Abstract
The gut microbiota has nutritional and protective functions. In patients with end-stage renal disease, changes in the gut microbiota disrupt their protective functions. Probiotics help maintain normal bowel function. However, their role in patients with end-stage renal disease is controversial. We investigated whether Clostridium butyricum affects the nutrition and immune function of patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing maintenance dialysis between 2014 and 2015; thirty-seven patients were included. The patients were divided into two groups: one in which C. butyricum was administered and one in which it was not. One tablet of the probiotics, which contained 20 mg of C. butyricum, was administered orally three times daily for 2 years in the C. butyricum group. The 16S rRNA genes were sequenced from stool samples of 14 (37.8%) patients in the C. butyricum group and 23 (62.2%) patients in the control group. The differences in the gut microbiota of the two groups were analyzed. The α-diversity index indicated that the C. butyricum group had significantly more operational taxonomic units and higher albumin and transferrin levels than the control group. The effector to target cell ratio was significantly higher in the C. butyricum group. In addition, interleukin-6 levels were significantly lower in the C. butyricum group, and inflammation was less severe in this group. The patients undergoing maintenance dialysis with C. butyricum had abundant gut microbiota. They also had a good nutritional status, low systemic inflammation, and a good immunological status.
Keywords: Clostridium butyricum, end stage renal disease, gut microbiota, hemodialysis, 16S rDNA
INTRODUCTION
The bacteria found in the human intestinal tract form the gut microbiota [1]. The gut microbiota is a major part of the host microbial flora and contains approximately 1014 bacterial cells that are symbiotic with the host [2]. They interact with the metabolism of the host to perform various beneficial functions, including control of nutritional and immunologic functions [3, 4]. However, changes in the intestinal ecosystem can lead to an increase in various pathogenic bacterial species, which can have some detrimental effects on the host’s health, such as carcinogenesis [5, 6].
End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is associated with chronic systemic inflammation and plays a central role in cachexia, anemia, and cardiovascular disease [7, 8]. Uremia, the most common complication of ESRD, occurs when waste products are not excreted by the kidneys and instead accumulate in the body. It has been shown that general systemic inflammation in patients with uremia may be partly due to an impaired intestinal barrier function [9]. Chronic inflammation of the entire gastrointestinal tract and elevated blood levels of intestinal microbial DNA and endotoxin have been reported in hemodialyzed patients [10, 11]. Thus, it has been suggested that patients with uremia have impaired intestinal barrier function, presumably causing endotoxinemia and systemic inflammation. However, the underlying mechanism of intestinal barrier dysfunction in patients with ESRD remains unclear.
Gut microbiota and microbial metabolism by-products play a role in intestinal barrier function [12]. Some intestinal pathogens disrupt the epithelial barrier by internalizing tight junction proteins [13]. Cytokines, produced as a result of intestinal mucosal damage, such as interleukin 6 (IL-6), mediate the systemic inflammatory response by stimulating the production of C-reactive protein, thereby worsening the prognosis of patients with ESRD [14]. Compared with healthy individuals, patients with ESRD have significantly different compositions of gut microbiota and colonic microbial metabolomes [15]. Therefore, modification of the gut microbiota may be a promising treatment for patients with ESRD.
Probiotics are microbes that are beneficial to the host’s health: they modify the gut microbiota. They are often used in the treatment of dyslipidemia, intestinal infections, inflammatory bowel syndrome, and cancer, due to their metabolic, immunomodulatory, and anti-tumoral properties [4, 16]. Probiotic microorganisms suppress the growth of harmful microorganisms, inhibit carcinogenic enzymes, activate the immune system of host cells, activate immune cells, and produce cytokines [17]. Furthermore, the use of probiotics has been shown to reduce uremia and improve cardiovascular disease [18]. Clostridium butyricum (CB) is probiotic that produces short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), such as butyric acid, acetic acid, and propionic acid. Short-chain fatty acids play a role in suppressing intestinal inflammation and maintaining normal intestinal function [19]. CB has been used to prevent or treat intestinal disorders in animals [20]. In clinical practice, CB is used for the treatment of gastrointestinal disorders associated with the destruction of the gastrointestinal microbiota, such as diarrhea and constipation [21]. The administration of CB has recently been reported to result in changes in the bacterial flora [22].
However, the effect of probiotic products on patients with ESRD remains unknown. Therefore, the aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of CB on the nutritional and immunological statuses of patients with ESRD.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Participant information
This retrospective study included 37 patients who underwent maintenance hemodialysis (HD) at our institution between April 2014 and March 2015. The patients were divided into two groups: the CB group, which received probiotics, ad the control group, which did not. Baseline demographic and clinical data were retrieved from the hospital database. The inclusion criteria were as follows: HD three times weekly for at least 6 months and vascular access through an arteriovenous fistula or prosthesis. Patients were excluded if they had liver disease, malignant tumors, active collagen disease, chronic hemorrhage, infection, or missing data. The study protocol followed the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the National Hospital Organization Yanai Medical Center (Provided ID Number: Y-1-9). Written informed consent was obtained from each participating patient.
