| Literature DB >> 35864993 |
Nahla M Elsherbiny1, Mohammed Ramadan2, Nagla H Abu Faddan3, Elham Ahmed Hassan4, Mohamed E Ali2, Abeer Sharaf El-Din Abd El-Rehim4, Wael A Abbas5, Mohamed A A Abozaid5, Ebtisam Hassanin6, Ghada A Mohamed7, Helal F Hetta1, Mohammed Salah8.
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the compositional and functional characteristics of T1DM-associated gut microbiota in two Egyptian cities and to study the geographical locality effects. Patients andEntities:
Keywords: children; dysbiosis; gut microbiota; type 1 diabetes mellitus
Year: 2022 PMID: 35864993 PMCID: PMC9296103 DOI: 10.2147/IJGM.S361169
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Gen Med ISSN: 1178-7074
Characteristics of the Study Population
| Diabetic Children | Controls | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assiut (n= 17) | Ismailia (n= 15) | Assiut (n= 8) | Ismailia (n= 8) | |
| Age (mean ± SD) (years) | 7.3 ± 2.8 (6–9) | 7.5 ± 2.5 (6–9) | 6.9 ± 2.1 (6–9) | 7.7 ± 1.5 (6–9) |
| Sex male/female (%) | 9/8 (52.9/47.1%) | 9/6 (60/40%) | 4/4 (50/50%) | 5/3 (62.5/37.5%) |
| Duration of DM (median) (years) | 3.3 (0.5–7) | 3.2 (3–7) | – | – |
| BMI (Kg/m2) (mean ± SD) | 15.4 ± 1.3 | 15.5 ± 0.9 | 14.9 ± 0.8 | 16.2 ± 1.5 |
| RBG (mg/dl) (mean ± SD) | 167.9 ± 28.4 (115–210) | 166.1 ± 26.3 (125–209) | 89.4 ± 8.9 (75–100) | 89.4 ± 8.9 (75–100) |
| HbA1C (mean ± SD) | 7.9 ± 0.7 (6–9) | 7.9 ± 0.9 (6–9.1) | 4.9 ± 0.3 (4.3–5.2) | 4.9 ± 0.3 (4.3–5.2) |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; HbA1C, glycated haemoglobin; RBG, random blood glucose; SD, standard deviation.
Figure 1A bar plot of the relative abundance of different phyla in the gut microbiota of the study groups; (A) Control groups (Assiut and Ismailia) and (B) Diabetic groups (Assiut and Ismailia).
Figure 2Diversity analyses of gut microbiomes. (A) Bacterial alpha diversity indices were represented by box plots of the following indices: the number of observed species Chao1 index and Shannon diversity index. X-axis represented the study groups, while alpha indices were plotted on the Y-axis. The median was represented by the line in each box, the interquartile range (IQR) between the 25th and 75th percentile was delimited by the box, and the range was outlined by the whisker. The nonparametric Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to define the statistical significance of pairwise comparisons. Significant differences were displayed with either NS (P> 0.05), * (P< 0.05), ** (P< 0.01) or *** (P< 0.001). (B) Principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) of gut microbiomes based on weighted UniFrac distance matrices. PCoA plot represented the similarity distances between gut microbiota of healthy and diseased groups. The significant clustering was denoted by ellipses (Adonis: r2= 0.047, P= 0.00092).
Figure 3Genus level analysis of gut microbiomes. (A) Relative abundance of most predominant genera in diabetic groups. (B) Difference in mean proportions between diabetic groups measured by confidence of intervals. (C) Green boxes represented core genera in all samples and the numbers defined the percentage of the presence of genera in all data set. (D) Colored boxes indicated the core microbiome of each diabetic group and strikes represented the significance difference of genera between diabetic groups [NS (P< 0.05), * (P< 0.05), ** (P< 0.01) or *** (P< 0.001)]. (E) LEfSe inferred potential biomarkers for each group and numbers indicated LDA scores.
Significant Genera Amongst the Studied Groups
| Genera | Group | FDR | LDA Score | P | Significance | Statistical Test | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AsC | IsC | 3.21E-02 | 0.16 | 0.03209 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsC | IsC | 0.0283 | 0.14 | 0.0283 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsC | IsC | 1.89E-02 | 0.076 | 0.0189 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsC | IsC | 0.036 | 2.41 | 0.037 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsC | IsC | 0.0321 | 1.33 | 0.0321 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsC | AsDM | 0.0065 | 2.75 | 0.0066 | ** | Wilcox | |
| AsC | AsDM | 3.16E-02 | 3.09 | 0.03156 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsC | AsDM | 3.24E-03 | 4.23 | 0.00324 | ** | Wilcox | |
| IsC | IsDM | 0.0084 | 1.93 | 0.0084 | ** | Wilcox | |
| IsC | IsDM | 0.0091 | 2.07 | 0.0092 | ** | Wilcox | |
| IsC | IsDM | 0.0091 | 1.83 | 0.0092 | ** | Wilcox | |
| IsC | IsDM | 9.15E-03 | 4.15 | 0.00915 | ** | Wilcox | |
| IsC | IsDM | 0.033 | 4.23 | 0.033 | * | Wilcox | |
| IsC | IsDM | 9.15E- | 3.93 | 0.00915 | ** | Wilcox | |
| IsC | IsDM | 8.80E-03 | 3.67 | 0.0088 | ** | Wilcox | |
| IsC | IsDM | 0.028 | 3.04 | 0.028 | * | Wilcox | |
| IsC | IsDM | 0.0091 | 2.82 | 0.0092 | ** | Wilcox | |
| IsC | IsDM | 0.0091 | 1.35 | 0.0092 | ** | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 0.0275 | 0.615 | 0.0275 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 0.0027 | 3.24 | 0.0028 | ** | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 4.25E-03 | 0.571 | 0.00425 | ** | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 0.015 | 2.22 | 0.015 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 2.68E-04 | 1.97 | 0.00027 | *** | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 2.42E-02 | 1.47 | 0.02425 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 4.93E- | 0.319 | 0.00049 | *** | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 0.023 | 1.72 | 0.024 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 0.01 | 1.90 | 0.011 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 3.38E-02 | 0.616 | 0.03384 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 1.21E-02 | 2.41 | 0.01209 | * | Wilcox | |
| AsDM | IsDM | 0.0275 | 3.43 | 0.0275 | * | Wilcox | |
Note: ns: P > 1; *: P < 0.05, **: P < 0.01; ***: P < 0.001.
Abbreviations: AsC, Assiut controls, AsDM, Assiut diabetes mellitus; FDR, false discovery rate; IsC, Ismailia controls; IsDM, Ismailia diabetes mellitus; LDA, linear discriminant analysis.
Figure 4Enterotype clusters identified using PCoA analysis in the gut microbiota. Enterotype cluster 1 (Assiut controls), enterotype cluster 2 (Ismailia DM), enterotype cluster 3 (Ismailia controls), enterotype cluster 4 (Assiut DM with giardiasis) and enterotype cluster 5 (AsDM).
Figure 5Estimated co-occurrence at the genus level among the DM samples. Assiut samples were presented by the green color, while Ismailia samples were presented by the red color. The size of a node represented its relative abundance. The blue lines represented negative association, and the red lines represented positive associations.