A case for improved assessment of gut permeability: a meta-analysis quantifying the lactulose:mannitol ratio in coeliac and Crohn’s disease

Background A widely used method in assessing small bowel permeability is the lactulose:mannitol test, where the lactulose:mannitol ratio (LMR) is measured. However, there is discrepancy in how the test is conducted and in the values of LMR obtained across studies. This meta-analysis aims to determine LMR in healthy subjects, coeliac and Crohn’s disease. Methods A literature search was performed using PRISMA guidance to identify studies assessing LMR in coeliac or Crohn’s disease. 19 studies included in the meta-analysis measured gut permeability in coeliac disease, 17 studies in Crohn’s disease. Outcomes of interest were LMR values and comparisons of standard mean difference (SMD) and weighted mean difference (WMD) in healthy controls, inactive Crohn’s, active Crohn’s, treated coeliac and untreated coeliac. Pooled estimates of differences in LMR were calculated using the random effects model. Results Pooled LMR in healthy controls was 0.014 (95% CI: 0.006–0.022) while pooled LMRs in untreated and treated coeliac were 0.133 (95% CI: 0.089–0.178) and 0.037 (95% CI: 0.019–0.055). In active and inactive Crohn’s disease, pooled LMRs were 0.093 (95% CI: 0.031–0.156) and 0.028 (95% CI: 0.015–0.041). Significant differences were observed in LMR between: (1) healthy controls and treated coeliacs (SMD = 0.409 95% CI 0.034 to 0.783, p = 0.032), (2) healthy controls and untreated coeliacs (SMD = 1.362 95% CI: 0.740 to 1.984, p < 0.001), (3) treated coeliacs and untreated coeliacs (SMD = 0.722 95% CI: 0.286 to 1.157, p = 0.001), (4) healthy controls and inactive Crohn’s (SMD = 1.265 95% CI: 0.845 to 1.686, p < 0.001), (5) healthy controls and active Crohn’s (SMD = 2.868 95% CI: 2.112 to 3.623, p < 0.001), and (6) active Crohn’s and inactive Crohn’s (SMD = 1.429 (95% CI: 0.580 to 2.278, p = 0.001). High heterogeneity was observed, which was attributed to variability in protocols used across different studies. Conclusion The use of gut permeability measurements in screening and monitoring of coeliac and Crohn’s disease is promising. LMR is useful in performing this function with significant limitations. More robust alternative tests with higher degrees of clinical evidence are needed if measurements of gut permeability are to find widespread clinical use.

The Intestinal Barrier and Its Dysfunction in Patients with Metabolic Diseases and Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) represents an increasing cause of liver disease worldwide, mirroring the epidemics of obesity and metabolic syndrome. As there are still no licensed medications for treating the disease, there is an ongoing effort to elucidate the pathophysiology and to discover new treatment pathways. An increasing body of evidence has demonstrated a crosstalk between the gut and the liver, which plays a crucial role in the development and progression of liver disease. Among other intestinal factors, gut permeability represents an interesting factor at the interface of the gut–liver axis. In this narrative review, we summarise the evidence from human studies showing the association between increased gut permeability and NAFLD, as well as with type-2 diabetes and obesity. We also discuss the manipulation of the gut permeability as a potential therapeutical target in patients with NAFLD.

The Gut Microbiome in Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (ME)/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS)

Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) or Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) is a neglected, debilitating multi-systemic disease without diagnostic marker or therapy. Despite evidence for neurological, immunological, infectious, muscular and endocrine pathophysiological abnormalities, the etiology and a clear pathophysiology remains unclear. The gut microbiome gained much attention in the last decade with manifold implications in health and disease. Here we review the current state of knowledge on the interplay between ME/CFS and the microbiome, to identify potential diagnostic or interventional approaches, and propose areas where further research is needed. We iteratively selected and elaborated on key theories about a correlation between microbiome state and ME/CFS pathology, developing further hypotheses. Based on the literature we hypothesize that antibiotic use throughout life favours an intestinal microbiota composition which might be a risk factor for ME/CFS. Main proposed pathomechanisms include gut dysbiosis, altered gut-brain axis activity, increased gut permeability with concomitant bacterial translocation and reduced levels of short-chain-fatty acids, D-lactic acidosis, an abnormal tryptophan metabolism and low activity of the kynurenine pathway. We review options for microbiome manipulation in ME/CFS patients including probiotic and dietary interventions as well as fecal microbiota transplantations. Beyond increasing gut permeability and bacterial translocation, specific dysbiosis may modify fermentation products, affecting peripheral mitochondria. Considering the gut-brain axis we strongly suspect that the microbiome may contribute to neurocognitive impairments of ME/CFS patients. Further larger studies are needed, above all to clarify whether D-lactic acidosis and early-life antibiotic use may be part of ME/CFS etiology and what role changes in the tryptophan metabolism might play. An association between the gut microbiome and the disease ME/CFS is plausible. As causality remains unclear, we recommend longitudinal studies. Activity levels, bedridden hours and disease progression should be compared to antibiotic exposure, drug intakes and alterations in the composition of the microbiota. The therapeutic potential of fecal microbiota transfer and of targeted dietary interventions should be systematically evaluated.

The Intestinal Barrier and Permeability

The largest surface of the human body exposed to the external environment is the gut. At this level, the intestinal barrier includes luminal microbes, the mucin layer, gastrointestinal motility and secretion, enterocytes, immune cells, gut vascular barrier, and liver barrier. A healthy intestinal barrier is characterized by the selective permeability of nutrients, metabolites, water, and bacterial products, and processes are governed by cellular, neural, immune, and hormonal factors. Disrupted gut permeability (leaky gut syndrome) can represent a predisposing or aggravating condition in obesity and the metabolically associated liver steatosis (nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, NAFLD). In what follows, we describe the morphological-functional features of the intestinal barrier, the role of major modifiers of the intestinal barrier, and discuss the recent evidence pointing to the key role of intestinal permeability in obesity/NAFLD.

Butyrate Protects against Diet-Induced NASH and Liver Fibrosis and Suppresses Specific Non-Canonical TGF-β Signaling Pathways in Human Hepatic Stellate Cells

In obesity-associated non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), persistent hepatocellular damage and inflammation are key drivers of fibrosis, which is the main determinant of NASH-associated mortality. The short-chain fatty acid butyrate can exert metabolic improvements and anti-inflammatory activities in NASH. However, its effects on NASH-associated liver fibrosis remain unclear. Putative antifibrotic effects of butyrate were studied in Ldlr-/-.Leiden mice fed an obesogenic diet (HFD) containing 2.5% (w/w) butyrate for 38 weeks and compared with a HFD-control group. Antifibrotic mechanisms of butyrate were further investigated in TGF-β-stimulated primary human hepatic stellate cells (HSC). HFD-fed mice developed obesity, insulin resistance, increased plasma leptin levels, adipose tissue inflammation, gut permeability, dysbiosis, and NASH-associated fibrosis. Butyrate corrected hyperinsulinemia, lowered plasma leptin levels, and attenuated adipose tissue inflammation, without affecting gut permeability or microbiota composition. Butyrate lowered plasma ALT and CK-18M30 levels and attenuated hepatic steatosis and inflammation. Butyrate inhibited fibrosis development as demonstrated by decreased hepatic collagen content and Sirius-red-positive area. In TGF-β-stimulated HSC, butyrate dose-dependently reduced collagen deposition and decreased procollagen1α1 and PAI1 protein expression. Transcriptomic analysis and subsequent pathway and upstream regulator analysis revealed deactivation of specific non-canonical TGF-β signaling pathways Rho-like GTPases and PI3K/AKT and other important pro-fibrotic regulators (e.g., YAP/TAZ, MYC) by butyrate, providing a potential rationale for its antifibrotic effects. In conclusion, butyrate protects against obesity development, insulin resistance-associated NASH, and liver fibrosis. These antifibrotic effects are at least partly attributable to a direct effect of butyrate on collagen production in hepatic stellate cells, involving inhibition of non-canonical TGF-β signaling pathways.

