ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Gut Microbiome Signatures Distinguish Susceptibility from Disease Development in Type 2 Diabetes.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Individuals may be prone or resistant to the development of type 2 diabetes. The basis for susceptibility is in part genetic, but environmental factors are likely to come into play. The gut microbiome stands at the interface of genetics and the host microenvironment. Its role in mediating susceptibility to diabetes, however, has not been resolved. Here we investigated whether the gut microbial composition contributes to susceptibility to diabetes, as distinct from disease development. We hypothesized that distinct microbial signatures modulate sensitivity or resistance to a diabetogenic diet (DD) and that separate signatures are linked to disease development. To test this hypothesis, we studied the Cohen diabetic rat model, comprising a diabetes-sensitive strain (CDs/y) and a diabetes-resistant strain (CDr/y). When exposed to DD, diabetes develops in CDs/y but not in CDr/y rats; on a regular diet (RD), both strains remain metabolically normal. To establish the contribution of the gut microbiome to susceptibility, we studied the fecal microbial composition in young, metabolically healthy CDs/y and CDr/y rats, using 16S rRNA gene sequencing, measures of α- and β-diversity, and differential taxonomic abundance. We found distinct, strain-specific gut microbiota profiles that differentiated diabetes-sensitive from -resistant animals, indicating an association between microbial composition and susceptibility. To test causality, we co-housed sensitive and resistant animals to allow passive microbial cross-transfer and fed the animals with DD. Co-housing led to partial convergence of microbial communities and significantly attenuated the diabetic phenotype in CDs/y rats, supporting a contributory and causal role for the gut microbiome in modulating sensitivity to diabetes. The resistance phenotype, on the other hand, remained unchanged. To distinguish between the contribution of the gut microbiome to susceptibility to diabetes as opposed to the development of the disease, we studied the gut microbial profiles across strains after feeding with DD or RD and the development of diabetes in CDs/y but not in CDr/y. We found distinct taxonomic signatures that differentiated diabetic from non-diabetic animals. These findings demonstrate that the gut microbiome contributes to susceptibility to diabetes with separate pathways from those linked to the development of diabetes and may represent an important modifiable determinant of diabetes risk and a target for early intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.