Treatment procedure
One tablet of MIYA-BM® (Miyarisan Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), which contained 20 mg of CB, was administered orally 3 times per day. Patients received the probiotics for 2 years.
Data collection
Blood samples were collected at the start of each dialysis session, with an interval of 2 days between sessions. Beta-2 microglobulin (β2MG) was measured using the latex agglutination method. Iron and transferrin were measured using Nitro so PSAP reagent. The serum copper, selenium, and zinc levels were measured by atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Measurement of immunoglobulin, complements, and cluster of differentiation (CD)4/CD8 was entrusted to Bio-Medical Laboratories, Inc. (Tokyo, Japan). Measurements of natural killer (NK) cell activity and soluble interleukin-2 receptor (sIL-2R) were obtained as previously reported [23]. Serum IL-6 was determined with a Quantikine ELISA kit (R&D Systems, Inc., Minneapolis, MO, USA). Kt/V was calculated using a single-pool kinetic model [24].
Fecal sample collection and DNA extraction
A fresh fecal sample was obtained from each patient and immediately frozen at −80°C. Sample collection and DNA extraction were conducted according to previously described methods [25]. The DNA extraction was performed using an automated DNA isolation system (GENE PREP STAR PI-480, Kurabo, Osaka, Japan).
Polymerase chain reaction amplification, Miseq sequencing, and sequence data process
To amplify the V3-V4 regions of bacterial 16S rRNA, the primer set 341f/R806 [26, 27] was used. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) was performed under the conditions described previously [25, 28]. The PCR-amplified fragments were paired-end sequenced with 2 × 284-bp cycles using the MiSeq system with MiSeq Reagent Kit version 3 (600 cycle) chemistry. Paired-end sequencing reads were merged using the fastq-join tool with the default settings [29]. The FASTX-Toolkit was used to extract only joined reads with a quality value score of ≥20 for more than 99% of the sequence [30]. The chimeric sequences were deleted with usearch6.1 [31, 32].
Operational taxonomic units clustering
Identification of sequence reads in sequence analyses was performed manually using the Ribosomal Database Project (RDP) Multiclassifier tool ver 2.11, which is available on the RDP website (http://rdp.cme.msu.edu/classifier/) [33]. Identification of bacterial species from sequences was performed using the Metagenome@KIN Ver 2.2.1 analysis software (World Fusion, Japan) and the TechnoSuruga Lab Microbial Identification database DB-BA 13.0 (TechnoSuruga Laboratory, Shizuoka, Japan), with homology for ≥97% [34].
Statistical analysis
Continuous variables are expressed as means and standard deviations and categorical variables are expressed as numbers and percentages. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to compare continuous variables, and Fisher’s exact test was used to compare categorical variables. QIIME2 packages were used to calculate α-diversities and perform principal component analysis (PCA). An R package was used to draw the figures. Statistical analyses were performed using JMP Pro (version 14; SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). Statistical significance was set at p<0.05.
RESULTS
Baseline characteristics of the study population
This study included 37 patients with an average age of 73.9 years old. There were 21 (56.8%) males and 16 (43.2%) females. Twenty-three (62.2%) patients had hypertension, 23 (62.2%) had diabetes, and 14 (37.8%) had cerebral infarction. The CB group included 14 (37.8%) patients who received the probiotic. The control group consisted of 23 (62.2%) patients who did not receive the probiotic. The patient demographic data are shown in Table 1. There were no differences in age (p=0.381), sex (p=0.733), or body mass index (p=0.984) between the two groups. Serum albumin levels were significantly higher in the CB group than in the control group (p=0.006). There are no differences in Kt/V (p=0.087) or β2MG (p=0.355) between the two groups.
Table 1. Baseline characteristics.
