FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2074804325> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2074804325 endingPage "703" @default.
• W2074804325 startingPage "701" @default.
• W2074804325 abstract "Intestinal microbial communities regulate a range of host physiological functions, from energy harvest and glucose homeostasis to immune development and regulation. Suez et al., 2014Suez J. Korem T. Zeevi D. Zilberman-Schapira G. Thaiss C.A. Maza O. Israeli D. Zmora N. Gilad S. Weinberger A. et al.Nature. 2014; (Published online September 17, 2014)https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13793Crossref PubMed Scopus (1215) Google Scholar recently demonstrated that artificial sweeteners alter gut microbial communities, leading to glucose intolerance in both mice and humans. Intestinal microbial communities regulate a range of host physiological functions, from energy harvest and glucose homeostasis to immune development and regulation. Suez et al., 2014Suez J. Korem T. Zeevi D. Zilberman-Schapira G. Thaiss C.A. Maza O. Israeli D. Zmora N. Gilad S. Weinberger A. et al.Nature. 2014; (Published online September 17, 2014)https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13793Crossref PubMed Scopus (1215) Google Scholar recently demonstrated that artificial sweeteners alter gut microbial communities, leading to glucose intolerance in both mice and humans. Microbial communities populate the mammalian gastrointestinal tract, closely associating with the host throughout its life span. The gut is an important site for metabolic and immune regulation, and microbial cells here substantially outnumber human cells in the entire body, making it a prime location for interaction (Human Microbiome Project Consortium, 2012Human Microbiome Project ConsortiumNature. 2012; 486: 207-214Crossref PubMed Scopus (6990) Google Scholar). Microbial communities are involved in regulation of numerous host physiological processes, including metabolism, immunity, and growth (Cox and Blaser, 2013Cox L.M. Blaser M.J. Cell Metab. 2013; 17: 883-894Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (197) Google Scholar). Diet is a major driver of microbial composition and function within the gut, and distinct microbial populations have been associated with both host adiposity and metabolic diseases (Cox and Blaser, 2013Cox L.M. Blaser M.J. Cell Metab. 2013; 17: 883-894Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (197) Google Scholar). Because host diet, metabolic and immune regulation, and microbiota are deeply interconnected, disturbance of this homeostasis can have long-lasting implications for host development and health (Cox and Blaser, 2013Cox L.M. Blaser M.J. Cell Metab. 2013; 17: 883-894Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (197) Google Scholar). Suez et al., 2014Suez J. Korem T. Zeevi D. Zilberman-Schapira G. Thaiss C.A. Maza O. Israeli D. Zmora N. Gilad S. Weinberger A. et al.Nature. 2014; (Published online September 17, 2014)https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13793Crossref PubMed Scopus (1215) Google Scholar now provide more evidence of how diet-induced microbial disturbances alter host health, demonstrating that dietary sugar alternatives increase glucose intolerance in mice and human patients. The last century has seen profound changes in the way industrialized humans live, eat, work, and receive medical treatment, impacting the microbial consortia that live in and on us (Blaser and Falkow, 2009Blaser M.J. Falkow S. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2009; 7: 887-894Crossref PubMed Scopus (600) Google Scholar). Modern humans consume diets that are increasingly high-fat, processed, and lower in plant matter, differing substantially from the foods on which our ancestors subsisted prior to the industrial revolution. Such changes have affected both human physiology and our microbial inhabitants. In parallel with modernization, rates of noncommunicable, “postmodern” diseases—such as diabetes, obesity, allergies, and asthma—have increased alarmingly (Blaser and Falkow, 2009Blaser M.J. Falkow S. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2009; 7: 887-894Crossref PubMed Scopus (600) Google Scholar). To combat this trend without compromising our penchant for sweet foods, dietary alternatives are frequently marketed for reducing caloric intake. The new study by Suez et al., 2014Suez J. Korem T. Zeevi D. Zilberman-Schapira G. Thaiss C.A. Maza O. Israeli D. Zmora N. Gilad S. Weinberger A. et al.Nature. 2014; (Published online September 17, 2014)https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13793Crossref PubMed Scopus (1215) Google Scholar described the effects of one such dietary change—increasing use of noncaloric artificial sweeteners (NAS)—on host glucose tolerance. The authors found that glucose intolerance, a marker of metabolic diseases such as diabetes mellitus, was increased in mice by regular consumption of the sweeteners saccharin, sucralose, or aspartame (Figure 1A). These changes accompanied altered intestinal bacterial communities, including several organisms that are associated with obesity, diabetes, and metabolic disease, and were suppressed by antibiotic treatment, suggesting a direct microbial role (Figure 1B). To test whether changes in microbial composition induced by NAS consumption led to glucose intolerance, the authors transferred intestinal microbiota from NAS-fed or control mice into germ-free mice, which are maintained under aseptic conditions, making their gastrointestinal tracts completely sterile. Thus, studies of microbial transfer into germ-free mice provide a unique opportunity to test the role of commensal microbiota on host physiology, since differences between control and treated animals can be attributed to the defined microbial inoculum given to the germ-free recipients, rather than to direct effects due to treatment. This approach has been employed with great success in defining how intestinal microbiota influence host metabolism under conditions of disturbance, such as comparing obese versus lean individuals (Turnbaugh et al., 2006Turnbaugh P.J. Ley R.E. Mahowald M.A. Magrini V. Mardis E.R. Gordon J.I. Nature. 