOMA-β, homeostasis model assessment of β cell function, total cholesterol; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-C, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol; TG, triglyceride; BP, blood pressure; BMI, body mass index. 2 Comparison between PreDM-IR and Reference groups adjusted for gender. 3 Lean (healthy weight) was defined according to the Tanita body fat percentage chart [36]. 4 Comparison between PreDM-Lean and Reference-Lean subgroups adjusted for gender.
Figure 3Gut microbiome composition in the PreDM-IR group relative to the Reference group. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) score (log10) above 2.0 and p < 0.05.
Figure 4Gut microbiome composition in the PreDM-IR group relative to the Reference group. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) score (log10) above 2.0 and p < 0.05.
Figure 5Box plots showing AUC0–24 h (areas under the 24 h curve) of microbial (poly)phenolic metabolites in plasma post-consumption of the red raspberry test (RRBtest) drink in PreDM-IR (red dots) vs. Reference (blue dots) and PreDM-Lean (yellow dots) vs. Reference-Lean (green dots): (a) 3,8-dihydroxy-urolithin derivatives; (b) total phenyl-γ-valerolactones; (c) dihydroxycinnamic acids derivatives; (d) benzoic acids derivatives; (e) hydroxyhippuric acids derivatives; (f) hippuric acid. * Significantly different, p < 0.05.
Figure 6Box plots showing AUC0–24 h (areas under the 24 h curve) of microbial (poly)phenolic metabolites in urine post-consumption of the RRBtest drink in PreDM-IR (red dots) vs. Reference (blue dots) and PreDM-Lean (yellow dots) vs. Reference-Lean (green dots): (a) 3,8-dihydroxy-urolithin derivatives; (b) total phenyl-γ-valerolactones; (c) dihydroxycinnamic acids derivatives; (d) benzoic acids derivatives; (e) hydroxyhippuric acids derivatives; (f) hippuric acid. * Significantly different, p < 0.05.
Figure 7Putative gut microbiome composition associations with metabolic risk indices and microbial (poly)phenolic metabolites. Biomarkers with statistically significant correlation in the PreDM-IR and the Reference groups are colored red and blue, respectively. Heatmap color intensity represents the magnitude of correlation. Purple = positive correlations; green = negative correlations. Significant correlation, * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01.