| Control, N=23 (62.2) | CB, N=14 (37.8) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 74.93 ± 9.33 | 72.24 ± 9.78 | 0.381 |
| Sex M/F | 14/9 (60.9/39.1) | 7/7 (50.0/50.0) | 0.733 |
| BMI | 19.06 ± 2.37 | 19.27 ± 2.71 | 0.984 |
| HT | 14 (60.8) | 9 (64.3) | 0.709 |
| DM | 14 (60.8) | 9 (64.3) | 0.709 |
| Stroke | 9 (39.1) | 5 (35.7) | 1 |
| TP | 5.96 ± 0.71 | 6.12 ± 0.61 | 0.626 |
| Alb | 2.82 ± 0.53 | 3.31 ± 0.38 | 0.006 |
| T. Bil | 0.39 ± 0.23 | 0.38 ± 0.17 | 0.572 |
| AST | 19.65 ± 13.79 | 15.01 ± 5.42 | 0.396 |
| ALT | 16.43 ± 10.27 | 12.71 ± 6.01 | 0.329 |
| CK | 82.86 ± 115.69 | 38.57 ± 26.48 | 0.204 |
| UN | 47.35 ± 18.34 | 41.93 ± 16.24 | 0.372 |
| Cr | 5.77 ± 2.19 | 5.74 ± 1.75 | 0.707 |
| UA | 5.36 ± 1.56 | 4.79 ± 1.19 | 0.355 |
| β2MG | 26.83 ± 4.61 | 27.85 ± 5.39 | 0.259 |
| Kt/V | 1.69 ± 0.41 | 1.99 ± 0.48 | 0.097 |
| TG | 102.73 ± 53.21 | 96.85 ± 46.99 | 0.742 |
| HDL | 47.04 ± 13.43 | 49.92 ± 10.95 | 0.339 |
| LDL | 79.82 ± 28.01 | 79.64 ± 25.62 | 0.975 |
CB: Clostridium butyricum; Alb: albumin; AST: aspartate aminotransferase; ALT: alanine aminotransferase; β2MG: beta-2 microglobulin; BFR: blood flow rate; BMI: body mass index; CK: creatin kinase; Cr: creatin; DM: diabetes mellitus; HDL: high-density lipoprotein; HT: hypertension; LDL: low-density lipoprotein; T. Bil: total bilirubin; TG: triglyceride; TP: total protein; UN: urea nitrogen.
Data are presented as means and standard deviations for continuous variables and as numbers and percentages for categorical variables.
Clostridium butyricum related to gut microbial diversity in ESRD
According to the α-diversity index, the CB group had a significantly higher number of operational taxonomic units (OTUs) than the control group (p=0.04; shown in Fig. 1A, B). A PCA, based on the distribution of OTUs, was performed to characterize the microbiome space in various samples (shown in Fig. 1C). The relative abundances and distributions of the OTUs at the phylum levels are shown for the two groups in Fig. 2.
Fig. 1.
Gut microbial diversity in patients administered Clostridium butyricum (CB) increased. (A) Rarefaction analysis between the number of samples and the numbers of operational taxonomic units (OTUs). As the number of samples increased, the number of OTUs approached saturation in the control group (n=23) and CB group (n=14). The number of OTUs in the CB group was significantly increased compared with the control group. (B) Gut microbial diversity was significantly increased in the CB group compared with the control group, as estimated by α-diversity (p=0.04). (C) Non-metric multidimensional scaling based on the main coordinate analysis distribution showed that the taxonomic composition of the intestine was significantly different between the control group and the CB group.
Fig. 2.
Phylogenetic profiles of the gut microbiome. The relative abundance of the bacterial community at the phylum level.
The gut microbiota included five main phyla: Firmicutes, Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria, and Verrucomicrobia. The relative abundance of the Firmicutes phylum was 69.8% in the CB group and 66.6% in the control group. The relative abundance of the Bacteroidetes phylum was 8.5% in the CB group and 9.8% in the control group. The Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes (F/B) ratio of the CB group was 11.7, and that of the control group was 11.1; there was no difference between the two groups (p=0.731; Fig. 3).
Fig. 3.
The Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio in the Clostridium butyricum (CB) group and control group.
Correlation between gut microbiota and systemic inflammation
As shown in Table 2, there were no differences in trace elements between the two groups. The rapid turnover protein transferrin was significantly more abundant in the CB group (p=0.043). The effector to target cell (E/T) ratio was higher in the CB group (p=0.021). IL-6 levels were significantly lower in the CB group (p=0.001).
Table 2. Comparison of the trace elements between CB and control group.
