Dataset Information

Gut barrier and microbiota changes with glycine and branched-chain amino acid supplementation in chronic haemodialysis patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We have previously shown that glycine increases fat-free mass in chronic haemodialysis patients with features of malnutrition as compared with branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs). This multicentre randomized double-blind crossover study evaluates the impact of these amino acids on the gut barrier and microbiota.

Methods

Haemodialysis patients were included if they had plasma albumin <38 g/L or weight loss >5% of dry body weight, and daily dietary intakes <30 kcal/kg and <1 g protein/kg. They consumed glycine or BCAA (7 g twice daily) for 4 months and underwent a 1 month washout period, before crossover of supplementations. Faecal microbiota (16S rRNA gene sequencing) and immunoglobulin A (IgA), serum levels of cytokines, surrogate markers of intestinal permeability, appetite mediators, and endocannabinoids were obtained at the start and end of each supplementation. Supplementations were compared by multiple mixed linear regression models, adjusted for age, sex, month of supplementation (0 and 4 in each period), and period (Period 1: first 4 months; Period 2: last 4 months). Microbiota comparisons were performed using principal coordinate analysis and permutational multivariate analysis of variance, Shannon diversity index estimate and analysis of composition of microbiomes analysis, and Wilcoxon tests.

Results

We analysed 27 patients compliant to the supplementations. Multiple mixed linear regression models were significant only for interleukin-6 (P = 0.002), glucagon-like peptide 1 (P = 0.028), cholecystokinin (P = 0.021), and peptide YY (P = 0.002), but not for the other outcomes. The significant models did not show any impact of the type of supplementation (P < 0.05 in all models). Principal coordinate analysis and permutational multivariate analysis of variance (P = 0.0001) showed strong microbiota clustering by subject, but no effect of the amino acids. Bacterial alpha diversity and zero-radius operational taxonomic unit richness remained stable, whatever the supplementation. Lacticaseibacillus paracasei (0.030; Q1-Q3 0.008-0.078 vs. 0.004; Q1-Q3 0.001-0.070) and Bifidobacterium dentium (0.0247; Q1-Q3 0.002-0.191 vs. 0.003; Q1-Q3 0.001-0.086) significantly decreased with the BCAA supplementation.

Conclusions

The BCAA and glycine supplementations had no impact on the serum levels of cytokines, appetite mediators, intestinal permeability, endocannabinoids, or faecal IgA. Overall faecal microbiota composition and microbial diversity did not change with the glycine or BCAA supplementation but decreased the abundance of L. paracasei and B. dentium.

SUBMITTER: Genton L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8718035 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBranched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) play a vital role in neonatal nutrition. Optimal BCAA supplementation might improve neonatal nutrient storage, leading to better physical and neurological development and other outcomes.ObjectivesTo determine the effect of BCAA supplementation on physical growth and neurological development in term and preterm neonates. We planned to make the following comparisons: parenteral nutrition with and without BCAA supplementation; enteral BCAA supplementation versus no supplementation; and any type of supplementation including enteral, parenteral and both ways versus no supplementation. To investigate the supplementation effectiveness for different dosages assessed in the eligible trials.Search methodsWe conducted comprehensive searches using Cochrane Neonatal's standard search strategies: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2016, Issue 6), MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL (up to July 2016). We updated the search with CENTRAL (2019, Issue 8), MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL (up to August 2019). We also searched clinical trials registries and reference lists of retrieved articles.Selection criteriaWe planned to include individual and cluster-randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing BCAA supplementation versus placebo or no supplementation in term and preterm neonates. We excluded trials presented only as abstracts and cross-over trials.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed the eligibility of all potential studies identified from the search strategy. We planned to extract data using a pilot-tested standard data extraction form and assess risk of bias of the included studies following the methods described in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We planned to analyse treatment effects and report their effect estimates as per dichotomous or continuous data with 95% confidence intervals. We planned to conduct subgroup analysis to investigate heterogeneity, and perform sensitivity analysis where possible. We planned to use fixed-effect meta-analysis to combine data wherever appropriate. We planned to assess evidence quality using the GRADE approach.Main resultsWe did not identify any potentially eligible studies that met the inclusion criteria in this review.Authors' conclusionsWe found no trial data to support or refute the idea that BCAA supplementation affects physical and neurological development and other outcomes in term and preterm neonates.