4.5 Article

Current Understanding of Dysbiosis in Disease in Human and Animal Models

期刊

INFLAMMATORY BOWEL DISEASES
卷 22, 期 5, 页码 1137-1150

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1097/MIB.0000000000000750

关键词

dysbiosis; inflammatory bowel disease; colorectal cancer; fecal microbiota; IBD-susceptibility genes

资金

  1. National Institute of Health [R01-DK80070, DK91247, AI81807]
  2. Broad Medical Foundation
  3. American Gastroenterological Association Foundation
  4. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [15H04813] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is an intestinal inflammatory condition that affects more than 2 million people in the United States. Although the etiology and pathogenesis of IBD are still largely unknown, dysregulated host/enteric microbial interactions are requisite for the development of IBD. So far, many researchers have tried to identify a precise relationship between IBD and an imbalance of the intestinal microbiota, termed dysbiosis. Despite extensive efforts, it is still largely unknown about the interplay among microbes, their hosts, and their environments, and whether dysbiosis is a causal factor or an effect of IBD. Recently, deep-sequencing analyses of the microbiota in patients with IBD patients have been instrumental in characterizing the strong association between dysbiosis and IBD development, although it is still unable to identify specific-associated species level changes in most cases. Based on many recent reports, dysbiosis of the commensal microbiota is implicated in the pathogenesis of several diseases, including IBD, obesity, and allergic disorders, in both human and animal models. In this review article, the authors have focused on explaining the multiple types of dysbiosis, as well as dysbiosis-related diseases and potential treatments to apply this knowledge to understand a possible cause and potentially find therapeutic strategies for IBD as well as the other dysbiosis-related diseases.

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

4.5
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