| Literature DB >> 35479954 |
Yan Guo1,2, Guoqin Zhu3, Fengliang Wang4, Haoyu Zhang1,5, Xin Chen1, Yan Mao1, Yifan Lv1, Fan Xia1, Yi Jin1, Guoxian Ding1, Jing Yu1.
Abstract
Frailty is a critical aging-related syndrome but the underlying metabolic mechanism remains poorly understood. The aim of this study was to identify novel biomarkers and reveal potential mechanisms of frailty based on the integrated analysis of metabolome and gut microbiome. In this study, twenty subjects consisted of five middle-aged adults and fifteen older adults, of which fifteen older subjects were divided into three groups: non-frail, pre-frail, and frail, with five subjects in each group. The presence of frailty, pre-frailty, or non-frailty was established according to the physical frailty phenotype (PFP). We applied non-targeted metabolomics to serum and feces samples and used 16S rDNA gene sequencing to detect the fecal microbiome. The associations between metabolites and gut microbiota were analyzed by the Spearman's correlation analysis. Serum metabolic shifts in frailty mainly included fatty acids and derivatives, carbohydrates, and monosaccharides. Most of the metabolites belonging to these classes increased in the serum of frail older adults. Propylparaben was found to gradually decrease in non-frail, pre-frail, and frail older adults. Distinct changes in fecal metabolite profiles and gut microbiota were also found among middle-aged adults, non-frail and frail older subjects. The relative abundance of Faecalibacteriu, Roseburia, and Fusicatenibacter decreased while the abundance of Parabacteroides and Bacteroides increased in frailty. The above altered microbes were associated with the changed serum metabolites in frailty, which included dodecanedioic acid, D-ribose, D-(-)-mannitol, creatine and indole, and their related fecal metabolites. The changed microbiome and related metabolites may be used as the biomarkers of frailty and is worthy of further mechanistic studies.Entities:
Keywords: frailty; gut microbiota; healthy aging; metabolites; metabolomics
Year: 2022 PMID: 35479954 PMCID: PMC9035822 DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.827174
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Med (Lausanne) ISSN: 2296-858X
FIGURE 1Diagram of the study protocol.
FIGURE 2Serum metabolome analysis. (A,D) PLS-DA analysis of the grouped discrimination by the first two principal components (PCs) in positive (pos) and negative (neg) ion modes. (B,E) Pie graph of the metabolite class composition of significantly altered metabolites according to the number of metabolites in serum. (C,F) Bubble chart of pathway enrichment analysis of differential metabolites in positive (pos) and negative (neg) ion modes. RichFactor was the number of differential metabolites divided by all the identified metabolites annotated to the pathway. (G) Relative abundance of the representative differential metabolites. Peak area: relative concentrations of metabolites. *p < 0.05. Error bars represented mean ± SD.
FIGURE 3Fecal metabolome analysis. (A,D) PLS-DA analysis of the grouped discrimination by the first two principal components (PCs) in positive (pos) and negative (neg) ion modes. (B,E) Pie graph of the metabolite class composition of significantly altered metabolites according to the number of metabolites in feces. (C,F) Bubble chart of pathway enrichment analysis of differential metabolites in positive (pos) and negative (neg) ion modes. RichFactor was the number of differential metabolites divided by all the identified metabolites annotated to the pathway. (G) Relative abundance of the differential metabolites related to the serum metabolites shown in Figure 2G. Peak Area: relative concentrations of metabolites. *p < 0.05. Error bars represented mean ± SD.
FIGURE 416S rDNA-amplicon sequencing analysis. (A) The Core-Pan diagram of OTUs distribution among four groups. (B) The rarefaction curve of random sequences per sample and their corresponding number of observed species. (C,D) Species diversity differences estimated by the observed Sobs, Chao, Ace, Shannon, Simpson, and coverage indices. (E) UPGMA cluster analysis of 20 samples at genus level. A01, A02, A03, A04, and A05 represented middle-aged group; B01, B02, B03, B04, and B05 represented non-frail group; C01, C02, C03, C04, and C05 represented pre-frail group; D01, D02, D03, D04, and D05 represented frail group. (F) Beta diversity box-plot based on weighted UniFrac analysis among groups. (G) The percentages of gut microbiota diversity at phylum level. (H) The percentages of gut microbiota diversity at genus level. (I,J) LDA integrated with effect size (LEfSe). Left: the phylogenetic distribution of microbiota in cladogram. Right: the differences in abundance of microbiota. Middle-aged adults vs. non-frail subjects (I); non-frail subjects vs. frail subjects (J). NS, not significant.
FIGURE 5Correlation analysis between metabolites and gut microbiota. Correlation profile of altered gut microbiota, fecal and serum metabolites in frailty based on the Spearman’s correlation analysis. Fecal metabolites and serum metabolites of the same color were included in the metabolism pathway with the same color. ↑ and ↓ indicated higher and lower concentration of metabolites or abundance of microbiota, respectively. Red and blue lines indicated positive and negative correlations, respectively.