| Literature DB >> 35251791 |
Xiaoyu Sun1, Yushuang Wang2, Xinke Li2, Meiling Wang3, Jianyi Dong4, Wei Tang2, Zengjie Lei2, Yuling Guo2, Ming Li2, Yuyuan Li5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a systemic autoimmune disease, in addition, gut microbiota plays an important role in the etiology of RA. However, our understanding of alterations to the gut fungal microbiota in Chinese population with RA is still limited.Entities:
Keywords: Age; Dysbiosis; Gender; Gut mycobiota; Rheumatoid arthritis
Year: 2022 PMID: 35251791 PMCID: PMC8896017 DOI: 10.7717/peerj.13037
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PeerJ ISSN: 2167-8359 Impact factor: 2.984
Clinical characteristics of subjects.
| RA ( | HC ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Male/Female (N) | 15/47 | 7/32 | |
| Age (Mean ± SEM) | 60.80 ± 1.33 | 60.44 ± 1.47 | 0.87 |
| CRP (mg/L) | 12.54 ± 1.73 | 6.29 ± 2.42 | 0.039 |
| ESR (mm/h) | 39.10 ± 2.84 | 14.95 ± 2.28 | <0.0001 |
| RF (IU/mL) | 362.93 ± 57.09 | 20.60 ± 0.36 | <0.0001 |
| IgG (IU/mL) | 1,426.38 ± 46.5 | 1,394.51 ± 83.38 | 0.738 |
| IgA (IU/mL) | 314.34 ± 16.75 | 235.62 ± 17.15 | 0.003 |
| IgM (IU/mL) | 113.12 ± 6.46 | 147.51 ± 24.51 | 0.12 |
| IgE (IU/mL) | 94.63 ± 14.88 | 49.13 ± 7.24 | 0.03 |
| CEA (ng/mL) | 2.18 ± 0.15 | 2.39 ± 0.27 | 0.48 |
| CA19-9 (IU/mL) | 13.42 ± 1.70 | 14.90 ± 1.45 | 0.561 |
| CA125 (IU/mL) | 17.98 ± 1.96 | 10.37 ± 0.67 | 0.015 |
Notes:
P < 0.05.
P < 0.01.
P < 0.0001.
Clinical characteristics of the RA group.
| Under 60 ( | Over 60 ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Male/Female (N) | 6/18 | 9/29 | |
| Age (Mean ± SEM) | 50.50 ± 1.51 | 67.26 ± 0.97 | 0.013 |
| CRP (mg/L) | 7.81 ± 1.63 | 15.74 ± 2.54 | 0.03 |
| ESR (mm/h) | 36.30 ± 4.52 | 40.89 ± 3.67 | 0.447 |
| RF (IU/ml) | 348.82 ± 78.11 | 379.32 ± 81.79 | 0.781 |
| IgG (IU/ml) | 1,491.00 ± 52.4 | 1,392.37 ± 66.74 | 0.33 |
| IgA (IU/ml) | 338.25 ± 27.57 | 301.06 ± 21.11 | 0.31 |
| IgM (IU/ml) | 133.80 ± 12.03 | 102.24 ± 6.97 | 0.02 |
| IgE (IU/ml) | 96.31 ± 24.79 | 93.61 ± 18.84 | 0.93 |
| CEA (ng/ml) | 1.69 ± 0.14 | 2.46 ± 0.21 | 0.016 |
| CA19-9 (IU/ml) | 9.97 ± 1.89 | 15.43 ± 2.45 | 0.14 |
| CA125 (IU/ml) | 13.51 ± 0.91 | 20.37 ± 3.01 | 0.169 |
|
|
|
| |
| Age (Mean ± SEM) | 60.00 ± 2.69 | 61.02 ± 1.55 | 0.746 |
| CRP (mg/L) | 13.77 ± 3.07 | 12.18 ± 2.07 | 0.715 |
| ESR (mm/h) | 40.29 ± 4.14 | 38.73 ± 3.52 | 0.823 |
| RF (IU/ml) | 544.68 ± 179.55 | 303.99 ± 47.74 | 0.11 |
| IgG (IU/ml) | 1,498.00 ± 86.92 | 1,401.40 ± 54.91 | 0.384 |
| IgA (IU/ml) | 381.00 ± 33.99 | 292.12 ± 18.35 | 0.028 |
| IgM (IU/ml) | 112.00 ± 13.82 | 113.51 ± 7.37 | 0.922 |
| IgE (IU/ml) | 170.78 ± 43.89 | 72.63 ± 12.79 | 0.006 |
| CEA (ng/ml) | 2.05 ± 0.15 | 2.22 ± 0.19 | 0.637 |
| CA19-9 (IU/ml) | 8.76 ± 1.15 | 14.94 ± 2.18 | 0.136 |
Notes:
P < 0.05.
