Antibiotics damage the colonic mucus barrier in a microbiota-independent manner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Antibiotic use is a risk factor for development of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs). IBDs are characterized by a damaged mucus layer, which does not properly separate the host intestinal epithelium from the microbiota. Here, we hypothesized that antibiotics might affect the integrity of the mucus barrier. By systematically determining the effects of different antibiotics on mucus layer penetrability we found that oral antibiotic treatment led to breakdown of the mucus barrier and penetration of bacteria into the mucus layer. Using fecal microbiota transplant, RNA sequencing followed by machine learning and ex vivo mucus secretion measurements, we determined that antibiotic treatment induces ER stress in the colonic tissue which inhibits colonic mucus secretion in a microbiota-independent manner. This mucus secretion flaw led to penetration of bacteria into the colonic mucus layer, translocation of microbial antigens into circulation and exacerbation of ulcerations in a mouse model of IBD. Thus, antibiotic use might predispose to development of intestinal inflammation by impeding mucus production.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".