| Control, N=23 (62.2) | CB, N=14 (37.8) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| WBC | 5.73 ± 2.18 | 5.49 ± 2.85 | 0.511 |
| Ly | 21.41 ± 9.31 | 26.81 ± 11.53 | 0.106 |
| Hb | 9.67 ± 1.55 | 9.95 ± 1.35 | 0.471 |
| Sodium | 136.73 ± 2.76 | 137.57 ± 4.16 | 0.603 |
| Karium | 4.11 ± 0.66 | 3.95 ± 0.53 | 0.626 |
| Calcium | 8.34 ± 0.91 | 8.51 ± 0.69 | 0.405 |
| Phosphorus | 3.55 ± 1.31 | 3.31 ± 1.19 | 0.481 |
| Ferrum | 48.21 ± 23.61 | 55.35 ± 29.75 | 0.481 |
| Copper | 89.56 ± 29.61 | 79.01 ± 35.02 | 0.331 |
| Selenium | 87.34 ± 21.23 | 86.42 ± 15.06 | 0.826 |
| Zinc | 52.13 ± 13.62 | 50.14 ± 6.65 | 0.937 |
| Transferrin | 158.91 ± 47.01 | 190.64 ± 46.94 | 0.043 |
| Prealbumin | 19.84 ± 8.01 | 23.87 ± 8.31 | 0.158 |
| IgG | 1420.78 ± 543.45 | 1608.28 ± 538.99 | 0.246 |
| IgA | 328.01 ± 127.59 | 303.85 ± 171.41 | 0.323 |
| C3 | 79.73 ± 20.29 | 86.57 ± 25.32 | 0.433 |
| C4 | 25.73 ± 6.28 | 26.37 ± 5.76 | 0.863 |
| CD4 | 42.34 ± 8.44 | 36.13 ± 11.27 | 0.058 |
| CD8 | 34.58 ± 10.75 | 33.21 ± 7.97 | 0.695 |
| CD4/8 | 1.23 ± 0.53 | 1.42 ± 0.65 | 0.398 |
| IL-6 | 23.35 ± 17.48 | 8.89 ± 7.91 | 0.001 |
| E/T ratio | |||
| 10:1 | 10.35 ± 6.16 | 14.59 ± 3.54 | 0.033 |
| 20:1 | 19.75 ± 13.56 | 27.71 ± 7.59 | 0.021 |
CB: Clostridium butyricum; C: complement; CD: cluster of differentiation; E/T ratio: effector cells/target cells ratio; Hb: hemoglobin; Ig: immunoglobulin; IL-6: interleukin-6; Ly: lymphocyte; NK cell: natural killer cell; sIL-2R: soluble interleukin-2 receptor; WBC: white blood cell.
Data are presented as means and standard deviations for continuous variables and as numbers and percentages for categorical variables.
DISCUSSION
The α-diversity index indicated that the gut microbiota was more abundant in patients who received CB than in patients who did not receive CB. In addition, in the CB group, the albumin level, transferrin level, and E/T ratio were higher, while the IL-6 level was lower, indicating better nutritional and immunological statuses.
Systemic edema due to fluid overload, which is a common complication in patients with ESRD, leads to edema of the intestinal wall, and aggressive ultrafiltration by hemodialysis results in intestinal ischemia due to hypotension [35]. The mechanical mechanism of ESRD is the impairment of the intestinal epithelial barrier as a result of intestinal edema and intestinal ischemia, causing endotoxinemia and systemic inflammation. In addition, indoxyl sulfate and p-cresol sulfate have been identified as colon-derived uremic toxins produced in response to changes in the composition and function of the gut microbiota and are reported to be an independent predictor of cardiovascular events [36]. A strong association between ESRD and uremia has been reprted, and changes in the intestinal biochemical environment specific to patients with ESRD contribute to systemic inflammation, malnutrition, and other complications.
Compared with healthy controls, the diversity of the gut microbiota of patients with ESRD was significantly reduced, indicating that the human gut microbiota changes significantly as patients leavs from a healthy state in ESRD [37]. The current study found that the gut microbiota was more abundant in the CB group, and changes in the diversity of the gut microbiota induced by probiotics may have beneficial effects on the kidneys [18]. It was confirmed that the administration of probiotics to patients with stage III-IV chronic kidney disease altered the composition of the microbial flora and resulted in a decrease in serum urea levels [38]. Probiotics favor urea hydrolysis, and they have been shown to be urea-targeted drugs that carry out “intestinal dialysis” [39]. In addition, biomarkers of inflammation are inversely correlated with renal function [40], and the assistance of renal function with probiotics helps to control chronic inflammation by reducing urea levels [41]. Therefore, the administration of probiotics alters the environment of the gut microbiota and replaces the renal function by eliminating uremic retention solutes that are associated with increased ESRD mortality [42, 43].
Probiotics are thought to exert anti-inflammatory effects by increasing the level of SCFAs [44]. Patients with ESRD have been shown to have low serum and fecal short chain fatty acid (SCFA) levels [45]. It has also been shown that the administration of CB increases butyric acid levels and restores the composition of the gut microbiota, thereby suppressing the production of uremic toxins [46]. Butyric acid has been shown to slow the progression of disease into ESRD [45], and acetic acid has been shown to reduce the incidence of acute kidney injury [47]. After the administration of probiotics, single-cell RNA sequencing at SCFA-related receptors showed a higher expression of anti-inflammatory and regeneration-related genes [44], indicating that the protective effect of probiotics is associated with the SCFA-mediated regulation of inflammatory responses.
