Gut microbiota-based vaccination engages innate immunity to improve blood glucose control in obese mice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Obesity and diabetes increase circulating levels of microbial components derived from the gut microbiota. Individual bacterial factors (i.e., postbiotics) can have opposing effects on metabolic inflammation and blood glucose control. We tested the net effect of gut bacterial extracts on blood glucose using a microbiota-based vaccination strategy in mice. Male and female mice had improved insulin sensitivity and blood glucose control five weeks after a single subcutaneous injection of a specific dose of a bacterial extract obtained from the luminal contents of the proximal gut. Injection of mice with proximal gut extracts from germ-free mice revealed that bacteria were required for a microbiota-based vaccination to improve blood glucose control. Vaccination of Nod1 −/− , Nod2 −/− , and Ripk2 −/− mice showed that each of these innate immune proteins was required for bacterial extract injection to improve blood glucose control. A microbiota-based vaccination promoted a proximal gut immunoglobulin-G (IgG) response directed against bacterial extract antigens, where subcutaneous injection of mice with the luminal contents of the ileum elicited a bacterial extract-specific IgG response that is compartmentalized to the ileum of vaccinated mice. A microbiota-based vaccination was associated with an altered the microbiota composition in the ileum and colon of mice. Lean mice required a single injection of proximal gut bacterial extracts, but high fat diet (HFD)-fed, obese mice required prime-boost bacterial extract injections for improvements in blood glucose control. These data show that, upon subversion of the gut barrier, vaccination with proximal gut bacterial extracts engages innate immunity to promote long-lasting improvements in blood glucose control in a dose-dependent manner.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".