Researchers at Karolinska Institutet in Sweden and the University of North Carolina in the USA have mapped out the cell types behind various brain disorders.
The findings are published in Nature Genetics and offer a roadmap for the development of new therapies to target neurological and psychiatric disorders.
One interesting finding was that cells from the gut’s nervous system are involved in Parkinson’s disease, indicating that the disease may start there.
The nervous system is composed of hundreds of different cell types with very different functions. It is vital to understand which cell types are affected in each disorder so as to understand the causes of the disorders and, ultimately, develop new treatments.
Researchers have now combined mice gene expression studies with human genetics to systematically map cell types underlying various brain disorders, including Parkinson’s disease, a neurodegenerative disorder with cognitive and motor symptoms resulting from the loss of dopamine-producing cells in a specific region of the brain.
“As expected, we found that dopaminergic neurons were associated with Parkinson’s disease. More surprisingly, we found that enteric neurons also seem to play an important role in the disorder, supporting the hypothesis that Parkinson’s disease starts in the gut,” says one of the study’s main authors Patrick Sullivan, Professor at the Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics at Karolinska Institutet and Yeargan Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina.
When the researchers analysed differences in brain tissue from healthy individuals and people with Parkinson’s disease at different stages of the disease, they made another unexpected discovery. A type of support cell in the brain called oligodendrocytes were found to be affected early on, suggesting that they play a key role in the early stages of the disease.
“The fact that the animal studies pointed us to oligodendrocytes and that we were then able to show that these cells were also affected in patients suggests that the results may have clinical implications,” says Jens Hjerling-Leffler, research group leader at the Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics at Karolinska Institutet and the other main author of the study.
The oligodendrocytes appear to be affected even before the loss of dopaminergic neurons.
“This makes them an attractive target for therapeutic interventions in Parkinson’s disease,” says Julien Bryois, researcher at the Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics at Karolinska Institutet and one of the first authors of the study.
The study was financed by the Swedish Research Council, StratNeuro, the Wellcome Trust, the Swedish Brain Foundation, the Swiss National Science Foundation, the US National Institute of Mental Health, and the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium.
Patrick Sullivan reports that he is currently a member of the pharmaceutical company Lundbeck’s advisory committee and that he has received grants from them. For the past three years he has been a member of Pfizer’s scientific advisory board and received fees from Element Genomics and Roche.
Co-author Cynthia Bulik has received grants from Shire and is a member of their scientific advisory board. She is also an author and recipient of royalties from both Pearson and Walker.
The Gut-Brain Axis and Parkinson’s Disease
The gut-brain axis is mediated by intense bidirectional communication between the CNS and the ENS (63). Through the ENS, the gut microbiota influences the development and function of all divisions of the nervous system (64) and this association was established very early during the evolution of multicellular organisms.
The first nervous system appeared more than 500 million years ago before the divergence of cnidarians and bilaterians, the two metazoan sister groups (65). That primitive brain had a simple structure, organized as a diffuse nerve net which controlled a restricted set of basic behaviors and was the template for the subsequent evolution of the mammalian ENS (66–68), which retained many of its basic structural characteristics, such as a network of nervous ganglia distributed in the myenteric and submucous plexuses (69).
Higher vertebrates went to evolve an additional set of neural structures in the central nervous system (CNS), tasked with the control of more sophisticated behaviors (70).
However, the ENS and the CNS maintain intense crosstalk through reciprocal connections mediated by the VN (Figure 1) and pelvic nerve in mammals (71, 72). As the main substrate for this information exchange, the vagus nerve is an attractive target of neurostimulation therapies for the treatment of psychiatric and gastrointestinal disorders (73, 74).
The GI tract harbors a complex microbial ecosystem (Figure 1), consisting of bacteria, archaea, protists, and eukaryotic and prokaryotic viruses, also known as bacteriophages (75–77).
The human microbiome has coevolved with its host (78), which keeps a tight leash on the intrinsic competitive nature of the microorganisms that comprise the microbiome, through both the nervous (71, 79, 80) and the immune systems (81, 82).
This arrangement maximizes the benefits the host gains from the symbiotic relationship, including protection against pathogens, improved nutrition, and mental health (81). A sub-type of intestinal epithelial cells called enteroendocrine cells, provide a signaling pathway through which the microbiome interacts with the CNS via the vagus nerve (20, 83).
Enteroendocrine cells have diverse phenotypes and express a variety of peptides/hormones that can act as signaling molecules on distinct targets, both local and distant, and some are chemoreceptors responding to a variety of luminal stimuli (84, 85).
