Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32435197›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2020

Distinct Responses of Gut Microbiota to Jian-Pi-Yi-Shen Decoction Are Associated With Improved Clinical Outcomes in 5/6 Nephrectomized Rats.

Lin Zheng, Shuo Chen, Fochang Wang, Shiying Huang, Xinhui Liu, Xilan Yang, Haokui Zhou, Guo-Ping Zhao, Mingjing Luo, Shunmin Li and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lin ZhengShenzhen Key Laboratory of Hospital Chinese Medicine Preparation, Shenzhen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, The Fourth Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen, China.
Shuo ChenShenzhen Institute of Synthetic Biology, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China.
Fochang WangShenzhen Key Laboratory of Hospital Chinese Medicine Preparation, Shenzhen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, The Fourth Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen, China.
Shiying HuangShenzhen Key Laboratory of Hospital Chinese Medicine Preparation, Shenzhen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, The Fourth Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen, China.
Xinhui LiuDepartment of Nephrology, Shenzhen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, The Fourth Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen, China.
Xilan YangShenzhen Institute of Synthetic Biology, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China.
Haokui ZhouShenzhen Institute of Synthetic Biology, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China.
Guo-Ping ZhaoShenzhen Institute of Synthetic Biology, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China.
Mingjing LuoShenzhen Institute of Synthetic Biology, Shenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen, China.
Shunmin LiDepartment of Nephrology, Shenzhen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, The Fourth Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen, China.
Jianping ChenShenzhen Key Laboratory of Hospital Chinese Medicine Preparation, Shenzhen Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, The Fourth Clinical Medical College of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen, China.
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CNShenzhen Institutes of Advanced Technology · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gut dysbiosis contributes to the development and progression of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and its complications. However, the effect of drugs on the gut microbiota of CKD patients and its influence on treatment outcomes remains to be explored. Here, we assessed whether the response of gut microbiota to the traditional Chinese medicine Jian-Pi-Yi-Shen (JPYS) decoction differed from that to piperazine ferulate (PF), a kidney-targeted drug, by 16S rDNA sequencing, and whether the difference could be linked with drug-specific clinical outcomes. We showed that both JPYS and PF improved renal function, but only JPYS was able to restore the blood reticulocyte counting and serum calcium level in CKD rats. We also found that weighted UniFrac beta-diversity of the gut microbiome of the JPYS treated rats was significantly different from that of PF. Microbiome markers of drug-specific response were identified and subjected to correlation network analysis, together with clinical parameters and KEGG pathways. Among the microbiome markers of CKD,

Indexed as

5/6 nephrectomized ratschronic kidney diseasegut microbiotaJian-Pi-Yi-Shen decoctionpiperazine ferulate

Identifiers

PMID32435197
PMCPMC7219274
OpenAlexW3021555064

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.