4.8 Article

A Clostridia-rich microbiota enhances bile acid excretion in diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 130, 期 1, 页码 438-450

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL INVESTIGATION INC
DOI: 10.1172/JCI130976

关键词

-

资金

  1. Innovation and Technology Fund, Hong Kong SAR [ITS-148-14FP]
  2. Shenzhen Science and Technology Innovation Committee [JCYJ20160331190123578, JCYJ20170413170320959]
  3. Guangdong-Hong Kong Technology Cooperation Funding Scheme [2016A050503039]
  4. Guangzhou Science and Technology Program Key Projects [201604020005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An excess of fecal bile acids (BAs) is thought to be one of the mechanisms for diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-D). However, the factors causing excessive BA excretion remain incompletely studied. Given the importance of gut microbiota in BA metabolism, we hypothesized that gut dysbiosis might contribute to excessive BA excretion in IBS-D. By performing BA-related metabolic and metagenomic analyses in 290 IBS-D patients and 89 healthy volunteers, we found that 24.5% of IBS-D patients exhibited excessive excretion of total BAs and alteration of BA-transforming bacteria in feces. Notably, the increase in Clostridia bacteria (e.g., C. scindens) was positively associated with the levels of fecal BAs and serum 7 alpha-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one (C4), but negatively correlated with serum fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19) concentration. Furthermore, colonization with Clostridia-rich IBS-D fecal microbiota or C. scindens individually enhanced serum C4 and hepatic conjugated BAs but reduced ileal FGF19 expression in mice. Inhibition of Clostridium species with vancomycin yielded opposite results. Clostridia-derived BAs suppressed the intestinal FGF19 expression in vitro and in vivo. In conclusion, this study demonstrates that the Clostridia-rich microbiota contributes to excessive BA excretion in IBS-D patients, which provides a mechanistic hypothesis with testable clinical implications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据