Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39050003›Full record

ArticleTurkish journal of medical sciences2024

Is gut microbiota of patients with ALS different from that of healthy individuals?

Zerin Özaydin Aksun, Seyda Erdoğan, Ayşe Kalkanci, Elif Ayça Şahin, Tuğba Çuhadar, H Özden Şener

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Defining reference values for the gut microbiota in a Southern European population.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Gut microbiota immune cross-talk in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Zerin Özaydin AksunDepartment of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1154-4276
Seyda ErdoğanDepartment of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2759-9562
Ayşe KalkanciDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0961-7325
Elif Ayça ŞahinDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0961-7325
Tuğba ÇuhadarDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6760-340X
H Özden ŞenerDepartment of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Ankara University, Ankara, Turkiye.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6825-6983

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background/aim: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal neurodegenerative disease. Several studies have shown that alterations of microbiota increase the risk of neurodegenerative disorders. We aimed to reveal whether there is a difference in the gut microbiota of patients with ALS. Materials and methods: The participants are divided into three groups. Group 1 comprised patients with ALS. Healthy family members living in the same house of the patients formed Group 2. Lastly, sex- and age-matched healthy people were included in Group 3. Fecal samples were collected in 15-mL falcon tubes and stored at -80 °C. Genomic DNA isolation was performed on samples. Bacterial primers selected from the 16S rRNA region for the bacterial genome and ITS1 and ITS4 (internal transcribed spacer) were used for the identification of DNA. Next generation sequence analysis (NGS) and taxonomic analyses were performed at the level of bacterial phylum, class, order, family, genus, and species. Alpha and beta diversity indexes were used. The linear discriminant analysis (LDA) effect size method (LEfSe) was applied to identify a microbial taxon specific to ALS disease. Results: The relative abundances of the Succinivibrionaceae and Lachnospiraceae families were significantly lower in patients. The dominant families among patients were Streptococcaceae and Ruminococcaceae, while the dominant families among healthy controls were Bacteroidaceae and Succinivibrionaceae. The LEfSe analysis revealed that four families (Atopobiaceae, Actinomycetaceae, Erysipelatoclostridiaceae, Peptococcacceae) differed significantly between the patients and healthy controls (LDA values> 2.5, p < 0.05). Conclusion: Comparison with family members living in the same house is the strength of this study. We found that there were changes in the microbiota of the patients, consistent with the literature. Studies that analyze the composition of the gut microbiota in the predisease period may be needed to understand whether dysbiosis is caused by the mechanisms inherent in the disease or whether it is dysbiosis that initiates the disease.

Indexed as

Amyotrophic Lateral SclerosisGastrointestinal MicrobiomeAdultAgedCase-Control StudiesFecesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 16SALSAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisgut microbiotaneurodegenerative diseasespathogenesis of ALS

Identifiers

PMID39050003
PMCPMC11265842

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.