5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Ursodeoxycholic acid enriches intestinal bile salt hydrolase-expressing Bacteroidetes in cholestatic pregnancy

      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

          Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) treatment can reduce itch and lower endogenous serum bile acids in intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy (ICP). We sought to determine how it could influence the gut environment in ICP to alter enterohepatic signalling. The gut microbiota and bile acid content were determined in faeces from 35 pregnant women (14 with uncomplicated pregnancies and 21 with ICP, 17 receiving UDCA). Faecal bile salt hydrolase activity was measured using a precipitation assay. Serum fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19) and 7α-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one (C4) concentrations were measured following a standardised diet for 21 hours. Women with a high ratio of Bacteroidetes to Firmicutes were more likely to be treated with UDCA (Fisher’s exact test p = 0.0178) than those with a lower ratio. Bile salt hydrolase activity was reduced in women with low Bacteroidetes: Firmicutes. Women taking UDCA had higher faecal lithocholic acid (p < 0.0001), with more unconjugated bile acids than women with untreated ICP or uncomplicated pregnancy. UDCA-treatment increased serum FGF19, and reduced C4 (reflecting lower bile acid synthesis). During ICP, UDCA treatment can be associated with enrichment of the gut microbiota with Bacteroidetes. These demonstrate high bile salt hydrolase activity, which deconjugates bile acids enabling secondary modification to FXR agonists, enhancing enterohepatic feedback via FGF19.

          Related collections

          Most cited references27

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Intestine-selective farnesoid X receptor inhibition improves obesity-related metabolic dysfunction

          The farnesoid X receptor (FXR) regulates bile acid, lipid and glucose metabolism. Here we show that treatment of mice with glycine-β-muricholic acid (Gly-MCA) inhibits FXR signalling exclusively in intestine, and improves metabolic parameters in mouse models of obesity. Gly-MCA is a selective high-affinity FXR inhibitor that can be administered orally and prevents, or reverses, high-fat diet-induced and genetic obesity, insulin resistance and hepatic steatosis in mice. The high-affinity FXR agonist GW4064 blocks Gly-MCA action in the gut, and intestine-specific Fxr-null mice are unresponsive to the beneficial effects of Gly-MCA. Mechanistically, the metabolic improvements with Gly-MCA depend on reduced biosynthesis of intestinal-derived ceramides, which directly compromise beige fat thermogenic function. Consequently, ceramide treatment reverses the action of Gly-MCA in high-fat diet-induced obese mice. We further show that FXR signalling in ileum biopsies of humans positively correlates with body mass index. These data suggest that Gly-MCA may be a candidate for the treatment of metabolic disorders.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found
            Is Open Access

            New paradigms in the treatment of hepatic cholestasis: from UDCA to FXR, PXR and beyond.

            Cholestasis is an impairment of bile formation/flow at the level of the hepatocyte and/or cholangiocyte. The first, and for the moment, most established medical treatment is the natural bile acid (BA) ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA). This secretagogue improves, e.g. in intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy or early stage primary biliary cirrhosis, impaired hepatocellular and cholangiocellular bile formation mainly by complex post-transcriptional mechanisms. The limited efficacy of UDCA in various cholestatic conditions urges for development of novel therapeutic approaches. These include nuclear and membrane receptor agonists and BA derivatives. The nuclear receptors farnesoid X receptor (FXR), retinoid X receptor (RXR), peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPARα), and pregnane X receptor (PXR) are transcriptional modifiers of bile formation and at present are under investigation as promising targets for therapeutic interventions in cholestatic disorders. The membrane receptors fibroblast growth factor receptor 4 (FGFR4) and apical sodium BA transporter (ASBT) deserve attention as additional therapeutic targets, as does the potential therapeutic agent norUDCA, a 23-C homologue of UDCA. Here, we provide an overview on established and future promising therapeutic agents and their potential molecular mechanisms and sites of action in cholestatic diseases.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Association of adverse perinatal outcomes of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy with biochemical markers: results of aggregate and individual patient data meta-analyses