2006; 444: 1027-1031Crossref PubMed Scopus (8228) Google Scholar) and during low-dose antibiotic exposure (Cox et al., 2014Cox L.M. Yamanishi S. Sohn J. Alekseyenko A.V. Leung J.M. Cho I. Kim S.G. Li H. Gao Z. Mahana D. et al.Cell. 2014; 158: 705-721Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1190) Google Scholar). Suez and colleagues found that germ-free mice inoculated with microbiota from NAS-fed mice became more glucose intolerant than mice conventionalized with control microbiota, demonstrating a causal role of the affected gut microbial communities (Suez et al., 2014Suez J. Korem T. Zeevi D. Zilberman-Schapira G. Thaiss C.A. Maza O. Israeli D. Zmora N. Gilad S. Weinberger A. et al.Nature. 2014; (Published online September 17, 2014)https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13793Crossref PubMed Scopus (1215) Google Scholar) (Figure 1C). Similar effects were also seen in germ-free mice receiving control microbiota that had been grown in vitro in the presence of NAS (Figure 1D). These results indicate that NAS consumption directly altered microbial composition and metabolism, leading to the important downstream metabolic effects. In each of these experiments, similar impacts were seen on microbial gene composition, as assessed by shotgun metagenomic sequencing, indicating that NAS exerted an impact on microbial function. Glycan degradation pathways were strongly affected, leading to increased short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) abundance. Among other properties, SCFAs are consumed by intestinal epithelial cells, leading to enhanced energy harvest by the host (Turnbaugh et al., 2006Turnbaugh P.J. Ley R.E. Mahowald M.A. Magrini V. Mardis E.R. Gordon J.I. Nature. 2006; 444: 1027-1031Crossref PubMed Scopus (8228) Google Scholar), providing one possible mechanism for microbial alterations of glucose tolerance induced by NAS consumption. However, intestinal SCFA production also has been associated with increased secretion of the incretin hormone glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 and improved glucose tolerance (Tolhurst et al., 2012Tolhurst G. Heffron H. Lam Y.S. Parker H.E. Habib A.M. Diakogiannaki E. Cameron J. Grosse J. Reimann F. Gribble F.M. Diabetes. 2012; 61: 364-371Crossref PubMed Scopus (1354) Google Scholar, Yadav et al., 2013Yadav H. Lee J.-H. Lloyd J. Walter P. Rane S.G. J. Biol. Chem. 2013; 288: 25088-25097Crossref PubMed Scopus (443) Google Scholar), so the mechanisms of NAS-induced, microbial-mediated alterations in glucose tolerance are unclear and likely more complex than SCFAs alone. The authors discovered a similar response to NAS consumption in nondiabetic humans, showing that these effects extend to human dietary choices. Healthy volunteers who did not normally consume NAS were fed saccharin daily for 1 week. The majority of these subjects developed poorer glycemic responses within 1 week, and had altered intestinal microbiota, distinguishing them from nonresponders, who had neither altered glycemic responses nor microbial changes. Germ-free mice conventionalized with stool samples from NAS responders developed glucose intolerance compared to mice conventionalized with stools from the same patients pre-NAS or from nonresponders (Figure 1E). These findings again provide evidence that NAS-induced dysbiosis had a causal role in inducing the glucose intolerance seen in these patients. These findings were consistent with the authors’ observations from a larger cohort of humans, in whom regular NAS consumption was positively correlated with intestinal microbial changes and multiple clinical parameters, including glucose intolerance and weight (Suez et al., 2014Suez J. Korem T. Zeevi D. Zilberman-Schapira G. Thaiss C.A. Maza O. Israeli D. Zmora N. Gilad S. Weinberger A. et al.Nature. 2014; (Published online September 17, 2014)https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13793Crossref PubMed Scopus (1215) Google Scholar). While specific microbial compositions clearly predispose human patients to NAS-induced metabolic effects, the factors that contribute to this susceptibility are unclear and warrant further investigation. Host genetics, diet, immune status, underlying diseases, and medical treatments all are features of patient history that influence human microbial composition and could determine individual responses to NAS consumption. We do not know whether NAS select against certain microbes by inhibiting their function, allowing their unaffected competitors to flourish, or whether they are direct stimulants of other organisms, or both. The mode of selection remains to be determined, but the problem is tractable. Also unclear is whether metabolic effects relate to differences in food and liquid intake between experimental groups. Future studies should carefully control intakes to minimize potential cofounder effects. Biological variation similarly defines patient susceptibility to other microbe-mediated treatments, such as drug metabolism (Maurice et al., 2013Maurice C.F. Haiser H.J. Turnbaugh P.J. Cell. 2013; 152: 39-50Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (573) Google Scholar) and dietary responses (Salonen et al., 2014Salonen A. Lahti L. Salojarvi J. Holtrop G. Korpela K. Duncan S.H. Date P. Farquharson F. Johnstone A.M. Lobley G.E. et al.ISME J. 2014; 8: 2218-2230Crossref PubMed Scopus (396) Google Scholar). These studies all highlight the need to establish how microbial variation influences host responses to diet, therapies, and disease. The development and implementation of personalized treatments for complex diseases could likely involve manipulation of the microbiota. In the interim, the findings of Suez and colleagues have more immediate consequences: that dietary sugar alternatives meant to stave off the risk of obesity and diabetes may actually increase disease risk due to microbial alterations (Suez et al., 2014Suez J. Korem T. Zeevi D. Zilberman-Schapira G. Thaiss C.A. Maza O. Israeli D. Zmora N. Gilad S. Weinberger A. et al.Nature. 