| Literature DB >> 33985595 |
Brooke C Wilson1, Tommi Vatanen1,2, Thilini N Jayasinghe1, Karen S W Leong1,3, José G B Derraik1,3, Benjamin B Albert1,3, Valentina Chiavaroli1, Darren M Svirskis4, Kathryn L Beck5, Cathryn A Conlon5, Yannan Jiang6, William Schierding1, David J Holland7, Wayne S Cutfield8,9, Justin M O'Sullivan10,11.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Donor selection is an important factor influencing the engraftment and efficacy of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for complex conditions associated with microbial dysbiosis. However, the degree, variation, and stability of strain engraftment have not yet been assessed in the context of multiple donors.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33985595 PMCID: PMC8120839 DOI: 10.1186/s40168-021-01060-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microbiome ISSN: 2049-2618 Impact factor: 14.650
Fig. 3Strain profiling reveals a variety of competition dynamics for conspecific microbial strains. a Phylogenetic tree of different Bacteroides faecis strains, one of the species enriched post-FMT. Bacteroides faecis strains were present in 138 fecal metagenomes as determined by SNP haplotyping. Scale bar signifies difference in sequence similarity between SNP haplotypes. b Distribution of median normalized DNA distances for conspecific strain pairs. Recipient strains (pre-FMT, post-FMT, and placebo) were compared against donor strains from the corresponding treatment batch. Because we had multiple stool samples for each donor, we also compared intra-donor strains (plotted in red). This allowed us to set a universal strain threshold of 0.2 median normalized DNA distance for calling identical strains, as indicated by the vertical dashed line. c Proportions of strains identified as being either unique to recipient (matching recipient’s baseline strain) or unique to donors (matching any of the contributing donor strains). Strains that were newly detected, or that did not match the recipient’s baseline strain or any contributing donor strains were designated as “Novel”. d Proportion of longitudinal strain profiling scenarios by treatment group. Differences between FMT and placebo proportions for each scenario were tested by proportion test with significance denoted by *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.0005, n.s. not significant
Fig. 1FMT led to prominent shifts in the gut microbiome composition towards particular donors. a Design of the Gut Bugs trial. Circles represent stool sample collection time points with corresponding participant numbers indicated. *One male donor was replaced during the trial; hence, 5 male donors were recruited. b Multidimensional scaling plots based on species-level Bray-Curtis dissimilarities, subset by sex and surveyed time point. Multiple samples from each donor, corresponding to each donation batch, were averaged to generate a composite donor profile. c Shifts in similarity of FMT recipients’ fecal metagenome to each contributing donor after adjusting for baseline similarity. d Alpha diversity of the gut microbiome of donors as measured by Shannon’s diversity index. Multiple points correspond to separate donations. e, f Prevotella/Bacteroides ratio of the gut microbiome of donors (e) and FMT and placebo recipients (f). Differences from baseline to week 6 were measured by Wilcoxon signed-rank test
Fig. 2Bacterial species of the gut microbiome whose relative abundance was altered post-FMT. Species are grouped according to whether they were enriched (top panel) or reduced (bottom panel) post-FMT and are listed in order of statistical significance from week 6 onwards (linear model, FDR adjusted q < 0.1). Relative abundances were log10-transformed with a small pseudo-count (1E-06) added to account for zero abundance values. A relative abundance < 0.0001% signifies that the species did not pass the minimum threshold abundance level for quantification. Each cell represents the mean transformed relative abundance for a specific species according to the grouping variable; “All” combines male and female averages, while “Females” and “Males” allow species abundances to be subset by sex and contributing donors. Placebo recipient profiles are not displayed, as no bacterial species in their gut microbiome were significantly altered throughout the course of the study.
Fig. 4Inter-individual variability in donor strain engraftment. a Proportion of donor-engrafted strains in recipients at each post-treatment timepoint. Data points represent recipient fecal metagenome samples. b Engraftment efficiency of donors represents the proportion of strains within the donor’s fecal metagenome that engrafted among FMT recipients, detected at week 6. c Donor-specific contributions to overall strain engraftment in FMT recipients
Fig. 5FMT-engrafting strains altered the metabolic capacity of the gut microbiome. a Bacterial metabolic pathways in the gut microbiome found to be differentially abundant between FMT and placebo recipients at week 6 (linear model, FDR adjusted q < 0.2). b Heatmap displaying UniRef90 gene families belonging to the nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) biosynthesis from aspartate pathway that were gained (red cells) by female FMT recipients at week 6 (i.e., were not present at baseline). Placebo recipient data were included to differentiate between environmental gain (gene families likely acquired from common species within the environment) and FMT-specific gain (gene families likely acquired from a donor-engrafting species)