Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33985595›Full record

Trial reportMicrobiome2021

Strain engraftment competition and functional augmentation in a multi-donor fecal microbiota transplantation trial for obesity.

Brooke C Wilson, Tommi Vatanen, Thilini N Jayasinghe, Karen S W Leong, José G B Derraik, Benjamin B Albert, Valentina Chiavaroli, Darren M Svirskis, Kathryn L Beck, Cathryn A Conlon and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialVideo-Audio Media
In one paragraph

Trial report in Microbiome, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

58 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 104 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

15 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Brooke C WilsonThe Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Tommi VatanenThe Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Thilini N JayasingheThe Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Karen S W LeongThe Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
José G B DerraikThe Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Benjamin B AlbertThe Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Valentina ChiavaroliThe Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Darren M SvirskisSchool of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Kathryn L BeckSchool of Sport, Exercise and Nutrition, College of Health, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Cathryn A ConlonSchool of Sport, Exercise and Nutrition, College of Health, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Yannan JiangDepartment of Statistics, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
William SchierdingThe Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
David J HollandDepartment of Infectious Diseases, Counties Manukau District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand.
Wayne S CutfieldThe Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. w.cutfield@auckland.ac.nz.
Justin M O'SullivanThe Liggins Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. justin.osullivan@auckland.ac.nz.ORCID 0000-0003-2927-450X
University of Auckland · NZMassey University · NZBroad Institute · USCounties Manukau District Health Board · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDonor selection is an important factor influencing the engraftment and efficacy of fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) for complex conditions associated with microbial dysbiosis. However, the degree, variation, and stability of strain engraftment have not yet been assessed in the context of multiple donors.

methodsWe conducted a double-blinded randomized control trial of FMT in 87 adolescents with obesity. Participants were randomized to receive multi-donor FMT (capsules containing the fecal microbiota of four sex-matched lean donors) or placebo (saline capsules). Following a bowel cleanse, participants ingested a total of 28 capsules over two consecutive days. Capsules from individual donors and participant stool samples collected at baseline, 6, 12, and 26 weeks post-treatment were analyzed by shotgun metagenomic sequencing allowing us to track bacterial strain engraftment and its functional implications on recipients' gut microbiomes.

resultsMulti-donor FMT sustainably altered the structure and the function of the gut microbiome. In what was effectively a microbiome competition experiment, we discovered that two donor microbiomes (one female, one male) dominated strain engraftment and were characterized by high microbial diversity and a high Prevotella to Bacteroides (P/B) ratio. Engrafted strains led to enterotype-level shifts in community composition and provided genes that altered the metabolic potential of the community. Despite our attempts to standardize FMT dose and origin, FMT recipients varied widely in their engraftment of donor strains.

conclusionOur study provides evidence for the existence of FMT super-donors whose microbiomes are highly effective at engrafting in the recipient gut. Dominant engrafting male and female donor microbiomes harbored diverse microbial species and genes and were characterized by a high P/B ratio. Yet, the high variability of strain engraftment among FMT recipients suggests the host environment also plays a critical role in mediating FMT receptivity.

trial registrationThe Gut Bugs trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12615001351505 ). TRIAL PROTOCOL: The trial protocol is available at https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/4/e026174 . Video Abstract.

Indexed as

DysbiosisFecal Microbiota TransplantationAdolescentAustraliaFecesFemaleHumansMaleObesityTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID33985595
PMCPMC8120839
OpenAlexW3115107221

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.