Uremic inflammation has been shown to be associated with protein-energy wasting (PEW) [48]. PEW is found in many patients with ESRD and causes skeletal muscle depletion [49]. Inflammation promotes PEW, and an overproduction of inflammatory factors is associated with increased metabolism and decreased body mass [50]. IL-6 is involved in the sarcopenic process by inhibiting the secretion of insulin-like growth factor-1, leading to the development of PEW and muscle catabolism [51]. In addition, diarrhea is one of the causes of malnutrition due to impaired intestinal barrier function in patients with ESRD [35, 52]. CB can be used clinically for diarrhea, constipation, and other symptoms associated with disruption of the intestinal microflora [53]. Furthermore, it enhances enterocyte integrity [18]. In the CB group in this study, IL-6 levels were significantly lower and albumin and transferrin levels were significantly higher. The administration of CB may restore the diversity of the gut microbiota in patients with ESRD, which would allow for the metabolism of urea, leading to less inflammation. It also protects the mucosal epithelium by alleviating nutrient absorption disorders, resulting in an improved nutritional status.
Patients in both groups in this study exceeded the Kt/V value recommended by the Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Initiative Guidelines [54], and there was no difference in β2MG between the two groups, thus dialysis efficiency did not affect uremia. Indoxyl sulphate and p-cresyl sulphate, which are other intestinal uremic toxins that are positively correlated with IL-6 [55], may have been reduced in the CB group. However, further investigations are required to determine the levels of these toxins in patients with ESRD receiving CB.
Probiotics have been shown to enhance both innate and adaptive immunity of the host immune system by reducing the presence of pathogens [56]. Some probiotic strains promote B cell differentiation, and thereby increase the production of immunoglobulin A, which is useful in preventing the invasion of pathogenic microorganisms [18]. In this study as well, the E/T ratio was higher in the CB group, indicating that innate immunity was activated.
Next-generation sequencing technology has shown that the human gut microbiota is mainly composed of seven phyla: Firmicutes, Bacteroides, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Fusobacteria, Verrucomicrobia, and Cyanobacteria [57]. The two most predominant phyla in the human gut are Firmicutes and Bacteroides [58]; however, in this study, Actinobacteria and Firmicutes were the two most predominant phyla. The increase in Firmicutes with CB administration is consistent with previous reports [59]. Antibiotics, such as streptomycin and vancomycin, have been discovered in Actinobacteria [60]. Since microbiota that survive and compete for nutrients and living space produce antibacterial compounds [61], changes in the gut microbiota in patients with ESRD may have an effect on the increase in Actinobacteria. The increased abundance of Firmicutes and Bacteroides indicates microbial imbalance [62]. The administration of CB did not alter the gut microbiota composition of Firmicutes and Bacteroides, and the F/B ratio was not significantly different between the two groups. CB increased the amount of gut microbiota, but did not appear to affect the proportions.
This study was not without limitations. It was a retrospective, observational study that included a small number of patients. A prospective, randomized controlled trial with a large number of patients is needed to determine the relationships between ESRD and the gut microbiota.
In conclusion, the α-diversity index suggests that the gut microbiota was more abundant in patients undergoing maintenance dialysis who received CB than in those who did not receive CB. CB positively affects the gut microbiota and nutritional and immunological statuses of patients with ESRD undergoing HD.
REFERENCES
- 1.De Sordi L, Khanna V, Debarbieux L. 2017. The gut microbiota facilitates drifts in the genetic diversity and infectivity of bacterial viruses. Cell Host Microbe 22: 801–808.e3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Riaz Rajoka MS, Mehwish HM, JZhu J, Li Q, Shaon D, Huang Q, Yang H. 2017. Interaction between diet composition and gut microbiota and its impact on gastrointestinal tract health. Food Sci Hum Wellness 6: 121–130. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Rooks MG, Garrett WS. 2016. Gut microbiota, metabolites and host immunity. Nat Rev Immunol 16: 341–352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Riaz Rajoka MSWY, Mehwish HM, Bansal M, Zhao L. 2020. Lactobacillus exopolysaccharides: new perspectives on engineering strategies, physiochemical functions, and immunomodulatory effects on host health. Trends Food Sci Technol 103: 36–48. [Google Scholar]
- 5.Riaz Rajoka MS, Xiong Y, Song X, Hussain N, Zhu Q, He Z. 2021. Gut microbiota targeted nanomedicine for cancer therapy: challenges and future considerations. Trends Food Sci Technol 107: 240–251. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Riaz Rajoka MS, Zhao H, Li N, Lu Y, Lian Z, Shao D, Jin M, Li Q, Zhao L, Shi J. 2018. Origination, change, and modulation of geriatric disease-related gut microbiota during life. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 102: 8275–8289. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Landray MJ, Wheeler DC, Lip GY, Newman DJ, Blann AD, McGlynn FJ, Ball S, Townend JN, Baigent C. 2004. Inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and platelet activation in patients with chronic kidney disease: the chronic renal impairment in Birmingham (CRIB) study. Am J Kidney Dis 43: 244–253. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Carrero JJ, Stenvinkel P. 2010. Inflammation in end-stage renal disease—what have we learned in 10 years? Semin Dial 23: 498–509. