| Literature DB >> 33892717 |
Lisa I Påhlman1,2,3, Lokeshwaran Manoharan4, Anna Stjärne Aspelund5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lung transplant (LTx) recipients are at increased risk for airway infections, but the cause of infection is often difficult to establish with traditional culture-based techniques. The objectives of the study was to compare the airway microbiome in LTx patients with and without ongoing airway infection and identify differences in their microbiome composition.Entities:
Keywords: Airway infection; Cytokines; Inflammation; Lung transplant recipients; Microbiome
Year: 2021 PMID: 33892717 PMCID: PMC8063417 DOI: 10.1186/s12931-021-01724-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Respir Res ISSN: 1465-9921
Patient characteristics
| Total number of patients; n | 22 |
| Age; median (range) | 57 (24–65) |
| Male gender; n (%) | 13 (59) |
| Type of lung Tx; n (%) | |
Single Double | 4 (18) 18 (82) |
| Underlying diagnosis; n (%) | |
Cystic fibrosis Fibrosis Emphysema COPD PAH BOS Sarcoidosis GVH | 6 (27) 5 (23) 3 (14) 3 (14) 2 (9) 1 (5) 1 (5) 1 (5) |
COPD Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
PAH Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension
BOS Bronchiolitis Obliterans Syndrome
GVH Graft versus host disease
BALF sample characteristics
| Number of BALF samples | 46 |
| Samples/patient; median (range) | 2 (1–4) |
| Sample collection during; n (%) | |
No infection Infection Antibiotic treatment | 15 (33) 31 (67) 16 (35) |
| Bacterial growth in conventional cultures; n (%)* | |
Other bacteria Negative culture | 9 (20) 8 (18) 5 (11) 4 (9) 4 (9) 9 (20) 11 (24) |
*Several bacterial species may be found in one culture, and the total number of findings can therefore exceed the number of samples
Fig. 1Microbiome composition of the study samples. The figure shows the microbiome of all included study samples from each patient. The patient number is indicated above the bars, and each bar shows the relative abundance of the 10 most common bacterial genera in this study. The clinical status of the patient at the time of sampling is indicated below each bar
Fig. 2Alpha-diversity of BALF samples. The microbiome composition of each sample was assessed based on phylogenetic diversity (faith; left panels), species richness (number of observed ASVs; middle panels) and ASV diversity (shannon index; right panels). Samples were compared based on clinical signs of infection at the time of sampling (a) and high versus low BALF-levels of the inflammatory markers HBP (b), IL-1β (C) or IL-8 (D). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01
Fig. 3Beta-diversity of the BALF samples. Principal coordinate analysis (PCoA) plots demonstrating the distance in the microbiome composition between samples classified as infection (grey) versus no infection (brown), and between samples with high (circles) versus low (triangles) levels of HBP. a Shows differences in abundance calculated with Bray–Curtis distance, where PEMANOVA analyses demonstrated a significant difference in the distance between both infection vs no infection samples (p < 0.05) and high vs low levels of HBP (p < 0.05). b Shows the phylogenetic distance between samples calculated with weighted UniFrac analyses, demonstrating a significant difference between infection vs no infection samples (p < 0.05) as well as between high vs low levels of HBP (p < 0.05)
Fig. 4Enrichment of microbes during infection. Differential abundance analysis of samples graded as infection versus no infection was used to identify enriched organisms during infection. The figure shows ASVs with adjusted p-values < 0.01. Each circle represents an ASV, and all ASVs with a log2FoldChange above zero are significantly enriched during infection. The different colours represent different phyla