Interaction Mechanisms Between Major Depressive Disorder and Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease

Major depressive disorder (MDD), which is highly associated with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), has complex pathogenic mechanisms. However, a limited number of studies have evaluated the mutual pathomechanisms involved in MDD and NAFLD development. Chronic stress-mediated elevations in glucocorticoid (GC) levels play an important role in the development of MDD-related NAFLD. Elevated GC levels can induce the release of inflammatory factors and changes in gut permeability. Elevated levels of inflammatory factors activate the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis, which further increases the release of GC. At the same time, changes in gut permeability promote the release of inflammatory factors, which results in a vicious circle among the three, causing disease outbreaks. Even though the specific role of the thyroid hormone (TH) in this pathogenesis has not been fully established, it is highly correlated with MDD and NAFLD. Therefore, changing lifestyles and reducing psychological stress levels are necessary measures for preventing MDD-related NAFLD. Among them, GC inhibitors and receptor antagonists may be key in the alleviation of early and mid-term disease progression. However, combination medications may be important in late-stage diseases, but they are associated with various side effects. Traditional Chinese medicines have been shown to be potential therapeutic alternatives for such complex diseases.

Possible Benefits of Faecalibacterium prausnitzii for Obesity-Associated Gut Disorders

Metabolic disorders are an increasing concern in the industrialized world. Current research has shown a direct link between the composition of the gut microbiota and the pathogenesis of obesity and diabetes. In only a few weeks, an obesity-inducing diet can lead to increased gut permeability and microbial dysbiosis, which contributes to chronic inflammation in the gut and adipose tissues, and to the development of insulin resistance. In this review, we examine the interplay between gut inflammation, insulin resistance, and the gut microbiota, and discuss how some probiotic species can be used to modulate gut homeostasis. We focus primarily on Faecalibacterium prausnitzii, a highly abundant butyrate-producing bacterium that has been proposed both as a biomarker for the development of different gut pathologies and as a potential treatment due to its production of anti-inflammatory metabolites.

A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial Assessing the Effect of VISBIOME ES Probiotic in People With HIV on Antiretroviral Therapy

Background A5350, a phase II, randomized, double-blind study, evaluated the safety and tolerability of the probiotic Visbiome Extra Strength (ES) over 24 weeks and measured effects on inflammation and intestinal barrier function. Methods The primary outcome was change in soluble CD14 (sCD14) levels; secondary outcomes included safety and tolerability, markers of inflammation and cellular activation, and microbiome. In a substudy, gut permeability was assessed by paired colonic biopsies measuring the area of lamina propria occupied by CD4+ cells, interleukin (IL)-17+ cells, and myeloperoxidase (MPO). Changes between arms were compared with the 2-sample t test with equal variance or the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. For safety, the highest graded adverse events (AEs) were compared between arms using the Fisher exact test. Results Overall, 93 participants enrolled: 86% male, median age 51 years, median CD4 count 712 cells/mm3. Visbiome ES was safe and well tolerated. There was no difference in mean change in sCD14 from baseline to week 25/26 between placebo (mean change, 92.3 µg/L; 95% CI, –48.5 to 233 µg/L) and Visbiome ES (mean change, 41.0 µg/L; 95% CI, –94.1 to 176.2 µg/L; P=.60). Similarly, no statistically significant differences between arms in inflammatory marker changes were identified. In substudy participants, no statistical differences between arms for change in cellular marker expression or gut permeability were observed (P&gt;.05 for all). The microbiome demonstrated increased probiotic species and a significant decrease in Gammaproteobacteria (P=.044) in the Visbiome ES arm. Conclusions Visbiome ES was safe and altered the microbiome but demonstrated no effect on systemic inflammatory markers, pathology, or gut permeability in antiretroviral therapy–treated people with HIV.