2014; (Published online September 17, 2014)https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13793Crossref PubMed Scopus (1215) Google Scholar). Other dietary additives may provoke similar microbial changes and deserve further investigation. This is yet another indication that we are not alone and that microbial disturbances can lead to unexpected physiological effects." @default.
• W2074804325 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2074804325 creator A5000165682 @default.
• W2074804325 creator A5033749053 @default.
• W2074804325 date "2014-11-01" @default.
• W2074804325 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2074804325 title "A Bitter Aftertaste: Unintended Effects of Artificial Sweeteners on the Gut Microbiome" @default.
• W2074804325 cites W1989947363 @default.
• W2074804325 cites W1990339279 @default.
• W2074804325 cites W1993127959 @default.
• W2074804325 cites W2031355202 @default.
• W2074804325 cites W2040693077 @default.
• W2074804325 cites W2053039168 @default.
• W2074804325 cites W2063856799 @default.
• W2074804325 cites W2128769815 @default.
• W2074804325 cites W2167062509 @default.
• W2074804325 cites W2168842536 @default.
• W2074804325 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2014.10.012" @default.
• W2074804325 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/4494042" @default.
• W2074804325 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25440050" @default.
• W2074804325 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2074804325 type Work @default.
• W2074804325 sameAs 2074804325 @default.
• W2074804325 citedByCount "19" @default.
• W2074804325 countsByYear W20748043252016 @default.
• W2074804325 countsByYear W20748043252017 @default.
• W2074804325 countsByYear W20748043252018 @default.
• W2074804325 countsByYear W20748043252019 @default.
• W2074804325 countsByYear W20748043252020 @default.
• W2074804325 countsByYear W20748043252021 @default.
• W2074804325 countsByYear W20748043252022 @default.
• W2074804325 countsByYear W20748043252023 @default.
• W2074804325 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2074804325 hasAuthorship W2074804325A5000165682 @default.
• W2074804325 hasAuthorship W2074804325A5033749053 @default.
• W2074804325 hasBestOaLocation W20748043251 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C143121216 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C2776889888 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C2777108408 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C2911055575 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C2992479659 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C3019978661 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C31903555 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C38858142 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C54355233 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C70721500 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConcept C8868529 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C111472728 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C138885662 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C143121216 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C2776889888 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C2777108408 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C2911055575 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C2992479659 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C3019978661 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C31903555 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C38858142 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C54355233 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C70721500 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C86803240 @default.
• W2074804325 hasConceptScore W2074804325C8868529 @default.
• W2074804325 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2074804325 hasLocation W20748043251 @default.
• W2074804325 hasLocation W20748043252 @default.
• W2074804325 hasLocation W20748043253 @default.
• W2074804325 hasLocation W20748043254 @default.
• W2074804325 hasOpenAccess W2074804325 @default.
• W2074804325 hasPrimaryLocation W20748043251 @default.
• W2074804325 hasRelatedWork W2074804325 @default.
• W2074804325 hasRelatedWork W2775633464 @default.
• W2074804325 hasRelatedWork W2891128362 @default.
• W2074804325 hasRelatedWork W2912572046 @default.
• W2074804325 hasRelatedWork W3034541089 @default.
• W2074804325 hasRelatedWork W3132416946 @default.
• W2074804325 hasRelatedWork W4229368354 @default.
• W2074804325 hasRelatedWork W4294124809 @default.
• W2074804325 hasRelatedWork W4307930462 @default.
• W2074804325 hasRelatedWork W4379230229 @default.
• W2074804325 hasVolume "20" @default.
• W2074804325 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2074804325 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2074804325 magId "2074804325" @default.
• W2074804325 workType "article" @default.