| Literature DB >> 35695679 |
Fériel Bouzid1, Imen Gtif1, Suad Alfadhli2, Salma Charfeddine3, Walid Ghorbel4, Rania Abdelhédi1, Riadh Benmarzoug1, Leila Abid3, Nouha Bouayed Abdelmoula5, Inés Elloumi1, Saber Masmoudi1, Ahmed Rebai1, Najla Kharrat1.
Abstract
The coronary artery disease (CAD) is a chronic inflammatory disease involving genetic as well as environmental factors. Recent evidence suggests that the oral microbiome has a significant role in triggering atherosclerosis. The present study assessed the oral microbiome composition variation between coronary patients and healthy subjects in order to identify a potential pathogenic signature associated with CAD. We performed metagenomic profiling of salivary microbiomes by 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) next-generation sequencing. Oral microbiota profiling was performed for 30 individuals including 20 patients with CAD and ten healthy individuals without carotid plaques or previous stroke or myocardial infarction. We found that oral microbial communities in patients and healthy controls are represented by similar global core oral microbiome. The predominant taxa belonged to Firmicutes (genus Streptococcus, Veillonella, Granulicatella, Selenomonas), Proteobacteria (genus Neisseria, Haemophilus), Actinobacteria (genus Rothia), Bacteroidetes (genus Prevotella, Porphyromonas), and Fusobacteria (genus Fusobacterium, Leptotrichia). More than 60% relative abundance of each sample for both CAD patients and controls is represented by three major genera including Streptococcus (24.97 and 26.33%), Veillonella (21.43 and 19.91%), and Neisseria (14.23 and 15.33%). Using penalized regression analysis, the bacterial genus Eikenella was involved as the major discriminant genus for both status and Syntax score of CAD. We also reported a significant negative correlation between Syntax score and Eikenella abundance in coronary patients' group (Spearman rho = -0.68, P=0.00094). In conclusion, the abundance of Eikenella in oral coronary patient samples compared with controls could be a prominent pathological indicator for the development of CAD.Entities:
Keywords: Eikenella; NGS; Oral microbiome; Tunisia; atherosclerosis; coronary artery disease
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35695679 PMCID: PMC9251586 DOI: 10.1042/BSR20220583
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biosci Rep ISSN: 0144-8463 Impact factor: 3.976
Characteristics of study participants
| CAD | Control |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 20 | 10 | NA |
| Females, | 19/20 (95%) | 10/10 (100%) | NA |
| Age, years | 63.4±7.1 | 52.6±8.3 | 0.0009 |
| Body mass index (BMI) | 26.8±3 | 28±3 | 0.35 |
| Obesity (BMI > 30), | 4/20 (20%) | 2/8 (25%) | 1 |
| Strong adherence to the MD (4 ≤ score ≤ 8), | 13/20 (65%) | 5/10 (50%) | 0.42 |
|
| |||
| Known diabetes, | 13/20 (65%) | 3/8 (37.5%) | 0.18 |
| Known hypertension, | 13/20 (65%) | 3/8 (37.5%) | 0.18 |
| Hypercholesterolemia, | 4/12 (33.33%) | 0 | NA |
| Dyslipidemia, | 7/20 (35%) | 2/8 (25%) | 1 |
|
| |||
| Statin treatment, | 17/20 (85%) | 4/8 (50%) | 0.053 |
| β-blocker treatment, | 7/19 (36.8%) | 1/8 (12.5%) | 0.36 |
| Clopidogrel treatment, | 9/20 (45%) | 0 | NA |
|
| |||
|
| |||
| Non-significant stenosis (<50%), | 11/20 (55%) | 0 | NA |
| Significant stenosis (≥50%), | 9/20 (45%) | 0 | NA |
| Healthy, | 0 | 10/10 (100%) | NA |
|
| |||
| Low (≤16), | 16/20 (80%) | 0 | NA |
| Intermediate (16–22), | 2/20 (10%) | 0 | NA |
| High (>22), | 2/20 (10%) | 0 | NA |
NA: not applicable.
Figure 1Salivary microbiome structure of coronary patients and controls on phylum level
(A) The composition bar plots generated by QIIME2 pipeline showing the average relative abundance of each taxa. (B) Heatmap of 18 representative phyla selected by random forest classification algorithm. The heatmap illustrates the mean Log 10 frequency of each phyla in CAD patients and controls.
