SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Gut microbiota dysbiosis in Parkinson disease: A systematic review and pooled analysis.

Eur J Neurol · 2023-01-18

DOI: 10.1111/ene.15671PMID: 36593694

Check source for accessReview; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Background and purposeThe role of the gut microbiome in the pathogenesis of Parkinson disease (PD) is under intense investigation, and the results presented are still very heterogeneous. These discrepancies arise not only from the highly heterogeneous pathology of PD, but also from widely varying methodologies at all stages of the workflow, from sampling to final statistical analysis. The aim of the present work is to harmonize the workflow across studies to reduce the methodological heterogeneity and to perform a pooled analysis to account for other sources of heterogeneity.MethodsWe performed a systematic review to identify studies comparing the gut microbiota of PD patients to healthy controls. A workflow was designed to harmonize processing across all studies from bioinformatics processing to final statistical analysis using a Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis based on individual patient-level data.ResultsThe results show that harmonizing workflows minimizes differences between statistical methods and reveals only a small set of taxa being associated with the pathogenesis of PD. Increased shares of the genera Akkermansia and Bifidobacterium and decreased shares of the genera Roseburia and Faecalibacterium were most characteristic for PD-associated microbiota.ConclusionsOur study summarizes evidence that reduced levels of butyrate-producing taxa in combination with possible degradation of the mucus layer by Akkermansia may promote intestinal inflammation and reduced permeability of the gut mucosal layer. This may allow potentially pathogenic metabolites to transit and enter the enteric nervous system.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.