Updating Urinary Microbiome Analyses to Enhance Biologic Interpretation.

bioinformatic analysis bladder dysfunction lactobacilli microbiota mixed urinary incontinence urinary microbiome urobiome

Journal

Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology
ISSN: 2235-2988
Titre abrégé: Front Cell Infect Microbiol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101585359

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2022
Historique:
received: 04 10 2021
accepted: 13 06 2022
entrez: 28 7 2022
pubmed: 29 7 2022
medline: 30 7 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

An approach for assessing the urinary microbiome is 16S rRNA gene sequencing, where analysis methods are rapidly evolving. This re-analysis of an existing dataset aimed to determine whether updated bioinformatic and statistical techniques affect clinical inferences. A prior study compared the urinary microbiome in 123 women with mixed urinary incontinence (MUI) and 84 controls. We obtained unprocessed sequencing data from multiple variable regions, processed operational taxonomic unit (OTU) tables from the original analysis, and de-identified clinical data. We re-processed sequencing data with DADA2 to generate amplicon sequence variant (ASV) tables. Taxa from ASV tables were compared to the original OTU tables; taxa from different variable regions after updated processing were also compared. Bayesian graphical compositional regression (BGCR) was used to test for associations between microbial compositions and clinical phenotypes (e.g., MUI versus control) while adjusting for clinical covariates. Several techniques were used to cluster samples into microbial communities. Multivariable regression was used to test for associations between microbial communities and MUI, again while adjusting for potentially confounding variables. Of taxa identified through updated bioinformatic processing, only 40% were identified originally, though taxa identified through both methods represented >99% of the sequencing data in terms of relative abundance. Different 16S rRNA gene regions resulted in different recovered taxa. With BGCR analysis, there was a low (33.7%) probability of an association between overall microbial compositions and clinical phenotype. However, when microbial data are clustered into bacterial communities, we confirmed that bacterial communities are associated with MUI. Contrary to the originally published analysis, we did not identify different associations by age group, which may be due to the incorporation of different covariates in statistical models. Updated bioinformatic processing techniques recover different taxa compared to earlier techniques, though most of these differences exist in low abundance taxa that occupy a small proportion of the overall microbiome. While overall microbial compositions are not associated with MUI, we confirmed associations between certain communities of bacteria and MUI. Incorporation of several covariates that are associated with the urinary microbiome improved inferences when assessing for associations between bacterial communities and MUI in multivariable models.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35899056
doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2022.789439
pmc: PMC9309214
doi:

Substances chimiques

Biological Products 0
RNA, Ribosomal, 16S 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

789439

Subventions

Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : K01 DK116706
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIGMS NIH HHS
ID : R01 GM135440
Pays : United States

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Siddiqui, Ma, Brubaker, Mao, Hoffman, Dahl, Wang and Karstens.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

Nucleic Acids Res. 2019 Oct 10;47(18):e103
pubmed: 31269198
Nat Methods. 2016 Jul;13(7):581-3
pubmed: 27214047
Front Microbiol. 2019 Feb 14;10:193
pubmed: 30837959
ISME J. 2017 Dec;11(12):2639-2643
pubmed: 28731476
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007 Aug;73(16):5261-7
pubmed: 17586664
mSystems. 2021 Oct 26;6(5):e0051821
pubmed: 34519534
Nucleic Acids Res. 2013 Jan;41(Database issue):D590-6
pubmed: 23193283
JAMA. 2019 Sep 17;322(11):1066-1076
pubmed: 31529007
Biometrics. 2017 Sep;73(3):792-801
pubmed: 28112797
Menopause. 2014 May;21(5):450-8
pubmed: 24080849
mSystems. 2019 Jun 4;4(4):
pubmed: 31164452
Int Urogynecol J. 2017 May;28(5):711-720
pubmed: 27738739
Trends Microbiol. 2017 Mar;25(3):217-228
pubmed: 27916383
Int Urogynecol J. 2018 Dec;29(12):1785-1795
pubmed: 29909556
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020 Nov;223(5):727.e1-727.e11
pubmed: 32791124
PLoS One. 2012;7(2):e30126
pubmed: 22319561
PLoS One. 2013 Apr 22;8(4):e61217
pubmed: 23630581
mSystems. 2019 Feb 19;4(1):
pubmed: 30801029
J Urol. 2021 Nov;206(5):1222-1231
pubmed: 34181466
Microbiome. 2018 Dec 17;6(1):226
pubmed: 30558668
Int Urogynecol J. 2016 Oct;27(10):1479-90
pubmed: 27287818
PeerJ. 2015 Dec 08;3:e1487
pubmed: 26664811
Neurourol Urodyn. 2021 Aug;40(6):1479-1489
pubmed: 34036621
Front Microbiol. 2021 Jan 12;11:607325
pubmed: 33510727
PeerJ. 2017 Oct 4;5:e3889
pubmed: 29018622
mBio. 2014 Jul 08;5(4):e01283-14
pubmed: 25006228
PeerJ. 2018 Aug 8;6:e5364
pubmed: 30123705
Microbiome. 2021 Jun 5;9(1):130
pubmed: 34090540
mSystems. 2016 Feb 9;1(1):
pubmed: 27822515
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2016 Jul 27;6:78
pubmed: 27512653
mSystems. 2021 Aug 31;6(4):e0137120
pubmed: 34282932
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2018 Jul;16(7):410-422
pubmed: 29795328

Auteurs

Nazema Y Siddiqui (NY)

Division of Urogynecology & Reconstructive Pelvic Surgery, Division of Reproductive Sciences, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, United States.

Li Ma (L)

Department of Statistical Science, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.
Department of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, United States.

Linda Brubaker (L)

Division of Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA, United States.

Jialiang Mao (J)

Department of Statistical Science, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.

Carter Hoffman (C)

Division of Bioinformatics and Computational Biomedicine, Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.

Erin M Dahl (EM)

Division of Bioinformatics and Computational Biomedicine, Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.

Zhuoqun Wang (Z)

Department of Statistical Science, Duke University, Durham, NC, United States.

Lisa Karstens (L)

Division of Bioinformatics and Computational Biomedicine, Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.
Division of Urogynecology, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, United States.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH