A Novel Approach Towards Less Invasive Multi 'Omics Gut Analyses: A Pilot Study
Berlinberg, A. J.; Brar, A.; Stahly, A.; Gerich, M. E.; Fennimore, B. P.; Scott, F. I.; Kuhn, K. A.
Show abstract
Newer omics approaches such as metatranscriptomics and metabolomics allow functional assessments of the interaction(s) between the gut microbiome and the human host. In order to generate meaningful data with these approaches, though, the method of sample collection is critical. Prior studies have relied upon expensive and invasive means towards sample acquisition such as intestinal biopsy, while other studies have relied upon easier methods of collection such as fecal samples that do not necessarily represent those microbes in contact with the host. In this pilot study, we attempt to characterize a novel, minimally invasive method towards sampling the human microbiome using mucosal cytology brush sampling compared to intestinal gut biopsy on 5 healthy participants undergoing routine screening colonoscopy. We compared metatranscriptomic analyses between the two collection methods, identifying increased taxonomic evenness and beta diversity in the cytology brush samples, and similar community transcriptional profiles between the two methods. Metabolomics assessment demonstrated striking differences between the two methods, implying a difference in bacterial-derived versus human absorbed metabolites. Put together, this study supports the use of a less invasive method of microbiome sampling with cytology brushes, but caution must be exercised when performing metabolomics assessment as this represents differential metabolite production but not absorption by the host. ImportanceIn order to generate meaningful metabolomic and microbiome data, the method of sample collection is critical. This study utilizes and compares two methods to intestinal tissue collection for evaluation of metabolites and microbiome, finding that using a brush to sample the microbiome is superior to tissue biopsy. However, for metabolomics assessment, biopsy may still be required.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Statistical evaluation of metaproteomics and 16s rRNA amplicon sequencing techniques for the study of the gut microbiota establishment of infants with cystic fibrosis 95%
- HIV positive patients on antiretroviral therapy have an altered mucosal intestinal but not oral microbiome 95%
- Short term tomato consumption alters the pig gut microbiome towards a more favorable profile 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Analysis of an Indian colorectal cancer faecal microbiome collection demonstrates universal colorectal cancer-associated patterns, but closest correlation with other Indian cohorts. 95%
- Gut microbiota analyses of Saudi populations for type 2 diabetes-related phenotypes reveals significant association 94%
- Short- and mid-term temporal variability of the human urinary microbiota: an observational cohort study 94%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Species- and strain-level assessment using rrn long-amplicons suggests donor's influence on gut microbial transference via fecal transplants in metabolic syndrome subjects 94%
- Enhancing Recovery from Gut Microbiome Dysbiosis and Alleviating DSS-Induced Colitis in Mice with a Consortium of Rare Short-Chain Fatty Acid-Producing Bacteria 94%
- Mucosal washes are useful for sampling intestinal mucus-associated microbiota despite low biomass 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.