| Literature DB >> 34361920 |
Tanya M Monaghan1,2, Rima N Biswas3, Rupam R Nashine3, Samidha S Joshi3, Benjamin H Mullish4, Anna M Seekatz5, Jesus Miguens Blanco4, Julie A K McDonald4,6, Julian R Marchesi4, Tung On Yau7, Niki Christodoulou7, Maria Hatziapostolou7, Maja Pucic-Bakovic8, Frano Vuckovic8, Filip Klicek8, Gordan Lauc8,9, Ning Xue10, Tania Dottorini10, Shrikant Ambalkar11, Ashish Satav12, Christos Polytarchou7, Animesh Acharjee13,14,15, Rajpal Singh Kashyap3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) have become a major cause of morbidity and mortality in India. Perturbation of host-microbiome interactions may be a key mechanism by which lifestyle-related risk factors such as tobacco use, alcohol consumption, and physical inactivity may influence metabolic health. There is an urgent need to identify relevant dysmetabolic traits for predicting risk of metabolic disorders, such as diabetes, among susceptible Asian Indians where NCDs are a growing epidemic.Entities:
Keywords: diabetes mellitus; dysmetabolism; geography; glycome; host–microbe interactions; multiomics
Year: 2021 PMID: 34361920 PMCID: PMC8307859 DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms9071485
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Microorganisms ISSN: 2076-2607
Baseline characteristics of study population. Descriptive statistics presented as the number of samples (n) and percentage (%) or median (interquartile range, IQR).
| Characteristic | Rural, | Urban, | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, yrs (median (IQR)) | 39 (27, 53) | 38 (30, 49) | >0.9 |
| Gender | 0.3 | ||
| Female | 47 (50%) | 52 (42%) | |
| Male | 47 (50%) | 72 (58%) | |
| BMI (median (IQR)) | 21.0 (19.2, 22.3) | 25.0 (23.5, 26.0) | <0.001 |
| BMI Class | <0.001 | ||
| Underweight | 10 (11%) | 0 (0%) | |
| Normal | 68 (72%) | 20 (16%) | |
| Overweight | 12 (13%) | 38 (31%) | |
| Pre-Obese | 2 (2.1%) | 62 (50%) | |
| Obese | 2 (2.1%) | 4 (3.2%) | |
| Smoker | 23 (24%) | 31 (25%) | >0.9 |
| Hospitalized | 13 (14%) | 45 (36%) | |
| Drugs | 0.017 | ||
| Antacid | 24 (26%) | 12 (9.7%) | |
| PPI | 1 (1.1%) | 1 (0.8%) | |
| Co-morbidities | <0.001 | ||
| Diabetes mellitus | 8 (8.5%) | 15 (12%) | |
| Epilepsy | 3 (3.2%) | 12 (9.7%) | |
| High cholesterol | 0 (0%) | 1 (0.8%) | |
| Hypertension | 0 (0%) | 7 (5.6%) | |
| Hypothyroidism | 0 (0%) | 1 (0.8%) | |
| Seizure disorder | 0 (0%) | 1 (0.8%) | |
| Tuberculosis | 0 (0%) | 1 (0.8%) | |
| Toilet facilities | 80 (85%) | 124 (100%) | <0.001 |
| Hand soap | 80 (85%) | 124 (100%) | <0.001 |
| Domestic animals | 42 (45%) | 21 (17%) | <0.001 |
| Water supply | <0.001 | ||
| Borewell | 0 (0%) | 18 (15%) | |
| Corporation water connection | 6 (6.4%) | 101 (81%) | |
| Corporation water tank | 78 (83%) | 3 (2.4%) | |
| Well water | 10 (11%) | 2 (1.6%) |
Figure 1The microbiota is structurally distinct in participants from rural vs. urban areas. (a) Schematic of overall study design (n = number of urban/rural samples). (b) Diversity as determined by inverse Simpson index based on normalized ASV counts in participants from rural vs. urban areas (Kruskall–Wallis nonparametric test, p < 0.001). (c) Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) visualization of Bray–Curtis distance (based on normalized ASV counts) of the microbiota in participants based on geography (rural vs. urban; purple vs. yellow). Analysis of similarities (ANOSIM) was conducted using Bray–Curtis distance, 9999 permutations. (d) Log-transformed relative abundance of significantly differential genera between participants from rural or urban areas, as determined by Linear discriminant analysis Effect Size (LEfSe).
Features which show significant differential responses between rural and urban cohorts are shown using two-tailed Student’s t-test. An FDR corrected p-value is shown in the last column. Arrows (↑/↓) represent features that were increased/decreased in the corresponding population.
