MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3134550833 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwab002.015

A16 FIBER SUPPLEMENTATION DIFFERENTIALLY MODULATES RESPONSES TO FECAL MICROBIAL TRANSPLANTATION IN PATIENTS WITH METABOLIC SYNDROME AND SEVERE OBESITY: A RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED PILOT TRIAL

2021· article· en· W3134550833 on OpenAlexaffabout
Valentin Mocanu, Zhengxiao Zhang, Edward C. Deehan, Kapila Samarasinghe, Naomi Hotte, Dina Kao, Shahzeer Karmali, Daniel W. Birch, Jens Walter, Karen Madsen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboRandomized controlled trialMetabolic syndromeInsulin resistanceInternal medicineGastroenterologyTransplantationObesitySurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Fecal microbial transplantation (FMT) from lean donors to obese patients with metabolic syndrome (MS) has been associated with promising yet short-term metabolic improvements. The concept of using dietary or fiber supplementation to enhance effects induced by FMT has been much discussed in the literature, but to date no human trials have examined this concept. Aims The aim of this study was to determine if fiber supplementation following FMT was able to enhance or sustain FMT-mediated metabolic benefits. Methods We performed a 12-wk double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial in patients with severe obesity and MS recruited from Edmonton’s Bariatric Clinic from 2018 to 2019. Patients were stratified by sex and block randomized 1:1:1:1 amongst one of four groups: (1) Placebo FMT and a non-fermentable fiber (NF) (2) Placebo FMT and fermentable fiber (FF); (3) FMT and non-fermentable fiber (FMT-NF); and (4) FMT and fermentable fiber (FMT-FF). Patients received a single dose of FMT (50g donor stool) with 20 oral capsules followed by a 6-wk period of daily fiber. The primary outcome was evaluating mean differences (MD) in insulin sensitivity from baseline to 6-wks using the homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA2-IR). Results Sixty-eight patients were randomized with 61 completing the primary outcome (NF = 17; FF = 15; FMT-NF = 14; FMT-FF = 15) and evaluated using a modified intent-to-treat analysis. Baseline characteristics were similar with a mean BMI 45 ± 7 kg/m2, a female predominance (83.6%), and a HOMA2-IR of 3.43 ± 2.2. There were no baseline differences in clinical characteristics, metabolic parameters, medications, or dietary intake. FMT-NF had improvements in HOMA2-IR (MD -24.0% ± 12.0%; p=0.02), insulin sensitivity (MD 27.6% ± 12.3%; p=0.02), and insulinemia (MD -25.4% ± 12.3%; p=0.02) from baseline to 6-wks (Figure 1). These benefits were associated with increased microbial richness and improvements in GLP-1 metabolism. Linear mixed model regression revealed that select bacterial taxa including Phascolarctobacterium, Ruminococcaeceae, and B. stercoris correlated with increased insulin sensitivity. Findings occurred in the absence of changes in anthropometric parameters, dietary intake, medication regimen and were not observed in groups receiving fermentable fiber or in any group following cessation of fiber. Conclusions This proof-of-concept trial provides evidence that a single FMT dose combined with daily non-fermentable fiber supplementation can successfully improve insulin resistance in patients with metabolic syndrome and severe obesity on optimized medical therapy. Funding Agencies W. Garfield Weston Foundation

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology→Same topicGut microbiota and health→French-language works237,207→