Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40588570›Full record

ArticleMolecular systems biology2025

Impact of drugs and environmental contaminants on amine production by gut bacteria.

Stephan Kamrad, Tara F Davis, Kiran R Patil

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular systems biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

3 authors.

Stephan KamradThe Medical Research Council Toxicology Unit and Department of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5957-4661
Tara F DavisThe Medical Research Council Toxicology Unit and Department of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Kiran R PatilThe Medical Research Council Toxicology Unit and Department of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. kp533@cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6166-8640

Funding

EC | ERC | HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council (ERC) 866028UKRI | Medical Research Council (MRC) MC_UU_00025/11
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Xenobiotics like drugs are recognised as key influencers of gut bacterial growth. Yet, their impact on the production of metabolites involved in microbiota-host interactions is largely unknown. Here, we report the impact of commonly ingested xenobiotics-therapeutic drugs, pesticides, industrial chemicals, and sweeteners-on gut bacterial amine metabolism. We tested >13,000 interactions between >1700 compounds and 4 amine-producing bacteria, uncovering 747 xenobiotic-species-metabolite interactions involving 275 compounds. These compounds span all tested classes, with the majority being antimicrobial drugs. In 66% of the cases, amine production was correlated with growth, while the rest showed xenobiotic-induced decoupling between growth and metabolite production. The latter includes transient bursts in polyamine production by Escherichia coli in response to β-lactam antibiotics, and overproduction of aromatic amines by Ruminococcus gnavus treated with 15 diverse chemicals. Xenobiotics thus can disrupt metabolic homeostasis in both growth-dependent and -independent manner. We also find that metabolic responses have non-monotonic dose-dependency, resulting in lower doses sometimes having stronger effects. Our results bring forward the potential of common xenobiotics to disrupt the amine metabolism of gut bacteria.

Indexed as

AminesBacteriaEnvironmental PollutantsGastrointestinal MicrobiomeXenobioticsEscherichia coliAminesEnvironmental PollutantsXenobioticsMicrobiomePesticidesPolyaminesStress ResponseXenobiotics

Identifiers

PMID40588570
PMCPMC12494721

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.