| Literature DB >> 33808476 |
Roque Pastor-Ibáñez1, Juan Blanco-Heredia2,3,4, Florencia Etcheverry1,5, Sonsoles Sánchez-Palomino1, Francisco Díez-Fuertes1, Rosa Casas6,7, María Ángeles Navarrete-Muñoz8,9, Sara Castro-Barquero6,7, Constanza Lucero1, Irene Fernández1,5, Lorna Leal1,5, José Miguel Benito8,9, Marc Noguera-Julian10, Roger Paredes10, Norma Rallón8,9, Ramón Estruch6,7, David Torrents11,12, Felipe García1,5.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The health effects of a supplemented Mediterranean diet (SMD) with extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO) and nuts are well documented in non-HIV-infected individuals. We hypothesised that the benefits of an SMD could be mediated by changes in the gut microbiota, even in those with an altered intestinal microbiota such as people living with HIV.Entities:
Keywords: HIV-1; Treg cells; gut microbiota; lipids; lymphocyte subsets; supplemented Mediterranean diet
Year: 2021 PMID: 33808476 PMCID: PMC8067262 DOI: 10.3390/nu13041141
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Scores at baseline and at the 12-week follow-up from the 14-item MEDAS questionnaire validated by the PREDIMED guidelines. The percentages of total individuals in each study group (the SMD or control group) are presented in the brackets. The data presented includes all individuals randomised by study group (n = 74); men who have sex with men (MSM) randomised by study group (n = 60); and a description of the improvement in the MEDAS scores at week 12. The adherence scores of two individuals from the SMD group were not registered at week 12. These two participants were considered as showing no improvements in their MEDAS scores. SMD, supplemented Mediterranean diet; MSM, men who have sex with men; MEDAS, MD Adherence Screener. * Increase. ** Decrease.
| Subject Selection | MEDAS Group | Basal (Week 0) | End of Study (Week 12) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Control group | High-Adherence | 6 (16%) | 6 (16%) |
| ( | (MEDAS ≥ 10) | ||
| Medium-Adherence | 20 (54%) | 20 (54%) | |
| (7 ≤ MEDAS < 10) | |||
| Low-Adherence | 11 (30%) | 11 (30%) | |
| (MEDAS < 7) | |||
| SMD group | High-Adherence | 3 (8%) | 31 (89%) * |
| ( | (MEDAS ≥ 10) | ||
| Medium-Adherence | 17 (46%) | 4 (11%) ** | |
| (7 ≤ MEDAS < 10) | |||
| Low-Adherence | 17 (46%) | 0 ** | |
| (MEDAS < 7) | |||
|
| |||
| Control group | High-Adherence | 6 (19%) | 6 (19%) |
| ( | (MEDAS ≥ 10) | ||
| Medium-Adherence | 18 (56%) | 18 (56%) | |
| (7 ≤ MEDAS < 10) | |||
| Low-Adherence | 8 (25%) | 8 (25%) | |
| (MEDAS < 7) | |||
| SMD group | High-Adherence | 3 (11%) | 24 (92%) * |
| ( | (MEDAS ≥10) | ||
| Medium-Adherence | 14 (50%) | 2 (8%) ** | |
| (7 ≤ MEDAS < 10) | |||
| Low-Adherence | 11 (39%) | 0 ** | |
| (MEDAS < 7) | |||
|
|
| ||
|
| |||
| Control group | Best improvement, Δ ≥ 4 | 0 | |
| ( | Δ = 1–3 | 1 (3%) | |
| No improvement, Δ = 0 | 31 (97%) | ||
| SMD group | Best improvement, Δ ≥ 4 | 17 (61%) | |
| ( | Δ = 1–3 | 9 (32%) | |
| No improvement, Δ = 0 | 2 (7%) |
Figure 1Microbiome diversity and richness in accordance with the sex. (a) Alpha diversity according to the sex. Grey boxes correspond to women individuals and blue boxes correspond to men individuals. All subjects from the cohort were selected at the basal time point. Left top: number of observed operational taxonomic units (OTUs); right top: Shannon index; left bottom: Fisher alpha index; right bottom: 1/Simpson index. For every parameter, the p-value for every comparison between women and men is presented. Signification code: p < 0.005: ***, p < 0.01: **, p < 0.05: *, p > 0.05: ns. (b) Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) plot clustered by the sex. All individuals included in the cohort were selected and classified by the sex at the basal time point. Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) used: Bray-Curtis distances. These distances were calculated using the abundances of the bacterial genus’ composition at the basal time point. R package: vegan.