| Feature | tstat | Rural | Urban | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serum Short-chain Fatty Acids | ||||
| Caproate | 6.679 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.000000 |
| Valerate | 5.5217 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.000001 |
| Acetate | 3.1602 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.006598 |
| Propionate | 3.0367 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.007375 |
| Serum Diabetic panel | ||||
| BMI | −3.9651 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.003120 |
| C-peptide | −3.4949 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.006466 |
| Insulin | −3.0994 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.013355 |
| Leptin | −2.9744 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.014119 |
| Serum IgG Fc | ||||
| IgG1 H4N4F1: IgG1 glycopeptide with monogalactosylated glycan with core fucose | −3.6748 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.004191 |
| IgG4 H5N4F1: IgG4 glycopeptide with digalactosylated glycan with core fucose | 3.4585 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.004569 |
| IgG1 H3N4F1: IgG1 glycopeptide with agalactosylated glycan with core fucose | −2.9742 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.014886 |
| IgG4 H5N4F1S1: IgG4 glycopeptide with digalactosylated and monosialylated glycan with core fucose | 2.889 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.014886 |
| IgG1_H5N4F1S1: IgG1 glycopeptide with digalactosylated and monosialylated glycan with core fucose. | 2.5309 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.033823 |
| Serum Immunoglobulin isotype | ||||
| IgG1 | −3.5703 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.003905 |
| IgM | 2.5608 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.045976 |
| Inflammation-related Protein | ||||
| IFN-γ | 3.077 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.051323 |
| Osteocalcin | −3.063 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.051323 |
| Serum | ||||
| S4: Tetrasialylated glycans | −5.2077 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.000004 |
| G4: Tetragalactosylated glycans | −5.1823 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.000004 |
| AF: Antennary fucosylation | −4.7813 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.000019 |
| S1: Monosialylated glycans | 3.9387 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.000413 |
| HB: High branching glycans | −3.9283 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.000413 |
| LB: Low branching glycans | 3.8475 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.000470 |
| S3: Trisialylated glycans | −3.25 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.003435 |
| G2: Digalactosylated glycans | 2.9324 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.008372 |
| G3: Trigalctosylated glycans | −2.7838 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.011686 |
| B: Bisection (Glycans with bisecting GlcNAc) | 2.403 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.030770 |
| HM: High mannose glycans | 2.2316 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.043612 |
Figure 2Serum immunoglobulin levels vary by geography. (a) Principal component analysis (PCA) score plot on the selected features demonstrates a clear separation in serum multi-isotype antibody responses in terms of geographic setting of sampled population. Dots represent patients and are coloured according to the subject cohort. Ellipse represents 95% confidence. Results are plotted according to the Principal component-1 (PC1) and Principal component-2 (PC2) scores, with the percent variation of the cohort explained by the respective x and y axess. (b) Box plots showing levels of serum IgM and IgG1 antibodies in rural and urban cohorts, respectively.
Features which demonstrate differential responses between normal and low glycated serum protein (GSP) levels (μmol/L). Low GSP = 0–199; Normal GSP = 200–285; MMP-2 = Matrix metalloproteinase-2; MMP-3 = Matrix metalloproteinase-3; sCD163 = Soluble CD163; sIL-6Rα = Soluble interleukin 6 receptor alpha; IFN-α2 = Interferon alpha-2; sCD30/TNFRSF8 = Tumour necrosis factor receptor superfamily member 8; Two-tailed Student’s t- test. An FDR corrected p-value is shown in the last column. Arrows (↑/↓) represent features that were increased/decreased in the corresponding population.
| Feature | tstat | Normal GSP ( | Low GSP ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMP-2 | −3.5975 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.000548 |
| HM: High mannose glycans | 2.8571 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.005416 |
| MMP-3 | 2.8315 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.005827 |
| sCD163 | −2.7054 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.008297 |
| sIL-6Rα | −2.6473 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.009727 |
| IFN-α2 | −2.4229 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.017598 |
| IgG4 H5N4F1S1: IgG4 glycopeptide with digalactosylated and monosialylated glycan with core fucose | 2.3389 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.021773 |
|
| −2.2579 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.026608 |
|
| −2.2579 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.026608 |
| 2-methylbutyrate | −2.196 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.030914 |
| AF: Antennary Fucosylation | −2.1194 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.03708 |
|
| −2.0844 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.040231 |
|
| −2.0666 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.041926 |
| sCD30/TNFRSF8 | −2.0552 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.043046 |
Features which demonstrate differential responses between normal and high GSP levels. Normal GSP = 200–285; High GSP = 286–400; APRIL/TNFSF13 = A proliferation-inducing ligand/Tumor necrosis factor ligand superfamily member, 13; Two-tailed Student’s t- test. Arrows (↑/↓) represent features that were increased/decreased in the corresponding population. An FDR corrected p-value is shown in the last column.
| Feature | tstat | Normal GSP ( | High GSP ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IgG2 | −2.7269 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.008335 |
| Caproate | −2.6832 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.009373 |
| Roseburia | −2.4077 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.019095 |
| Valerate | −2.2378 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.028897 |
| Dorea | −2.2193 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.030193 |
| IgM | −2.1594 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.034761 |
| APRIL/TNFSF13 | 2.141 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.036276 |
Features which demonstrate differential responses between normal and very high GSP levels; Normal GSP = 200–285; Very high GSP = >400. Two-tailed student’s t- test. Arrows (↑/↓) represent features that were increased/decreased in the corresponding population. An FDR corrected p-value is shown in the last column.
| Feature | tstat | Normal GSP ( | Very High GSP ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Caproate | 2.4758 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.017035 |
| Blautia | −2.0712 | ↓ | ↑ | 0.04398 |
| Osteopontin | 2.0162 | ↑ | ↓ | 0.049643 |
Figure 3Significant Pearson correlation (p < 0.05) of the selected features for the (a) rural (n = 94) and (b) urban samples (124). Correlated variables are either highly positively correlated (in blue circles) or negatively correlated (red circles).
Figure 4(a) Principal component analysis (PCA) score plot performed on the selected omics features demonstrating clustering of the rural vs. urban cohorts. Dots represent patients and are coloured according to the subject cohort. Ellipse represents 95% confidence. Results are plotted according to the Principal component-1 (PC1) and Principal component-2 (PC2) scores, with the percent variation of the cohort explained by the respective x and y axes. (b) Permutation test to show the stability of the AUC value after randomizing the urban and rural samples 100 times. (c) Significant correlation (p < 0.05) heatmap of the elastic net selected features is shown for urban samples. (d) Significant Pearson correlation (p < 0.05) heatmap of the elastic net selected features is shown for rural (n = 94) samples.
Figure 5Jitter plot of the normalized selected features from elastic net analysis are shown for the rural (n = 94) vs. urban (n = 124) cohorts. Wilcoxon Rank test was performed and results were obtained, and p-values are shown in the respective plots.