Parkinson's disease-associated alterations of the gut microbiome predict disease-relevant changes in metabolic functions.

BACKGROUND: Parkinson's disease (PD) is a systemic disease clinically defined by the degeneration of dopaminergic neurons in the brain. While alterations in the gut microbiome composition have been reported in PD, their functional consequences remain unclear. Herein, we addressed this question by an analysis of stool samples from the Luxembourg Parkinson's Study (n = 147 typical PD cases, n = 162 controls). RESULTS: All individuals underwent detailed clinical assessment, including neurological examinations and neuropsychological tests followed by self-reporting questionnaires. Stool samples from these individuals were first analysed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Second, we predicted the potential secretion for 129 microbial metabolites through personalised metabolic modelling using the microbiome data and genome-scale metabolic reconstructions of human gut microbes. Our key results include the following. Eight genera and seven species changed significantly in their relative abundances between PD patients and healthy controls. PD-associated microbial patterns statistically depended on sex, age, BMI, and constipation. Particularly, the relative abundances of Bilophila and Paraprevotella were significantly associated with the Hoehn and Yahr staging after controlling for the disease duration. Furthermore, personalised metabolic modelling of the gut microbiomes revealed PD-associated metabolic patterns in the predicted secretion potential of nine microbial metabolites in PD, including increased methionine and cysteinylglycine. The predicted microbial pantothenic acid production potential was linked to the presence of specific non-motor symptoms. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that PD-associated alterations of the gut microbiome can translate into substantial functional differences affecting host metabolism and disease phenotype.

Variability and bias in microbiome metagenomic sequencing: an interlaboratory study comparing experimental protocols.

Several studies have documented the significant impact of methodological choices in microbiome analyses. The myriad of methodological options available complicate the replication of results and generally limit the comparability of findings between independent studies that use differing techniques and measurement pipelines. Here we describe the Mosaic Standards Challenge (MSC), an international interlaboratory study designed to assess the impact of methodological variables on the results. The MSC did not prescribe methods but rather asked participating labs to analyze 7 shared reference samples (5 × human stool samples and 2 × mock communities) using their standard laboratory methods. To capture the array of methodological variables, each participating lab completed a metadata reporting sheet that included 100 different questions regarding the details of their protocol. The goal of this study was to survey the methodological landscape for microbiome metagenomic sequencing (MGS) analyses and the impact of methodological decisions on metagenomic sequencing results. A total of 44 labs participated in the MSC by submitting results (16S or WGS) along with accompanying metadata; thirty 16S rRNA gene amplicon datasets and 14 WGS datasets were collected. The inclusion of two types of reference materials (human stool and mock communities) enabled analysis of both MGS measurement variability between different protocols using the biologically-relevant stool samples, and MGS bias with respect to ground truth values using the DNA mixtures. Owing to the compositional nature of MGS measurements, analyses were conducted on the ratio of Firmicutes: Bacteroidetes allowing us to directly apply common statistical methods. The resulting analysis demonstrated that protocol choices have significant effects, including both bias of the MGS measurement associated with a particular methodological choices, as well as effects on measurement robustness as observed through the spread of results between labs making similar methodological choices. In the analysis of the DNA mock communities, MGS measurement bias was observed even when there was general consensus among the participating laboratories. This study was the result of a collaborative effort that included academic, commercial, and government labs. In addition to highlighting the impact of different methodological decisions on MGS result comparability, this work also provides insights for consideration in future microbiome measurement study design.