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Kanbay M, Onal EM, Afsar B, Dagel T, Yerlikaya A, Covic A, Vaziri ND. 2018. The crosstalk of gut microbiota and chronic kidney disease: role of inflammation, proteinuria, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus. Int Urol Nephrol 50: 1453–1466. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Vaziri ND, Dure-Smith B, Miller R, Mirahmadi MK. 1985. Pathology of gastrointestinal tract in chronic hemodialysis patients: an autopsy study of 78 cases. Am J Gastroenterol 80: 608–611. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Bossola M, Sanguinetti M, Scribano D, Zuppi C, Giungi S, Luciani G, Torelli R, Posteraro B, Fadda G, Tazza L. 2009. Circulating bacterial-derived DNA fragments and markers of inflammation in chronic hemodialysis patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 4: 379–385. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Clemente JC, Ursell LK, Parfrey LW, Knight R. 2012. The impact of the gut microbiota on human health: an integrative view. Cell 148: 1258–1270. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Awad WA, Hess C, Hess M. 2017. Enteric pathogens and their toxin-induced disruption of the intestinal barrier through alteration of tight junctions in chickens. Toxins (Basel) 9: E60. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Lee BT, Ahmed FA, Hamm LL, Teran FJ, Chen CS, Liu Y, Shah K, Rifai N, Batuman V, Simon EE, He J, Chen J. 2015. Association of C-reactive protein, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, and interleukin-6 with chronic kidney disease. BMC Nephrol 16: 77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Jiang S, Xie S, Lv D, Wang P, He H, Zhang T, Zhou Y, Lin Q, Zhou H, Jiang J, Nie J, Hou F, Chen Y. 2017. Alteration of the gut microbiota in Chinese population with chronic kidney disease. Sci Rep 7: 2870. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Riaz Rajoka MS, Jin M, Haobin Z, Li Q, Shao D, Huang Q, Shi J. 2018. Impact of dietary compounds on cancer-related gut microbiota and microRNA. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 102: 4291–4303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Riaz Rajoka MS, Shi J, Zhu J, Shao D, Huang Q, Yang H, Jin M. 2017. Capacity of lactic acid bacteria in immunity enhancement and cancer prevention. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 101: 35–45. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Koppe L, Mafra D, Fouque D. 2015. Probiotics and chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int 88: 958–966. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Zhao K, Yu L, Wang X, He Y, Lu B. 2018. Clostridium butyricum regulates visceral hypersensitivity of irritable bowel syndrome by inhibiting colonic mucous low grade inflammation through its action on NLRP6. Acta Biochim Biophys Sin (Shanghai) 50: 216–223. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Hayashi A, Sato T, Kamada N, Mikami Y, Matsuoka K, Hisamatsu T, Hibi T, Roers A, Yagita H, Ohteki T, Yoshimura A, Kanai T. 2013. A single strain of Clostridium butyricum induces intestinal IL-10-producing macrophages to suppress acute experimental colitis in mice. Cell Host Microbe 13: 711–722. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Chen D, Jin D, Huang S, Wu J, Xu M, Liu T, Dong W, Liu X, Wang S, Zhong W, Liu Y, Jiang R, Piao M, Wang B, Cao H. 2020. Clostridium butyricum, a butyrate-producing probiotic, inhibits intestinal tumor development through modulating Wnt signaling and gut microbiota. Cancer Lett 469: 456–467. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Andoh A, Imaeda H, Aomatsu T, Inatomi O, Bamba S, Sasaki M, Saito Y, Tsujikawa T, Fujiyama Y. 2011. Comparison of the fecal microbiota profiles between ulcerative colitis and Crohn’s disease using terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis. J Gastroenterol 46: 479–486. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Yamamoto M, Matsumoto T, Ohmori H, Takemoto M, Ikeda M, Sumimoto R, Kobayashi T, Kato A, Ohdan H. 2021. Effect of increased blood flow rate on renal anemia and hepcidin concentration in hemodialysis patients. BMC Nephrol 22: 221. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Daugirdas JT. 1993. Linear estimates of variable-volume, single-pool Kt/V: an analysis of error. Am J Kidney Dis 22: 267–270. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Takahashi S, Tomita J, Nishioka K, Hisada T, Nishijima M. 2014. Development of a prokaryotic universal primer for simultaneous analysis of Bacteria and Archaea using next-generation sequencing. PLoS One 9: e105592. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Muyzer G, de Waal EC, Uitterlinden AG. 1993. Profiling of complex microbial populations by denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis analysis of polymerase chain reaction-amplified genes coding for 16S rRNA. Appl Environ Microbiol 59: 695–700. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Caporaso JG, Lauber CL, Walters WA, Berg-Lyons D, Lozupone CA, Turnbaugh PJ, Fierer N, Knight R. 2011. Global patterns of 16S rRNA diversity at a depth of millions of sequences per sample. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108 Suppl 1 (Suppl 1): 4516–4522. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 28.Hisada T, Endoh K, Kuriki K. 2015. Inter- and intra-individual variations in seasonal and daily stabilities of the human gut microbiota in Japanese. Arch Microbiol 197: 919–934. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Aronesty E.2013. Comparison of sequencing utility programs. Open Bioinforma J 7: 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- 30.Gordon AH.G. 2010. FASTQ/A short-reads preprocessing tools.
