Engraftment and Augmentation of Microbiome Following Fecal Microbiota Transplantation for Recurrent Clostridium difficile Infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Recurrent Clostridum diffcile infection (rCDI) poses major challenges to healthcare providers and patients. Fecal Microbiota Transplantation (FMT) is an effective therapy for rCDI, but the exact mechanism of its efficacy is unknown. Current metagenomics literature indicates that abundance of Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes may protect against CD proliferation and recurrence. However, this is too broad to be useful for developing refined and targeted microbial-specific therapy for rCDI, because the long-term safety of FMT remains unknown. We examined the phylogeny of bacteria pre- and post- FMT to determine the key organisms associated with successful FMT to the genera level. Methods A subset of patient stool samples (n = 35) from a phase 2 study comparing fresh vs. frozen FMT for rCDI was sequenced at four time points: pre-FMT; at day 10; at week 5; and at week 13, following the last FMT. The matching donor stool was sequenced simultaneously with the corresponding patients’ pre- and post-FMT samples. Using the binary outcome to a single FMT as the response, we have developed an in-house machine learning algorithm, Φ-LASSO, to isolate key genera using the bacterial phylogenetic structure. Engraftment was defined as: newly detected operational taxonomic unit (OTUs) in the patient post-FMT, which were present in the donor but undetected in the patient pre-FMT. Augmentation was defined as: non-donor OTUs whose levels substantially increased post-FMT. Figure 1 (below) displays the distribution of engrafted and augmented OTUs at varying thresholds. We observed increases over time points within each threshold level. Results Akkermansia, Blautia and Roseburiaappear to be key genera for successful FMT. The Φ-LASSO fits with consistently positive coefficients, see Figure 2. Conclusion In this preliminary study, using Φ-LASSO, we have shown that specific microbes to the genera level are uniformly present in successful FMT. This information may lead to developing refined and targeted microbial-therapy for rCDI. Figure 1 Observed (a) engraftment of distinct donor OTUs on patients and (b) augmentation of distinct OTUs in patients for day 10 (D10), week 5 (W5), and week 13 (W13) post-treatment. Figure 2 Fitted coefficients for donor OTUs selected by Φ-LASSO. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".