Intervertebral disc microbiome in Modic changes: Lack of result replication underscores the need for a consensus in low‐biomass microbiome analysis

Author:

Mengis Tamara12ORCID,Zajac Natalia3,Bernhard Laura12,Heggli Irina12ORCID,Herger Nick12,Devan Jan12,Marcus Roy4,Brunner Florian2,Laux Christoph5,Farshad Mazda5,Distler Oliver12,Dudli Stefan12

Affiliation:

1. Center of Experimental Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology University Hospital, University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland

2. Department of Physical Medicine and Rheumatology, Balgrist University Hospital University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland

3. Functional Genomics Center Zurich University and ETH Zurich Zurich Switzerland

4. Department of Radiology, Balgrist University Hospital University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland

5. Department of Orthopedics, Balgrist University Hospital University of Zurich Zurich Switzerland

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionThe emerging field of the disc microbiome challenges traditional views of disc sterility, which opens new avenues for novel clinical insights. However, the lack of methodological consensus in disc microbiome studies introduces discrepancies. The aims of this study were to (1) compare the disc microbiome of non‐Modic (nonMC), Modic type 1 change (MC1), and MC2 discs to findings from prior disc microbiome studies, and (2) investigate if discrepancies to prior studies can be explained with bioinformatic variations.MethodsSequencing of 16S rRNA in 70 discs (24 nonMC, 25 MC1, and 21 MC2) for microbiome profiling. The experimental setup included buffer contamination controls and was performed under aseptic conditions. Methodology and results were contrasted with previous disc microbiome studies. Critical bioinformatic steps that were different in our best‐practice approach and previous disc microbiome studies (taxonomic lineage assignment, prevalence cut‐off) were varied and their effect on results were compared.ResultsThere was limited overlap of results with a previous study on MC disc microbiome. No bacterial genera were shared using the same bioinformatic parameters. Taxonomic lineage assignment using “amplicon sequencing variants” was more sensitive and detected 48 genera compared to 22 with “operational taxonomic units” (previous study). Increasing filter cut‐off from 4% to 50% (previous study) reduced genera from 48 to 4 genera. Despite these differences, both studies observed dysbiosis with an increased abundance of gram‐negative bacteria in MC discs as well as a lower beta‐diversity. Cutibacterium was persistently detected in all groups independent of the bioinformatic approach, emphasizing its prevalence.ConclusionThere is dysbiosis in MC discs. Bioinformatic parameters impact results yet cannot explain the different findings from this and a previous study. Therefore, discrepancies are likely caused by different sample preparations or true biologic differences. Harmonized protocols are required to advance understanding of the disc microbiome and its clinical implications.

Funder

Foundation for Research in Rheumatology

Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3