Impact of Probiotics on Gut Microbiome Bifidobacterium Relative Abundance: First Do No Harm

Daniels Jordan, Papoutsis Andreas, Barrows Brad, Hänniger Sabine
{"title":"Impact of Probiotics on Gut Microbiome Bifidobacterium Relative Abundance: First Do No Harm","authors":"Daniels Jordan, Papoutsis Andreas, Barrows Brad, Hänniger Sabine","doi":"10.35248/2167-0870.21.11.473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Several reports have raised safety concerns regarding the use of probiotics. To address these concerns, this study examined the relative abundance (proportion of the microbiome made up of a particular taxa) and normalized read counts (number of times a particular microbe was identified) of Bifidobacteria in the gut microbiome of healthy subjects participating in an ongoing study on the microbiome. Bifidobacteria is a critically important constituent of the human microbiome and plays roles in digestion, gut immunity, and cancer prevention. Methods: Fecal samples were analyzed using next-generation sequencing to evaluate composition and relative abundance of bacterial phyla through species level in each subject`s microbiome. The primary outcomes of this subgroup analysis were relative abundance and normalized read count of genus Bifidobacteria in subjects who took unregulated probiotics, regulated probiotics, or no probiotics. Results: The relative abundance and normalized read count of Bifidobacteria were significantly lower in the microbiome of subjects who took unregulated probiotics (n=15) than in the microbiomes of both those who took regulated probiotics (n=12, P=0.0002) and no probiotics (n=13, P=0.0483) (0.18 vs. 9.59 vs. 5.66 relative abundance). Discussion: Subjects taking unregulated probiotics had a significantly lower relative abundance of Bifidobacteria, which could potentially have a detrimental impact on health. Next-generation sequencing could be a useful tool to guide decisions on the appropriate use of probiotics based on dysbiosis.","PeriodicalId":15375,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical trials","volume":"23 1","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical trials","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35248/2167-0870.21.11.473","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Several reports have raised safety concerns regarding the use of probiotics. To address these concerns, this study examined the relative abundance (proportion of the microbiome made up of a particular taxa) and normalized read counts (number of times a particular microbe was identified) of Bifidobacteria in the gut microbiome of healthy subjects participating in an ongoing study on the microbiome. Bifidobacteria is a critically important constituent of the human microbiome and plays roles in digestion, gut immunity, and cancer prevention. Methods: Fecal samples were analyzed using next-generation sequencing to evaluate composition and relative abundance of bacterial phyla through species level in each subject`s microbiome. The primary outcomes of this subgroup analysis were relative abundance and normalized read count of genus Bifidobacteria in subjects who took unregulated probiotics, regulated probiotics, or no probiotics. Results: The relative abundance and normalized read count of Bifidobacteria were significantly lower in the microbiome of subjects who took unregulated probiotics (n=15) than in the microbiomes of both those who took regulated probiotics (n=12, P=0.0002) and no probiotics (n=13, P=0.0483) (0.18 vs. 9.59 vs. 5.66 relative abundance). Discussion: Subjects taking unregulated probiotics had a significantly lower relative abundance of Bifidobacteria, which could potentially have a detrimental impact on health. Next-generation sequencing could be a useful tool to guide decisions on the appropriate use of probiotics based on dysbiosis.
益生菌对肠道菌群双歧杆菌相对丰度的影响:首先无害
背景:一些报告提出了使用益生菌的安全性问题。为了解决这些问题,本研究检查了参与正在进行的微生物组研究的健康受试者肠道微生物组中双歧杆菌的相对丰度(由特定分类群组成的微生物组的比例)和标准化读取计数(确定特定微生物的次数)。双歧杆菌是人类微生物组中至关重要的组成部分,在消化、肠道免疫和癌症预防中发挥作用。方法:利用下一代测序技术对粪便样本进行分析,通过每个受试者微生物组的物种水平来评估细菌门的组成和相对丰度。该亚组分析的主要结果是双歧杆菌属的相对丰度和标准化读数计数在服用未调节益生菌、调节益生菌或不服用益生菌的受试者中。结果:服用未调节益生菌的受试者(n=15)的微生物组中双歧杆菌的相对丰度和标准化读数显著低于服用调节益生菌的受试者(n=12, P=0.0002)和不服用益生菌的受试者(n=13, P=0.0483)的微生物组(相对丰度0.18比9.59比5.66)。讨论:服用不受管制益生菌的受试者双歧杆菌的相对丰度明显较低,这可能对健康产生有害影响。下一代测序可能是一个有用的工具,指导决定在生态失调的基础上适当使用益生菌。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信