Dietary Emulsifier Exposure in People With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Compared With Healthy Controls: Is There a Cause for Concern?

BACKGROUND: Emulsifiers are implicated in the pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Few studies have examined emulsifier intake in people with existing IBD. We aimed to describe the frequency of exposure to 6 selected emulsifiers in a contemporary cohort of people with IBD and compare intake with healthy controls (HCs). METHODS: Baseline food records from participants in an Australian prospective cohort study examining the microbiome of IBD patients and HCs were analyzed. Exposure to inflammatory emulsifiers polysorbate-80 (P80); carboxymethylcellulose (CMC); carrageenan; xanthan gum (XG); lecithin (soy and sunflower) and mono- and diglycerides of fatty acids (MDGs) were determined by examining ingredient lists. Frequency of emulsifier exposure between groups (IBD vs HC, Crohn's disease [CD] vs ulcerative colitis [UC], IBD children vs adults, active disease vs remission) was examined after controlling for confounders. RESULTS: Records from 367 participants were analyzed (n = 176 IBD, of which there were 101 CD, 75 UC, and 191 HC patients). In total, 5022 unique food items were examined, with 18% containing 1 or more emulsifier of interest. Inflammatory bowel disease participants had significantly higher total daily emulsifier exposure compared with HCs (2.7 ±â€…1.8 vs 2.3 ±â€…1.6, P = .02). In IBD participants, emulsifiers with the highest daily exposure were MDGs (1.2 ±â€…0.93), lecithin (0.85 ±â€…0.93), and XG (0.38 ±â€…0.42). There were no recorded exposures to P80. CONCLUSIONS: Inflammatory bowel disease participants were exposed to more emulsifiers than HCs. Intake of inflammatory emulsifiers were low or nonexistent, suggesting their presence in the food supply are not as common as frequently stated.

The Interplay Between Use of Biological Therapies, Psychological State, and the Microbiome in IBD.

Background: This study examines longitudinal bio-psychological dynamics and their interplay in IBD patients undergoing conventional and biological therapies. Methods: Fifty IBD participants (24 UC, 26 CD) in clinical remission were followed for 12 months. Complete longitudinal datasets, biological samples, validated scores of psychological status were collected monthly for analysis of association. Microbiome analysis was performed to identify microbial dynamics and signatures. Patients were grouped on disease phenotype (CD, UC) and mode of treatment (biological therapies, non-biological treatment). General linear models, mixed models, cluster analysis, and analyses of variance were used to examine the longitudinal trends of the variables and their associations over time. Results were corrected for multiple testing. Results: Results substantiated different interactions between biological therapy and longitudinal trends of inflammatory biomarkers in remission CD and UC patients as well as significant differences between CD and UC patients in their psychological measures during clinical remission, with UC patients having inferior condition compared to CD. A significant reduction in microbial diversity in CD patients compared to UC was identified. Results characterized considerable differences in longitudinal microbial profile between those taking and not taking biological treatment in UC patients, but not in CD patients. Conclusion: A different trajectory of interdependence was identified between psychological state, sleep, and microbial dynamics with mode of treatment when compared between CD and UC patients. Further studies should investigate the causal relationships between bio-psychological factors for improved treatment purposes.