- 31.Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, Bittinger K, Bushman FD, Costello EK, Fierer N, Peña AG, Goodrich JK, Gordon JI, Huttley GA, Kelley ST, Knights D, Koenig JE, Ley RE, Lozupone CA, McDonald D, Muegge BD, Pirrung M, Reeder J, Sevinsky JR, Turnbaugh PJ, Walters WA, Widmann J, Yatsunenko T, Zaneveld J, Knight R. 2010. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods 7: 335–336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Edgar RC, Haas BJ, Clemente JC, Quince C, Knight R. 2011. UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection. Bioinformatics 27: 2194–2200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Wang Q, Garrity GM, Tiedje JM, Cole JR. 2007. Naive Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl Environ Microbiol 73: 5261–5267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Kasai C, Sugimoto K, Moritani I, Tanaka J, Oya Y, Inoue H, Tameda M, Shiraki K, Ito M, Takei Y, Takase K. 2015. Comparison of the gut microbiota composition between obese and non-obese individuals in a Japanese population, as analyzed by terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism and next-generation sequencing. BMC Gastroenterol 15: 100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Vaziri ND, Zhao YY, Pahl MV. 2016. Altered intestinal microbial flora and impaired epithelial barrier structure and function in CKD: the nature, mechanisms, consequences and potential treatment. Nephrol Dial Transplant 31: 737–746. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Meijers BK, Claes K, Bammens B, de Loor H, Viaene L, Verbeke K, Kuypers D, Vanrenterghem Y, Evenepoel P. 2010. p-Cresol and cardiovascular risk in mild-to-moderate kidney disease. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 5: 1182–1189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Ren Z, Fan Y, Li A, Shen Q, Wu J, Ren L, Lu H, Ding S, Ren H, Liu C, Liu W, Gao D, Wu Z, Guo S, Wu G, Liu Z, Yu Z, Li L. 2020. Alterations of the human gut microbiome in chronic kidney disease. Advanced Science 7: 2001936. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Miranda Alatriste PV, Urbina Arronte R, Gómez Espinosa CO, Espinosa Cuevas ML. 2014. Effect of probiotics on human blood urea levels in patients with chronic renal failure. Nutr Hosp 29: 582–590. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Ranganathan N, Patel BG, Ranganathan P, Marczely J, Dheer R, Pechenyak B, Dunn SR, Verstraete W, Decroos K, Mehta R, Friedman EA. 2006. In vitro and in vivo assessment of intraintestinal bacteriotherapy in chronic kidney disease. ASAIO J 52: 70–79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Gupta J, Mitra N, Kanetsky PA, Devaney J, Wing MR, Reilly M, Shah VO, Balakrishnan VS, Guzman NJ, Girndt M, Periera BG, Feldman HI, Kusek JW, Joffe MM, Raj DS, CRIC Study Investigators2012. Association between albuminuria, kidney function, and inflammatory biomarker profile in CKD in CRIC. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 7: 1938–1946. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Wang IK, Wu YY, Yang YF, Ting IW, Lin CC, Yen TH, Chen JH, Wang CH, Huang CC, Lin HC. 2015. The effect of probiotics on serum levels of cytokine and endotoxin in peritoneal dialysis patients: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Benef Microbes 6: 423–430. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Simenhoff ML, Dunn SR, Zollner GP, Fitzpatrick ME, Emery SM, Sandine WE, Ayres JW. 1996. Biomodulation of the toxic and nutritional effects of small bowel bacterial overgrowth in end-stage kidney disease using freeze-dried Lactobacillus acidophilus. Miner Electrolyte Metab 22: 92–96. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Takayama F, Taki K, Niwa T. 2003. Bifidobacterium in gastro-resistant seamless capsule reduces serum levels of indoxyl sulfate in patients on hemodialysis. Am J Kidney Dis 41Suppl 1: S142–S145. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Zhu H, Cao C, Wu Z, Zhang H, Sun Z, Wang M, Xu H, Zhao Z, Wang Y, Pei G, Yang Q, Zhu F, Yang J, Deng X, Hong Y, Li Y, Sun J, Zhu F, Shi M, Qian K, Ye T, Zuo X, Zhao F, Guo J, Xu G, Yao Y, Zeng R. 2021. The probiotic L. casei Zhang slows the progression of acute and chronic kidney disease. Cell Metab. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Wang S, Lv D, Jiang S, Jiang J, Liang M, Hou F, Chen Y. 2019. Quantitative reduction in short-chain fatty acids, especially butyrate, contributes to the progression of chronic kidney disease. Clin Sci (Lond) 133: 1857–1870. