ABSTRACT
Non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) are commonly integrated into human diet and presumed to be inert; however, animal studies suggest that they may impact the microbiome and downstream glycemic responses. We causally assessed NNS impacts in humans and their microbiomes in a randomized-controlled trial encompassing 120 healthy adults, administered saccharin, sucralose, aspartame, and stevia sachets for 2 weeks in doses lower than the acceptable daily intake, compared with controls receiving sachet-contained vehicle glucose or no supplement. As groups, each administered NNS distinctly altered stool and oral microbiome and plasma metabolome, whereas saccharin and sucralose significantly impaired glycemic responses. Importantly, gnotobiotic mice conventionalized with microbiomes from multiple top and bottom responders of each of the four NNS-supplemented groups featured glycemic responses largely reflecting those noted in respective human donors, which were preempted by distinct microbial signals, as exemplified by sucralose. Collectively, human NNS consumption may induce person-specific, microbiome-dependent glycemic alterations, necessitating future assessment of clinical implications.
Subject(s)
Microbiota , Non-Nutritive Sweeteners , Adult , Animals , Aspartame/pharmacology , Blood Glucose , Humans , Mice , Non-Nutritive Sweeteners/analysis , Non-Nutritive Sweeteners/pharmacology , Saccharin/pharmacologyABSTRACT
Consumption of over-the-counter probiotics for promotion of health and well-being has increased worldwide in recent years. However, although probiotic use has been greatly popularized among the general public, there are conflicting clinical results for many probiotic strains and formulations. Emerging insights from microbiome research enable an assessment of gut colonization by probiotics, strain-level activity, interactions with the indigenous microbiome, safety and impacts on the host, and allow the association of probiotics with physiological effects and potentially useful medical indications. In this Perspective, we highlight key advances, challenges and limitations in striving toward an unbiased interpretation of the large amount of data regarding over-the-counter probiotics, and propose avenues to improve the quality of evidence, transparency, public awareness and regulation of their use.
Subject(s)
Probiotics/adverse effects , Probiotics/therapeutic use , Animals , Clinical Trials as Topic , Clostridium Infections/therapy , Gastroenteritis/therapy , Gastrointestinal Microbiome , Host Microbial Interactions , Humans , Immunomodulation , Infant, Newborn , Irritable Bowel Syndrome/therapy , Neonatal Sepsis/therapy , Probiotics/standards , Respiratory Tract Infections/therapy , Safety , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
The development of innovative high-throughput genomics and metabolomics technologies has considerably expanded our understanding of the commensal microorganisms residing within the human body, collectively termed the microbiota. In recent years, the microbiota has been reported to have important roles in multiple aspects of human health, pathology and host-pathogen interactions. One function of commensals that has attracted particular interest is their role in protection against pathogens and pathobionts, a concept known as colonization resistance. However, pathogens are also able to sense and exploit the microbiota during infection. Therefore, obtaining a holistic understanding of colonization resistance mechanisms is essential for the development of microbiome-based and microbiome-targeting therapies for humans and animals. Achieving this is dependent on utilizing physiologically relevant animal models. In this Perspective, we discuss the colonization resistance functions of the gut microbiota and sieve through the advantages and limitations of murine models commonly used to study such mechanisms within the context of enteric bacterial infection.