Figure 2The composition bar plots for each sample on the phylum level
Bacterial species detected in more than 90% of subjects
| Taxonomy | Prevalence n/N (%) | Abundance average % (CAD/controls) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phylum | Genus | Species | |||
| 100% | Firmicutes |
|
| 30/30 (100%) | 20.91%/19.46% |
| Proteobacteria |
|
| 30/30 (100%) | 12.81%/13.31% | |
| Proteobacteria |
|
| 30/30 (100%) | 4.74%/5% | |
| Actinobacteria |
|
| 30/30 (100%) | 2.57%/2.53% | |
| Bacteroidetes |
|
| 30/30 (100%) | 1.19%/0.97% | |
| Firmicutes |
|
| 30/30 (100%) | 0.49%/0.44% | |
| Firmicutes |
|
| 30/30 (100%) | 0.64%/0.64% | |
| Firmicutes |
|
| 30/30 (100%) | 0.26%/0.17% | |
| Actinobacteria |
|
| 30/30 (100%) | 0.31%/0.13% | |
| Bacteroidetes |
|
| 30/30 (100%) | 0.29%/0.13% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 23.68%/25.38% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 2.38%/2.72% | |
| Bacteroidetes |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 2.69%/3.43% | |
| Fusobacteria |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 2.27%/2.38% | |
| Proteobacteria |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 1.4%/2% | |
| Fusobacteria |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 2.84%/1.92% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 1.13%/0.98% | |
| Bacteroidetes |
| sp. | 30/30 100% | 0.8%/0.95% | |
| Actinobacteria |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 0.37%/0.43% | |
| Actinobacteria |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 0.63%/0.49% | |
| Proteobacteria |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 0.54%/0.7% | |
| Bacteroidetes |
| sp. | 30/30 (100%) | 0.35%/0.24% | |
| >90% | Proteobacteria |
|
| 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.18%/0.1% |
| Actinobacteria |
|
| 28/30 (93,3%) | 0,04%/0.12% | |
| Bacteroidetes |
|
| 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.08%/0.14% | |
| Bacteroidetes |
|
| 27/30 (90%) | 0.6%/0.98% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 29/30 (96,66%) | 0.27%/0.27% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 29/30 (96,66%) | 0.41%/0.21% | |
| Proteobacteria |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.05%/0.06% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.83%/0.97% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.35%/0.3% | |
| Proteobacteria |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.44%/0.48% | |
| Bacteroidetes |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.08%/0.09% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.12%/0.04% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.04%/0.12% | |
| Proteobacteria |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.08%/0.14% | |
| Proteobacteria |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.03%/0.06% | |
| Proteobacteria |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.95%/0.7% | |
| Bacteroidetes |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.03%/0.04% | |
| Bacteroidetes |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.08%/0.06% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 28/30 (93,3%) | 0.06%/0.07% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 27/30 (90%) | 0.62% /0.84% | |
| Synergistetes |
| sp. | 27/30 (90%) | 0.29%/0.29% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 27/30 (90%) | 0.27%/0.33% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 27/30 (90%) | 0.39%/0.45% | |
| Firmicutes |
| sp. | 27/30 (90%) | 0.05%/0.04% | |
Figure 3α and β diversity rarefaction
(A) α rarefaction curves showing species richness using Shannon metric on rarefied samples to the lowest read depth of 4334 reads. (B) Principal Coordinate Analysis (PCoA) plot of β diversity rarefaction using Jaccard distances calculated between samples rarefied to the lowest read depth of 4334 reads showing an outlier CAD sample.
Figure 4Description of the global balance for CAD by Selbal methodology
(A) CV results for CAD study showing the most frequent taxa selected in the CV procedure compared with the global balance obtained with the whole data set. Colored rectangles indicate if the component is in the numerator (NUM) (red) or in the denominator (DEN) (blue) of the balance. (B) MSE as a function of 19 components included in the balance.
Figure 5Box plots showing the absolute frequency of the bacterial genus Eikenella
(A) Abundance of the bacterial genus Eikenella in CAD patients compared with the control group. (B) Abundance of Eikenella in CAD patients at early and advanced stages, and the control group. The y axis represents the absolute frequency of Eikenella.