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Hsiao YP, Chen HL, Tsai JN, Lin MY, Liao JW, Wei MS, Ko JL, Ou CC. 2021. Administration of Lactobacillus reuteri combined with Clostridium butyricum attenuates cisplatin-induced renal damage by gut microbiota reconstitution, increasing butyric acid production, and suppressing renal inflammation. Nutrients 13: 2792. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Andrade-Oliveira V, Amano MT, Correa-Costa M, Castoldi A, Felizardo RJ, de Almeida DC, Bassi EJ, Moraes-Vieira PM, Hiyane MI, Rodas AC, Peron JP, Aguiar CF, Reis MA, Ribeiro WR, Valduga CJ, Curi R, Vinolo MA, Ferreira CM, Câmara NO. 2015. Gut bacteria products prevent AKI induced by ischemia-reperfusion. J Am Soc Nephrol 26: 1877–1888. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Stenvinkel P, Heimbürger O, Paultre F, Diczfalusy U, Wang T, Berglund L, Jogestrand T. 1999. Strong association between malnutrition, inflammation, and atherosclerosis in chronic renal failure. Kidney Int 55: 1899–1911. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Stenvinkel P, Heimbürger O, Lindholm B. 2004. Wasting, but not malnutrition, predicts cardiovascular mortality in end-stage renal disease. Nephrol Dial Transplant 19: 2181–2183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Wang AY, Sea MM, Tang N, Sanderson JE, Lui SF, Li PK, Woo J. 2004. Resting energy expenditure and subsequent mortality risk in peritoneal dialysis patients. J Am Soc Nephrol 15: 3134–3143. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Barbieri M, Ferrucci L, Ragno E, Corsi A, Bandinelli S, Bonafè M, Olivieri F, Giovagnetti S, Franceschi C, Guralnik JM, Paolisso G. 2003. Chronic inflammation and the effect of IGF-I on muscle strength and power in older persons. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 284: E481–E487. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 52.Goodman C, Keating G, Georgousopoulou E, Hespe C, Levett K. 2021. Probiotics for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open 11: e043054. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 53.Yasueda A, Mizushima T, Nezu R, Sumi R, Tanaka M, Nishimura J, Kai Y, Hirota M, Osawa H, Nakajima K, Mori M, Ito T. 2016. The effect of Clostridium butyricum MIYAIRI on the prevention of pouchitis and alteration of the microbiota profile in patients with ulcerative colitis. Surg Today 46: 939–949. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54.National Kidney Foundation2015. KDOQI clinical practice guideline for hemodialysis adequacy: 2015 update. Am J Kidney Dis 66: 884–930. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55.Borges NA, Barros AF, Nakao LS, Dolenga CJ, Fouque D, Mafra D. 2016. Protein-bound uremic toxins from gut microbiota and inflammatory markers in chronic kidney disease. J Ren Nutr 26: 396–400. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 56.Artis D. 2008. Epithelial-cell recognition of commensal bacteria and maintenance of immune homeostasis in the gut. Nat Rev Immunol 8: 411–420. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 57.Liu M, Xie W, Wan X, Deng T. 2020. Clostridium butyricum modulates gut microbiota and reduces colitis associated colon cancer in mice. Int Immunopharmacol 88: 106862. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58.Bäckhed F, Ley RE, Sonnenburg JL, Peterson DA, Gordon JI. 2005. Host-bacterial mutualism in the human intestine. Science 307: 1915–1920. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 59.Tian T, Xu B, Qin Y, Fan L, Chen J, Zheng P, Gong X, Wang H, Bai M, Pu J, Lu J, Zhou W, Zhao L, Yang D, Xie P. 2019. Clostridium butyricum miyairi 588 has preventive effects on chronic social defeat stress-induced depressive-like behaviour and modulates microglial activation in mice. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 516: 430–436. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60.Katsuyama Y. 2019. Mining novel biosynthetic machineries of secondary metabolites from actinobacteria. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem 83: 1606–1615. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 61.Davies J, Davies D. 2010. Origins and evolution of antibiotic resistance. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 74: 417–433. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62.Murphy EF, Cotter PD, Healy S, Marques TM, O’Sullivan O, Fouhy F, Clarke SF, O’Toole PW, Quigley EM, Stanton C, Ross PR, O’Doherty RM, Shanahan F. 2010. Composition and energy harvesting capacity of the gut microbiota: relationship to diet, obesity and time in mouse models. Gut 59: 1635–1642. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]



