Cargando…

Comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling

BACKGROUND: Studies of the gut microbiome are becoming increasingly important. Such studies require stool collections that can be processed or frozen in a timely manner so as not to alter the microbial content. Due to the logistical difficulties of home-based stool collection, there has been a chall...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Short, Meghan I., Hudson, Robert, Besasie, Benjamin D., Reveles, Kelly R., Shah, Dimpy P., Nicholson, Susannah, Johnson-Pais, Teresa L., Weldon, Korri, Lai, Zhao, Leach, Robin J., Fongang, Bernard, Liss, Michael A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7809826/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33446094
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-020-02080-3
_version_ 1783637194122985472
author Short, Meghan I.
Hudson, Robert
Besasie, Benjamin D.
Reveles, Kelly R.
Shah, Dimpy P.
Nicholson, Susannah
Johnson-Pais, Teresa L.
Weldon, Korri
Lai, Zhao
Leach, Robin J.
Fongang, Bernard
Liss, Michael A.
author_facet Short, Meghan I.
Hudson, Robert
Besasie, Benjamin D.
Reveles, Kelly R.
Shah, Dimpy P.
Nicholson, Susannah
Johnson-Pais, Teresa L.
Weldon, Korri
Lai, Zhao
Leach, Robin J.
Fongang, Bernard
Liss, Michael A.
author_sort Short, Meghan I.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Studies of the gut microbiome are becoming increasingly important. Such studies require stool collections that can be processed or frozen in a timely manner so as not to alter the microbial content. Due to the logistical difficulties of home-based stool collection, there has been a challenge in selecting the appropriate sample collection technique and comparing results from different microbiome studies. Thus, we compared stool collection and two alternative clinic-based fecal microbiome collection techniques, including a newer glove-based collection method. RESULTS: We prospectively enrolled 22 adult men from our prostate cancer screening cohort SABOR (San Antonio Biomarkers of Risk for prostate cancer) in San Antonio, TX, from 8/2018 to 4/2019. A rectal swab and glove tip sample were collected from each participant during a one-time visit to our clinics. A single stool sample was collected at the participant’s home. DNA was isolated from the fecal material and 16 s rRNA sequencing of the V1-V2 and V3-V4 regions was performed. We found the gut microbiome to be similar in richness and evenness, noting no differences in alpha diversity among the collection methods. The stool collection method, which remains the gold-standard method for the gut microbiome, proved to have different community composition compared to swab and glove tip techniques (p< 0.001) as measured by Bray-Curtis and unifrac distances. There were no significant differences in between the swab and glove tip samples with regard to beta diversity (p> 0.05). Despite differences between home-based stool and office-based fecal collection methods, we noted that the distance metrics for the three methods cluster by participant indicating within-person similarities. Additionally, no taxa differed among the methods in a Linear Discriminant Analysis Effect Size (LEfSe) analysis comparing all-against-all sampling methods. CONCLUSION: The glove tip method provides similar gut microbiome results as rectal swab and stool microbiome collection techniques. The addition of a new office-based collection technique could help easy and practical implementation of gut microbiome research studies and clinical practice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12866-020-02080-3.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7809826
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78098262021-01-18 Comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling Short, Meghan I. Hudson, Robert Besasie, Benjamin D. Reveles, Kelly R. Shah, Dimpy P. Nicholson, Susannah Johnson-Pais, Teresa L. Weldon, Korri Lai, Zhao Leach, Robin J. Fongang, Bernard Liss, Michael A. BMC Microbiol Research Article BACKGROUND: Studies of the gut microbiome are becoming increasingly important. Such studies require stool collections that can be processed or frozen in a timely manner so as not to alter the microbial content. Due to the logistical difficulties of home-based stool collection, there has been a challenge in selecting the appropriate sample collection technique and comparing results from different microbiome studies. Thus, we compared stool collection and two alternative clinic-based fecal microbiome collection techniques, including a newer glove-based collection method. RESULTS: We prospectively enrolled 22 adult men from our prostate cancer screening cohort SABOR (San Antonio Biomarkers of Risk for prostate cancer) in San Antonio, TX, from 8/2018 to 4/2019. A rectal swab and glove tip sample were collected from each participant during a one-time visit to our clinics. A single stool sample was collected at the participant’s home. DNA was isolated from the fecal material and 16 s rRNA sequencing of the V1-V2 and V3-V4 regions was performed. We found the gut microbiome to be similar in richness and evenness, noting no differences in alpha diversity among the collection methods. The stool collection method, which remains the gold-standard method for the gut microbiome, proved to have different community composition compared to swab and glove tip techniques (p< 0.001) as measured by Bray-Curtis and unifrac distances. There were no significant differences in between the swab and glove tip samples with regard to beta diversity (p> 0.05). Despite differences between home-based stool and office-based fecal collection methods, we noted that the distance metrics for the three methods cluster by participant indicating within-person similarities. Additionally, no taxa differed among the methods in a Linear Discriminant Analysis Effect Size (LEfSe) analysis comparing all-against-all sampling methods. CONCLUSION: The glove tip method provides similar gut microbiome results as rectal swab and stool microbiome collection techniques. The addition of a new office-based collection technique could help easy and practical implementation of gut microbiome research studies and clinical practice. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12866-020-02080-3. BioMed Central 2021-01-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7809826/ /pubmed/33446094 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-020-02080-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research Article
Short, Meghan I.
Hudson, Robert
Besasie, Benjamin D.
Reveles, Kelly R.
Shah, Dimpy P.
Nicholson, Susannah
Johnson-Pais, Teresa L.
Weldon, Korri
Lai, Zhao
Leach, Robin J.
Fongang, Bernard
Liss, Michael A.
Comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling
title Comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling
title_full Comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling
title_fullStr Comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling
title_short Comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling
title_sort comparison of rectal swab, glove tip, and participant-collected stool techniques for gut microbiome sampling
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7809826/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33446094
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12866-020-02080-3
work_keys_str_mv AT shortmeghani comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT hudsonrobert comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT besasiebenjamind comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT reveleskellyr comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT shahdimpyp comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT nicholsonsusannah comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT johnsonpaisteresal comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT weldonkorri comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT laizhao comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT leachrobinj comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT fongangbernard comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling
AT lissmichaela comparisonofrectalswabglovetipandparticipantcollectedstooltechniquesforgutmicrobiomesampling