              Summary Background Intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes, but the association with the concentration of specific biochemical markers is unclear. We aimed to quantify the adverse perinatal effects of intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy in women with increased serum bile acid concentrations and determine whether elevated bile acid concentrations were associated with the risk of stillbirth and preterm birth. Methods We did a systematic review by searching PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases for studies published from database inception to June 1, 2018, reporting perinatal outcomes for women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy when serum bile acid concentrations were available. Inclusion criteria were studies defining intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy based upon pruritus and elevated serum bile acid concentrations, with or without raised liver aminotransferase concentrations. Eligible studies were case-control, cohort, and population-based studies, and randomised controlled trials, with at least 30 participants, and that reported bile acid concentrations and perinatal outcomes. Studies at potential higher risk of reporter bias were excluded, including case reports, studies not comprising cohorts, or successive cases seen in a unit; we also excluded studies with high risk of bias from groups selected (eg, a subgroup of babies with poor outcomes were explicitly excluded), conference abstracts, and Letters to the Editor without clear peer review. We also included unpublished data from two UK hospitals. We did a random effects meta-analysis to determine risk of adverse perinatal outcomes. Aggregate data for maternal and perinatal outcomes were extracted from case-control studies, and individual patient data (IPD) were requested from study authors for all types of study (as no control group was required for the IPD analysis) to assess associations between biochemical markers and adverse outcomes using logistic and stepwise logistic regression. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42017069134. Findings We assessed 109 full-text articles, of which 23 studies were eligible for the aggregate data meta-analysis (5557 intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy cases and 165 136 controls), and 27 provided IPD (5269 intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy cases). Stillbirth occurred in 45 (0·83%) of 4936 intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy cases and 519 (0·32%) of 163 947 control pregnancies (odds ratio [OR] 1·46 [95% CI 0·73–2·89]; I 2=59·8%). In singleton pregnancies, stillbirth was associated with maximum total bile acid concentration (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [ROC AUC]) 0·83 [95% CI 0·74–0·92]), but not alanine aminotransferase (ROC AUC 0·46 [0·35–0·57]). For singleton pregnancies, the prevalence of stillbirth was three (0·13%; 95% CI 0·02–0·38) of 2310 intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy cases in women with serum total bile acids of less than 40 μmol/L versus four (0·28%; 0·08–0·72) of 1412 cases with total bile acids of 40–99 μmol/L (hazard ratio [HR] 2·35 [95% CI 0·52–10·50]; p=0·26), and versus 18 (3·44%; 2·05–5·37) of 524 cases for bile acids of 100 μmol/L or more (HR 30·50 [8·83–105·30]; p<0·0001). Interpretation The risk of stillbirth is increased in women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy and singleton pregnancies when serum bile acids concentrations are of 100 μmol/L or more. Because most women with intrahepatic cholestasis of pregnancy have bile acids below this concentration, they can probably be reassured that the risk of stillbirth is similar to that of pregnant women in the general population, provided repeat bile acid testing is done until delivery. Funding Tommy's, ICP Support, UK National Institute of Health Research, Wellcome Trust, and Genesis Research Trust.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                j.marchesi@imperial.ac.uk
                Catherine.williamson@kcl.ac.uk
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                3 March 2020
                3 March 2020
                2020
                : 10
                : 3895
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2322 6764, GRID grid.13097.3c, Maternal and Fetal Disease Group, Department of Women and Children’s Health, , King’s College London, ; London, SE1 1UL UK
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2113 8111, GRID grid.7445.2, Section of Biomolecular Medicine, Division of Computational & Systems Medicine, Department of Surgery & Cancer, Faculty of Medicine, , Imperial College London, ; London, SW7 2AZ UK
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2113 8111, GRID grid.7445.2, Centre for Clinical Microbiome Research and The Division of Integrative Systems Medicine and Digestive Disease, Department of Surgery and Cancer, , Imperial College London, ; London, W2 1NY UK
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0000 9919 9582, GRID grid.8761.8, Sahlgrenska Academy, Institute of Medicine, Department of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, , University of Gothenburg, ; Gothenburg, 41345 Sweden
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2322 6764, GRID grid.13097.3c, Diabetes Research Group, School of Life Course Sciences, King’s College London, ; London, SE1 1UL UK
                [6 ]ISNI 0000 0001 2113 8111, GRID grid.7445.2, Division of Digestive Diseases, Hammersmith Hospital, Imperial College London, ; London, W12 0HS UK
                [7 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0807 5670, GRID grid.5600.3, Cardiff School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, ; Cardiff, CF10 3XQ UK
                Article
                60821
                10.1038/s41598-020-60821-w
                7054423
                32127609
                f09c44f5-054d-4617-a42c-c3facb54ab44
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 24 October 2019
                : 10 January 2020
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Uncategorized
                microbiome,endocrine reproductive disorders
                Uncategorized
                microbiome, endocrine reproductive disorders

                Comments

                Comment on this article