Back

Small intestinal microbiota of undernourished women of reproductive age and microbiota-directed balanced energy protein (MD-BEP) supplementation in maternal environmental enteric dysfunction (EED): protocol for a community-based intervention study

Hossain, M. S.; Mahfuz, M.; Rahman, M. M.; Begum, S. M. K. N.; Sarker, S. A.; Ahmed, T.

2025-05-15 nutrition
10.1101/2025.05.14.25327641 medRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionStudies show, malnourished women of childbearing age with environmental enteric dysfunction (EED) exhibit small intestinal enteropathy resembling that in malnourished children residing in the same community. However, currently there are no universally accepted protocols for validation of these facts. Our current protocol is designed to better understand the mechanism of transmission of the microbiota of mothers with EED to their children perpetuates intergenerational undernutrition. We plan to compare the small intestinal (SI) and fecal microbiota along with plasma, duodenal, and fecal proteomes/ metabolomes and histopathologic evidence of EED in non-pregnant women with and without malnutrition. We also plan to see and compare the effect of microbiota-directed balanced energy protein (MD-BEP) supplementation on these biological parameters between malnourished non-pregnant and pregnant women. Methods and analysisThis is a community-based intervention study where pregnant women and non-pregnant women of reproductive age (18-35 years) will be screened through household surveys from the Bauniabadh and adjacent slum area of Mirpur, Dhaka (pregnant and non-pregnant cohorts, n=90 each). Using Body Mass Index (BMI), both the groups will be categorized into undernourished (BMI <18.5kg/m2, n=60 each with pregnant and non-pregnant cohort) and well-nourished (BMI >20-24.9 kg/ m2, n=30, each with pregnant and non-pregnant cohort). Upper gastro-intestinal (UGI) endoscopy will be performed on non-pregnant women (both well-nourished and undernourished cohorts) and biopsy samples will be collected for diagnosis of environmental enteric dysfunction (EED) by histopathological scoring. We will compare the small intestinal (SI) and fecal microbiota and the plasma, duodenal, and fecal proteomes/ metabolomes of the undernourished non-pregnant cohort with histopathologic evidence of EED with the well-nourished non-pregnant cohort with no histopathologic evidence of EED (Aim IA). Furthermore, we will perform an intervention study (Aim IB). The undernourished non-pregnant cohort will be randomized into two groups (n=30/arm) and receive daily dietary supplementation with either shelf-stable microbiota-directed balanced energy protein (MD-BEP) or ready-to-use supplementary food balanced energy protein (RUSF-BEP) for 90 days. After cessation of the intervention they will be further followed up for another 270 days and biological samples will be collected at scheduled time points. The well-nourished non-pregnant cohort will not receive any nutritional intervention will serve as a reference control group. The undernourished pregnant cohort will also be randomly (n=30/arm) assigned to receive either MD-BEP or RUSF-BEP daily for 6 months until the child birth and thereafter for 3 months and followed up for another 9 months. During this period anthropometry will be measured and biological samples including fecal and plasma samples will be collected from the mothers and their infants in scheduled time points. Anthropometric, socio-demographic and laboratory assay data will be compared between the groups and candidate EED biomarkers will be correlated with nutritional status, histological analyses and score of EED, plus assessments of microbial community structure will be examined. Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the Ethical Review Committee of icddr,b (protocol no: PR-22117; Version 1.2; 29 November 2022). Results of this study will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT05862363. Registered on 08 February 2023. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05862363

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nutrients
64 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
39.9%
2
The Journal of Nutrition
21 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.6%
50% of probability mass above
3
Current Developments in Nutrition
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.3%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 21%
8.5%
5
Frontiers in Nutrition
23 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.9%
6
The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.2%
7
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.9%
8
Food & Function
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
9
Public Health Nutrition
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
10
BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
11
The Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry
13 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
12
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
11 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.8%
13
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
14
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 34%
0.7%
15
Frontiers in Microbiology
375 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.7%
16
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 16%
0.7%
17
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
18
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
19
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
218 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.7%
20
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.7%
21
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%