FODMAPs alter symptoms and the metabolome of patients with IBS: a randomised controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To gain mechanistic insights, we compared effects of low fermentable oligosaccharides, disaccharides and monosaccharides and polyols (FODMAP) and high FODMAP diets on symptoms, the metabolome and the microbiome of patients with IBS. DESIGN: We performed a controlled, single blind study of patients with IBS (Rome III criteria) randomised to a low (n=20) or high (n=20) FODMAP diet for 3 weeks. Symptoms were assessed using the IBS symptom severity scoring (IBS-SSS). The metabolome was evaluated using the lactulose breath test (LBT) and metabolic profiling in urine using mass spectrometry. Stool microbiota composition was analysed by 16S rRNA gene profiling. RESULTS: production in the low FODMAP compared with the high FODMAP group. Metabolic profiling of urine showed groups of patients with IBS differed significantly after the diet (p<0.01), with three metabolites (histamine, p-hydroxybenzoic acid, azelaic acid) being primarily responsible for discrimination between the two groups. Histamine, a measure of immune activation, was reduced eightfold in the low FODMAP group (p<0.05). Low FODMAP diet increased Actinobacteria richness and diversity, and high FODMAP diet decreased the relative abundance of bacteria involved in gas consumption. CONCLUSIONS: IBS symptoms are linked to FODMAP content and associated with alterations in the metabolome. In subsets of patients, FODMAPs modulate histamine levels and the microbiota, both of which could alter symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01829932.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".