P < 0.01.
Clinical characteristics of the HC group.
| Under 60 ( | Over 60 ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Male/Female (N) | 3/11 | 6/19 | |
| Age (Mean ± SEM) | 50.79 ± 1.73 | 65.84 ± 1.01 | <0.0001 |
| CRP (mg/L) | 2.62 ± 0.96 | 8.43 ± 3.73 | 0.259 |
| ESR (mm/h) | 9.92 ± 1.81 | 17.56 ± 3.28 | 0.447 |
| RF (IU/ml) | 20.00 ± 0 | 20.98 ± 0.57 | 0.21 |
| IgG (IU/ml) | 1,418.77 ± 79.49 | 1,381.38 ± 122.92 | 0.84 |
| IgA (IU/ml) | 254.69 ± 35.30 | 225.29 ± 18.48 | 0.43 |
| IgM (IU/ml) | 132.61 ± 21.75 | 155.58 ± 36.34 | 0.67 |
| IgE (IU/ml) | 60.61 ± 25.78 | 94.53 ± 38.68 | 0.56 |
| CEA (ng/ml) | 2.67 ± 0.69 | 2.25 ± 0.22 | 0.49 |
| CA19-9 (IU/ml) | 13.13 ± 2.40 | 15.79 ± 1.83 | 0.41 |
| CA125 (IU/ml) | 11.90 ± 0.89 | 9.61 ± 0.88 | 0.18 |
|
|
|
| |
| Age (Mean ± SEM) | 64.75 ± 2.94 | 59.40 ± 1.70 | 0.15 |
| CRP (mg/L) | 8.75 ± 7.28 | 5.79 ± 2.53 | 0.63 |
| ESR (mm/h) | 9.12 ± 3.63 | 17.00 ± 2.72 | 0.17 |
| RF (IU/ml) | 20.51 ± 0.51 | 20.64 ± 0.46 | 0.889 |
| IgG (IU/ml) | 1,036.71 ± 73.35 | 1,476.90 ± 99.90 | 0.045 |
| IgA (IU/ml) | 162.00 ± 16.00 | 253.13 ± 20.50 | 0.044 |
| IgM (IU/ml) | 86.57 ± 13.94 | 163.79 ± 30.80 | 0.24 |
| IgE (IU/ml) | 29.77 ± 9.69 | 98.04 ± 33.52 | 0.33 |
| CEA (ng/ml) | 3.30 ± 0.74 | 2.10 ± 0.28 | 0.08 |
| CA19-9 (IU/ml) | 16.54 ± 3.62 | 14.37 ± 1.64 | 0.566 |
Notes:
P < 0.05.
P < 0.0001.
Figure 1Comparison of mycobiota between RA patients and healthy controls.
(A) Venn diagram of shared and independent fungal OTUs between the two groups; Fungal community bar plot at the phylum (B) and genus (C) levels; (D) the analysis of species difference at genus level with the values evaluated as mean ± SEM; (E) LEfSe analysis of mycobiota between the RA patients and healthy controls; (F) Heatmap of Spearman correlations between fungal taxa and serological features of RA. The color red represents the highest score value (the highest correlation), while blue marks the lowest score value (the lowest correlation). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01.
Figure 2Comparison of mycobiota between RA patients aged less than 60 and those over 60 years of age.
(A) Venn diagram of shared and independent fungal OTUs between the two groups; fungal community bar plot at the phylum (B) and genus (C) levels; (D) the analysis of species difference at the genus level with the values evaluated as mean ± SEM; (E) LEfSe analysis of mycobiota between the RA patients aged under 60 and over 60 years; (F) Heatmap of Spearman correlations between fungal taxa and serological features of RA. The color red represents the highest score value (the highest correlation), while blue marks the lowest score value (the lowest correlation). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01.
Figure 3Comparison of mycobiota between male and female RA patients.
(A) Venn diagram of shared and independent fungal OTUs between the two groups; fungal community bar plot at the phylum (B) and genus (C) levels; (D) the analysis of species difference at the genus level with the values evaluated as mean ± SEM; (E) LEfSe analysis of mycobiota between the male and female RA patients; (F) Heatmap of Spearman correlations between fungal taxa and serological features of RA. The color red represents the highest score value (the highest correlation), while blue marks the lowest score value (the lowest correlation). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01.