维持性血液透析患者肠道微生物群和尿毒症毒素在疫苗反应性中的作用

IF 5.2 3区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY
Vaccines Pub Date : 2026-04-17 DOI:10.3390/vaccines14040358
Erin Vaughan, Alexander Gilbert, Bree Shi, Griffith B Perkins, Huiling Wu, Steve Chadban
{"title":"维持性血液透析患者肠道微生物群和尿毒症毒素在疫苗反应性中的作用","authors":"Erin Vaughan, Alexander Gilbert, Bree Shi, Griffith B Perkins, Huiling Wu, Steve Chadban","doi":"10.3390/vaccines14040358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Patients with kidney failure requiring dialysis experience a high burden of vaccine-preventable diseases, and vaccine hypo-responsiveness is a key contributor. Uraemic toxins and gut dysbiosis are potential causes of hypo-responsiveness. <b>Aim</b>: This study aimed to determine whether uraemic toxin concentrations or gut dysbiosis are associated with vaccine response in haemodialysis patients. <b>Methods</b>: This was a single centre, observational cohort study of maintenance dialysis patients receiving a conventional 2-dose primary COVID-19 vaccination course. Demographic, clinical and vaccination data were collected from the eMR. Vaccine response (Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay), serum uraemic toxin concentrations (indoxyl sulphate, p-cresyl sulphate, and trimethylamine N-oxide by liquid chromatography), and stool microbiome (16S rRNA gene sequencing) were measured 8 weeks after the second dose of vaccine. <b>Results</b>: Forty participants (43% female, mean age 66 years; 59% Caucasian) were included, 70% of whom were classified as a vaccine responder. Antibiotic exposure, prednisolone use and lymphopenia were significantly associated with hypo-responsiveness. Microbiome profiling identified differences in beta diversity between responders and non-responders, positively correlated with short-chain fatty acid producers (<i>Parabacteriodes</i>) and negatively with pathobionts (<i>Escherichia</i>/<i>Shigella</i>). Differential abundance analysis identified lower levels of <i>Tyzzerella</i>, <i>Gemmiger</i>, and <i>Hungatella</i> and higher levels of <i>Turicibacter</i> in vaccine responders. Total uraemic toxin burden and individual toxin concentrations did not differ between responders and hypo-responders (all <i>p</i> > 0.05). Stratification by low versus high/very high toxin burden groupings was not associated with response (<i>p</i> > 0.99). <b>Conclusions</b>: Differences in gut microbial composition were observed between vaccine responder groups, while uraemic toxin concentrations were not associated with vaccine responsiveness. These findings suggest gut microbiota composition may contribute to vaccine hypo-responsiveness in individuals receiving dialysis and warrant further investigation in larger mechanistic studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":23634,"journal":{"name":"Vaccines","volume":"14 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13119954/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Role of the Gut Microbiota and Uraemic Toxins in Vaccine Responsiveness Among People Receiving Maintenance Haemodialysis.\",\"authors\":\"Erin Vaughan, Alexander Gilbert, Bree Shi, Griffith B Perkins, Huiling Wu, Steve Chadban\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/vaccines14040358\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Patients with kidney failure requiring dialysis experience a high burden of vaccine-preventable diseases, and vaccine hypo-responsiveness is a key contributor. Uraemic toxins and gut dysbiosis are potential causes of hypo-responsiveness. <b>Aim</b>: This study aimed to determine whether uraemic toxin concentrations or gut dysbiosis are associated with vaccine response in haemodialysis patients. <b>Methods</b>: This was a single centre, observational cohort study of maintenance dialysis patients receiving a conventional 2-dose primary COVID-19 vaccination course. Demographic, clinical and vaccination data were collected from the eMR. Vaccine response (Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay), serum uraemic toxin concentrations (indoxyl sulphate, p-cresyl sulphate, and trimethylamine N-oxide by liquid chromatography), and stool microbiome (16S rRNA gene sequencing) were measured 8 weeks after the second dose of vaccine. <b>Results</b>: Forty participants (43% female, mean age 66 years; 59% Caucasian) were included, 70% of whom were classified as a vaccine responder. Antibiotic exposure, prednisolone use and lymphopenia were significantly associated with hypo-responsiveness. Microbiome profiling identified differences in beta diversity between responders and non-responders, positively correlated with short-chain fatty acid producers (<i>Parabacteriodes</i>) and negatively with pathobionts (<i>Escherichia</i>/<i>Shigella</i>). Differential abundance analysis identified lower levels of <i>Tyzzerella</i>, <i>Gemmiger</i>, and <i>Hungatella</i> and higher levels of <i>Turicibacter</i> in vaccine responders. Total uraemic toxin burden and individual toxin concentrations did not differ between responders and hypo-responders (all <i>p</i> > 0.05). Stratification by low versus high/very high toxin burden groupings was not associated with response (<i>p</i> > 0.99). <b>Conclusions</b>: Differences in gut microbial composition were observed between vaccine responder groups, while uraemic toxin concentrations were not associated with vaccine responsiveness. These findings suggest gut microbiota composition may contribute to vaccine hypo-responsiveness in individuals receiving dialysis and warrant further investigation in larger mechanistic studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23634,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vaccines\",\"volume\":\"14 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2026-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13119954/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vaccines\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines14040358\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vaccines","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines14040358","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:需要透析的肾衰竭患者经历疫苗可预防疾病的高负担,疫苗低反应性是一个关键因素。尿毒症毒素和肠道生态失调是低反应性的潜在原因。目的:本研究旨在确定尿毒症毒素浓度或肠道生态失调是否与血液透析患者的疫苗应答相关。方法:这是一项单中心、观察性队列研究,研究对象是接受常规2剂COVID-19初级疫苗接种疗程的维持性透析患者。从电子病历中收集人口统计、临床和疫苗接种数据。第二剂疫苗接种8周后,测定疫苗应答(Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2免疫分析法)、血清尿毒毒素浓度(液相色谱法测定硫酸吲哚酚、对甲酰硫酸甲酰和三甲胺n -氧化物)和粪便微生物组(16S rRNA基因测序)。结果:纳入40名参与者(43%为女性,平均年龄66岁;59%为白种人),其中70%被归类为疫苗应答者。抗生素暴露、强的松龙使用和淋巴细胞减少与低反应性显著相关。微生物组分析确定了应答者和非应答者之间β多样性的差异,与短链脂肪酸生产者(副杆菌)正相关,与病原体(埃希氏菌/志贺氏菌)负相关。差异丰度分析发现,在疫苗应答者中,Tyzzerella、Gemmiger和Hungatella的水平较低,Turicibacter的水平较高。总毒素负担和个体毒素浓度在反应者和低反应者之间无差异(均p < 0.05)。低、高/非常高毒素负荷分组的分层与反应无关(p < 0.99)。结论:在疫苗应答组之间观察到肠道微生物组成的差异,而尿毒症毒素浓度与疫苗应答无关。这些发现表明,肠道微生物群组成可能导致接受透析的个体疫苗反应性低下,值得在更大规模的机制研究中进一步调查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Role of the Gut Microbiota and Uraemic Toxins in Vaccine Responsiveness Among People Receiving Maintenance Haemodialysis.

Background: Patients with kidney failure requiring dialysis experience a high burden of vaccine-preventable diseases, and vaccine hypo-responsiveness is a key contributor. Uraemic toxins and gut dysbiosis are potential causes of hypo-responsiveness. Aim: This study aimed to determine whether uraemic toxin concentrations or gut dysbiosis are associated with vaccine response in haemodialysis patients. Methods: This was a single centre, observational cohort study of maintenance dialysis patients receiving a conventional 2-dose primary COVID-19 vaccination course. Demographic, clinical and vaccination data were collected from the eMR. Vaccine response (Elecsys Anti-SARS-CoV-2 immunoassay), serum uraemic toxin concentrations (indoxyl sulphate, p-cresyl sulphate, and trimethylamine N-oxide by liquid chromatography), and stool microbiome (16S rRNA gene sequencing) were measured 8 weeks after the second dose of vaccine. Results: Forty participants (43% female, mean age 66 years; 59% Caucasian) were included, 70% of whom were classified as a vaccine responder. Antibiotic exposure, prednisolone use and lymphopenia were significantly associated with hypo-responsiveness. Microbiome profiling identified differences in beta diversity between responders and non-responders, positively correlated with short-chain fatty acid producers (Parabacteriodes) and negatively with pathobionts (Escherichia/Shigella). Differential abundance analysis identified lower levels of Tyzzerella, Gemmiger, and Hungatella and higher levels of Turicibacter in vaccine responders. Total uraemic toxin burden and individual toxin concentrations did not differ between responders and hypo-responders (all p > 0.05). Stratification by low versus high/very high toxin burden groupings was not associated with response (p > 0.99). Conclusions: Differences in gut microbial composition were observed between vaccine responder groups, while uraemic toxin concentrations were not associated with vaccine responsiveness. These findings suggest gut microbiota composition may contribute to vaccine hypo-responsiveness in individuals receiving dialysis and warrant further investigation in larger mechanistic studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Vaccines
Vaccines Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics-Pharmacology
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
1853
审稿时长
18.06 days
期刊介绍: Vaccines (ISSN 2076-393X) is an international, peer-reviewed open access journal focused on laboratory and clinical vaccine research, utilization and immunization. Vaccines publishes high quality reviews, regular research papers, communications and case reports.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书