33
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Modulation of Protein Fermentation Does Not Affect Fecal Water Toxicity: A Randomized Cross-Over Study in Healthy Subjects

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          Protein fermentation results in production of metabolites such as ammonia, amines and indolic, phenolic and sulfur-containing compounds. In vitro studies suggest that these metabolites might be toxic. However, human and animal studies do not consistently support these findings. We modified protein fermentation in healthy subjects to assess the effects on colonic metabolism and parameters of gut health, and to identify metabolites associated with toxicity.

          Design

          After a 2-week run-in period with normal protein intake (NP), 20 healthy subjects followed an isocaloric high protein (HP) and low protein (LP) diet for 2 weeks in a cross-over design. Protein fermentation was estimated from urinary p-cresol excretion. Fecal metabolite profiles were analyzed using GC-MS and compared using cluster analysis. DGGE was used to analyze microbiota composition. Fecal water genotoxicity and cytotoxicity were determined using the Comet assay and the WST-1-assay, respectively, and were related to the metabolite profiles.

          Results

          Dietary protein intake was significantly higher during the HP diet compared to the NP and LP diet. Urinary p-cresol excretion correlated positively with protein intake. Fecal water cytotoxicity correlated negatively with protein fermentation, while fecal water genotoxicity was not correlated with protein fermentation. Heptanal, 3-methyl-2-butanone, dimethyl disulfide and 2-propenyl ester of acetic acid are associated with genotoxicity and indole, 1-octanol, heptanal, 2,4-dithiapentane, allyl-isothiocyanate, 1-methyl-4-(1-methylethenyl)-benzene, propionic acid, octanoic acid, nonanoic acid and decanoic acid with cytotoxicity.

          Conclusion

          This study does not support a role of protein fermentation in gut toxicity. The identified metabolites can provide new insight into colonic health.

          Trial Registration

          ClinicalTrial.gov NCT01280513

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

          In clinical measurement comparison of a new measurement technique with an established one is often needed to see whether they agree sufficiently for the new to replace the old. Such investigations are often analysed inappropriately, notably by using correlation coefficients. The use of correlation is misleading. An alternative approach, based on graphical techniques and simple calculations, is described, together with the relation between this analysis and the assessment of repeatability.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A simple technique for quantitation of low levels of DNA damage in individual cells.

            Human lymphocytes were either exposed to X-irradiation (25 to 200 rads) or treated with H2O2 (9.1 to 291 microM) at 4 degrees C and the extent of DNA migration was measured using a single-cell microgel electrophoresis technique under alkaline conditions. Both agents induced a significant increase in DNA migration, beginning at the lowest dose evaluated. Migration patterns were relatively homogeneous among cells exposed to X-rays but heterogeneous among cells treated with H2O2. An analysis of repair kinetics following exposure to 200 rads X-rays was conducted with lymphocytes obtained from three individuals. The bulk of the DNA repair occurred within the first 15 min, while all of the repair was essentially complete by 120 min after exposure. However, some cells demonstrated no repair during this incubation period while other cells demonstrated DNA migration patterns indicative of more damage than that induced by the initial irradiation with X-rays. This technique appears to be sensitive and useful for detecting damage and repair in single cells.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Meat, fish, and colorectal cancer risk: the European Prospective Investigation into cancer and nutrition.

              Current evidence suggests that high red meat intake is associated with increased colorectal cancer risk. High fish intake may be associated with a decreased risk, but the existing evidence is less convincing. We prospectively followed 478 040 men and women from 10 European countries who were free of cancer at enrollment between 1992 and 1998. Information on diet and lifestyle was collected at baseline. After a mean follow-up of 4.8 years, 1329 incident colorectal cancers were documented. We examined the relationship between intakes of red and processed meat, poultry, and fish and colorectal cancer risk using a proportional hazards model adjusted for age, sex, energy (nonfat and fat sources), height, weight, work-related physical activity, smoking status, dietary fiber and folate, and alcohol consumption, stratified by center. A calibration substudy based on 36 994 subjects was used to correct hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for diet measurement errors. All statistical tests were two-sided. Colorectal cancer risk was positively associated with intake of red and processed meat (highest [>160 g/day] versus lowest [ 80 g/day versus <10 g/day, HR = 0.69, 95 % CI = 0.54 to 0.88; Ptrend<.001), but was not related to poultry intake. Correcting for measurement error strengthened the associations between colorectal cancer and red and processed meat intake (per 100-g increase HR = 1.25, 95% CI =1.09 to 1.41, Ptrend = .001 and HR = 1.55, 95% CI = 1.19 to 2.02, Ptrend = .001 before and after calibration, respectively) and for fish (per 100 g increase HR = 0.70, 95% CI = 0.57 to 0.87, Ptrend<.001 and HR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.27 to 0.77, Ptrend = .003; before and after correction, respectively). In this study population, the absolute risk of development of colorectal cancer within 10 years for a study subject aged 50 years was 1.71% for the highest category of red and processed meat intake and 1.28% for the lowest category of intake and was 1.86% for subjects in the lowest category of fish intake and 1.28% for subjects in the highest category of fish intake. Our data confirm that colorectal cancer risk is positively associated with high consumption of red and processed meat and support an inverse association with fish intake.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, USA )
                1932-6203
                2012
                20 December 2012
                : 7
                : 12
                : e52387
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Translational Research Center for Gastrointestinal Disorders and Leuven Food Science and Nutrition Research Centre, University Hospital Gasthuisberg, KU Leven Leuven, Belgium
                [2 ]Interface Valorisation Platform, KU Leven Leuven, Belgium
                [3 ]Department of Nutrition–Public Health Medicine, Leuven Food Science and Nutrition Research Centre, KU Leven Leuven, Belgium
                [4 ]Gene Expression Unit, Department of Molecular Cell Biology, KU Leven, Leuven, Belgium
                Paris Institute of Technology for Life, Food and Environmental Sciences, France
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Conceived and designed the experiments: KW VDP GV KV. Performed the experiments: KW VDP. Analyzed the data: KW VDP KV. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: JH FS TL GV KV. Wrote the paper: KW VDP KV. Revised the manuscript: TL FS JH GV.

                Article
                PONE-D-12-20502
                10.1371/journal.pone.0052387
                3527498
                23285019
                4948bcdf-d361-438a-ba02-0f33c57f8b66
                Copyright @ 2012

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 4 July 2012
                : 12 November 2012
                Page count
                Pages: 12
                Funding
                Sources of support are Fund for Scientific Research-Flanders (FWO Vlaanderen) Belgium (FWO project G.0674.10). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology
                Anatomy and Physiology
                Digestive System
                Digestive Physiology
                Digestive Functions
                Digestive Regulation
                Biochemistry
                Metabolism
                Protein Metabolism
                Microbiology
                Microbial Metabolism
                Proteomics
                Spectrometric Identification of Proteins
                Toxicology
                Genetic Toxicology
                Chemistry
                Chromatography
                Gas Chromatography
                Medicine
                Gastroenterology and Hepatology
                Colon
                Nutrition
                Toxicology
                Genetic Toxicology

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article