Figure 2Microbiome diversity and richness in the different adherence groups. (a) After classifying the subjects according to their MEDAS scores, alpha diversity was determined at the end of the study. MSM subjects were selected (n = 60). Top left: number of observed OTUs; top right: the Shannon index; bottom left: Fisher’s alpha index; and bottom right: Simpson’s diversity index. For each parameter, the global Kruskal–Wallis p-value and the p-values for every comparison between the adherence groups at week 12 are presented. *** p < 0.005, ** p < 0.01, * p ≤ 0.05. ns: p < 0.05. (b) PCoA plot clustered by the MEDAS scores from week 12. MSM individuals were selected. Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) used: Bray–Curtis distances. R package: vegan.
Figure 3Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) effect size (LEfSe) in the group of MSM individuals. (a) Influence of the adherence groups, at baseline (the high-adherence group (n = 9) is shown in red, while the low-adherence group (n = 19) is shown in green), on the gut microbiota composition. (b) Influence of the adherence groups, fixed at week 12 (the high-adherence group (n = 30) is shown in red, while the low-adherence group (n = 8) is shown in green), on the gut microbiota composition. (c) Influence of the increase in the MEDAS score between baseline and week 12 (ΔMEDAS) on the gut microbiota composition (ΔMEDAS ≥ 4 points (n = 17): green; ΔMEDAS < 2 points (n = 33): red). MSM individuals were selected to avoid bias caused by the sex and the sexual behaviour.
Figure 4Selbal analysis. This analysis indicated the bacterial genera that best explained the differences between the extreme adherence groups among the MSM individuals (high-adherence group (n = 37): red; low-adherence group (n = 33): blue). The balance derived from the selbal analysis is shown in the middle of the plot. The cross-validation accuracy of the microbiota classifier is depicted by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the bacterial genera obtained, with the area under the curve (top right: AUC = 0.842) indicated inside each plot. As shown in this figure, there was a strong association between the specific microbiome genus composition and the MEDAS classification.
Figure 5Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients in the high-adherence group at the end of the study. Each column of the table represents a particular bacterial genus, while the rest of the parameters analysed in this study are shown in the rows for the high-adherence group among the MSM individuals at week 12. The bacterial genera (columns) were grouped by phylum (Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, and Proteobacteria). Only the most significant correlations are shown. Direct (positive) correlations are highlighted in red, while inverse (negative) correlations are highlighted in blue. Test applied: Spearman’s rank correlation with Holm’s correction. The corrected p-values are not shown. * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.005. White squares: no significant correlations, p ≥ 0.05. The following parameters were analysed: metabolic (cholesterol, HDL, LDL, A1-lipoprotein, and B-lipoprotein), inflammation (uCRP, IL-6, and D-dimer), bacterial translocation (sCD14 and LBP), nutrition (BMI, weight, adherence scores (MEDAS), oleic acid, linoleic acid, alpha-linoleic acid, omega-3, and omega-6), immune activation (CD4+ T-cells, CD3+CD4+, CD3+CD8+, CD4+HLADR, CD8+HLADR), Treg cells (CD4+Foxp3+CD25, Foxp3+CD25+CD127), IL17 and IFN-γ production (CD4+IL17A+, CD4+IFNγ+, CD4+IL17A+IFNγ+, CD8+IL17A+, CD8+IFNγ+, CD8+IL17A+IFNγ+). Acronyms: HDL, high-density lipoprotein; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; uCRP, ultrasensitive C-reactive protein; IL-6, interleukin-6; DD, D-dimer; sCD14, soluble CD14; LBP, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein; Treg, regulatory T-cell; BMI, body mass index.