| Literature DB >> 35242730 |
David Chaima1,2, Harry Pickering1, John D Hart1, Sarah E Burr1,2, Joanna Houghton1, Kenneth Maleta3, Khumbo Kalua4,5, Robin L Bailey1, Martin J Holland1.
Abstract
Community-level mass treatment with azithromycin has been associated with a mortality benefit in children. However, antibiotic exposures result in disruption of the gut microbiota and repeated exposures may reduce recovery of the gut flora. We conducted a nested cohort study within the framework of a randomized controlled trial to examine associations between mass drug administration (MDA) with azithromycin and the gut microbiota of rural Malawian children aged between 1 and 59 months. Fecal samples were collected from the children at baseline and 6 months after two or four biannual rounds of azithromycin treatment. DNA was extracted from fecal samples and V4-16S rRNA sequencing used to characterize the gut microbiota. Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria and Actinobacteria were the dominant phyla while Faecalibacterium and Bifidobacterium were the most prevalent genera. There were no associations between azithromycin treatment and changes in alpha diversity, however, four biannual rounds of treatment were associated with increased abundance of Prevotella. The lack of significant changes in gut microbiota after four biannual treatments supports the use of mass azithromycin treatment to reduce mortality in children living in low- and middle-income settings.Entities:
Keywords: V4-16S rRNA sequencing; amplicon; azithromycin; gut microbiota; mass drug administration
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35242730 PMCID: PMC8885630 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.756318
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Public Health ISSN: 2296-2565
Figure 1Study flow. Study flow for the cross sectional survey of carriage of antimicrobial resistance and selection of samples for the nested cohort study.
Baseline demographics of participants whose samples were included in the nested cohort study of 16S rRNA sequencing vs. all participants who provided fecal samples for the cross sectional survey of antimicrobial resistance.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of participants ( | 102 | 1,090 | |
| Male sex N (%) | 52 (51%) | 487 (45%) | 0.304 |
| Mean (SD) age in months | 22.95 (13.54) | 29.59 (16.42) | <0.001 |
| Age range in months | 2–56 | 1–59 |
Denotes P-values obtained from sample proportion test while
denotes P-values obtained from Student's t-test.
Figure 2Relative abundance of major taxa found in fecal samples at baseline. (A). Major phyla. The proportion of total number of reads for each phylum in a sample represents phylum abundance after rarefaction to 1000 reads. (B) Major genera. The proportion of total number of reads for each genus in a sample represents genus abundance after rarefaction to 1000 reads. The stacked bar plot only shows the 10 most abundant genera. Genera with relative abundance <1% were grouped as “Other.”
Comparison of baseline participant characteristics between treatment groups for the BL vs. 2MDA and BL vs. 4MDA datasets.
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |||
| Number of participants ( | 24 | 30 | |
| Child male sex | 14 (58%) | 15 (50%) | 0.74 |
| Mean (SD) age, months | 27 (14) | 24.3 (15) | 0.51 |
| 0 | 1 (4%) | ||
| 1 | 10 (42%) | ||
| 2 | 13 (51%) | ||
|
| |||
| Number of participants ( | 25 | 30 | |
| Child male sex, | 13 (52%) | 16 (53%) | 0.99 |
| Mean (SD) age, months | 18.3 (10.6) | 19 (10.8) | 0.82 |
| 0 | 3 (12) | ||
| 1 | 3 (12) | ||
| 2 | 6 (24) | ||
| 3 | 4 (16) | ||
| 4 | 9 (36) | ||
Denotes P-values obtained from sample proportion test while
denotes P-values obtained from Student's t-test.
Alpha diversity distribution between treatment groups.
|
|
|
|
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| BL vs. 2MDA ( | Baseline | 2.4 (1.9, 2.5) | 2 (1.6, 2.2) | 0.02 | 0.9 (0.8, 0.9) | 0.8 (0.7, 0.9) | 0.01 |
| 12 months | 2.2 (2, 2.4) | 2.2 (1.7, 2.4) | 0.71 | 0.8 (0.8, 0.9) | 0.8 (0.7, 0.8) | 0.72 | |
| BL vs. 4MDA ( | Baseline | 2.0 (0.5) | 2.1 (0.5) | 0.69 | 0.8 (0.7, 0.8) | 0.8 (0.7, 0.8) | 0.61 |
| 24 months | 2.2 (0.5) | 2.2 (0.4) | 0.97 | 0.8 (0.8, 0.9) | 0.8 (0.8, 0.9) | 0.91 | |
Median (25.
Mean (SD).
P-value calculated by Wilcoxon rank sum test.
P-value calculated by Student's t-test.
Alpha diversity distribution within the azithromycin treatment group.
|
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| 2.1 (0.5) | 2.2 (0.5) | 0.88 | 0.8 (0.11) | 0.8 (0.11) | 0.99 | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 1.8 (0.5) | 2.2 (0.5) | 0.005 | 0.37 | 0.77 (0.17) | 0.82 (0.10) | 0.33 | |
Median (25.
Mean (SD).
P-value calculated by Wilcoxon rank sum test.
P-value calculated by Student's t-test.
Denotes P-values calculated from a linear regression model after adjusting for age and sex.
Figure 3Overall fecal microbiota composition differences between baseline and 24-month fecal samples in the azithromycin (A,B) and placebo (C,D) arms. (A) PCoA plot of unweighted UniFrac distances [PERMANOVA, R2 = 0.1, F = 5.09, P = 0.001] (B) PCoA plot of weighted UniFrac distances [PERMANOVA, R2 = 0.1, F = 5.1, P = 0.001], (C) PCoA plot of unweighted UniFrac distances [PERMANOVA, R2 = 0.07, F = 4.01, P = 0.001] (D) PCoA plot of weighted UniFrac distances [PERMANOVA, R2 =0.16, F=11.87, P=0.001]. In all the PCoA plots above (A–D), PCo1 explained the most variation and baseline fecal samples clustered in the negative space of PCo1 while 24-month fecal samples clustered in the positive space of PCo1.
Longitudinal comparison of relative abundance of individual genera after 4 rounds of biannual treatment compared to baseline in the azithromycin and placebo arms within the BL vs. 4MDA dataset.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Azithromycin |
| −3.9 (−5.9, −1.9) | <0.01 | 0.18 (−0.79, 1.16) | 0.71 |
|
| 1.5 (0.6, 2.4) | 0.002 | 0.3 (0.003, 0.6) | 0.05 | |
|
| −40 (−70, −9) | 0.012 | 0.54 (−0.1, 1.17) | 0.1 | |
| Placebo |
| −3.3 (−4.7, −1.8) | <0.01 | 0.66 (−0.68, 2.0) | 0.34 |
|
| 1.3 (0.6, 1.9) | 0.0002 | 0.21 (−0.28, 0.69) | 0.4 |
CI, confidence interval.
Coefficient (95% CI) and P-values obtained with unadjusted linear regression model.
Coefficient (95%CI) and P-values obtained with linear mixed models adjusted for age, sex and time since last treatment with the participant as a random effect.
Figure 4Heatmap showing relative abundance of genera in baseline and 24-month fecal samples by treatment arm. (A) Azithromycin arm, (B) Placebo arm.