As other intestinal epithelial cells, enteroendocrine cells express toll-like receptors (86), allowing them to detect bacterial products, and activate vagal afferents through basal processes called neuropods (see Figure 1) (20, 87).
The Gut Microbiome and Brain Function
There is increasing evidence of the association between microbiome dysfunction and CNS-related co-morbidities, such as anxiety, depression, autism spectrum disorders, Alzheimer’s disease and PD (88–92).
This association probably arose as a by-product of natural selection forces acting on microorganisms to adapt to the host and vice-versa (93). The effect of the microbiota on the CNS can lead to behavior modifications (93–95) and even to host manipulation (96) associated with increasing fitness of its bacterial populations.
For instance, the microbiome can influence social interactions by acting on the nutritional behavior of individual animals, particularly those from social species where individuals share microbes and interact around foods (97).
The proximate neuro-endocrinological and inflammatory mechanisms underlying this type of host manipulation are largely shared by the microbiome and the host (98, 99). For instance, levels of many neurotransmitters that are important for the expression of social behavior, such as serotonin (5-HT), dopamine, norepinephrine (NE), γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA), and glutamate are either expressed or regulated by bacteria (100–102).
Particularly, most of the body’s serotonin (5-HT) (5-hydroxytryptamine) is produced in the gut by enterochromaffin cells (EC) under the influence of the microbiome (103). The activation of 5-HT4 receptors induces the maturation of the ENS and regulates its adult function (104).
In the gut, there are three major metabolic pathways leading from the essential amino acid tryptophan (Trp) to 5-HT, kynurenine (Kyn), and indole derivatives, which are under the direct or indirect control of the microbiota (105).
During inflammatory states, most tryptophan is diverted to the production of Kyn and its metabolites kynurenine acid (KYNA) and quinolinic acid (QUIN) (106). While KYNA is considered neuroprotective, QUIN can cause excitotoxicity as an agonist of N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor and contribute to the neuropathogenesis of PD [for review, see (107)].
Although α-syn aggregates are also seen in the ENS of normally aging subjects (108), especially in the appendix (109), it is more prevalent in PD patients (110). Recent in vivo models showed that accumulation of α-syn aggregates in the ENS can be induced by alterations in the gut microbiome (111).
Interestingly, Sampson et al. (112) demonstrated in mice, genetically modified to overexpress α-syn, that the presence of gut microbiota is necessary to promote pathological alterations and motor deficits similar to PD.
They also demonstrated that fecal transplants from PD patients impair motor function in the same mouse strain, strongly suggesting that gut microbes may play a pivotal role in the onset of synucleinopathies such as PD (112).
Underlying these findings is the fact that microbial amyloids produced by some members of the gut microbiota can be released in the extracellular space, where they can be internalized by neighboring cells, including neurons, and seed the formation of pathological aggregates of endogenous α-syn through permissive templating (113, 114).
The failure of normal clearance mechanisms such as the ubiquitin-proteasome system, characteristic of both familial and idiopathic PD (115), to degrade the misfolded protein, may facilitate the seeding process.
The concept of microbial dysbiosis also comprises the bacteriophage components of the microbiome (116). Bacteriophages (phages) are viral parasites of bacteria and are important regulators of host-microbiome interactions through horizontal gene transfer and antagonistic coevolution (117, 118).
Besides targeting bacteria, phages can impact human health by playing a direct role on intestinal inflammatory processes (119) and possibly causing α-syn misfolding (120). A recent study showed significant differences in the gut phagobiota of PD patients and healthy individuals and a depletion of Lactococcus bacteria (121) in the former, which is associated with the regulation of gut permeability (122) and dopamine production (102), two factors linked with the early signs of PD in the gut (123).
Phage therapy has recently returned to the spotlight as an alternative antimicrobial strategy (124, 125). Eventually, it may also contribute to fighting PD through targeted approaches to manipulate the microbiome (121).
Probiotic bacteria have been linked to improved GI symptoms associated with PD (126). Probiotics affect the functionality of the CNS through beneficial interactions with the commensal gut microbiota and modulation of gut-derived inflammation (127).
The microbiota of PD patients exhibits a pro-inflammatory profile (128, 129) due to increased intestinal permeability to endotoxins (lipopolysaccharide) (130). Bacterial amyloids may also favor a pro-inflammatory environment in the gut (131).
A common bacterial component, the Curli fimbriae, share structural and biophysical properties with amyloids and are produced by E. coli through coordinated biosynthetic processes (132).
Other components of the gut microbiome are also known to produce functional extracellular amyloids [e.g., Salmonella, Klebsiella, Citrobacter, and Bacillus species; (133)]. Since probiotic treatment induces an anti-inflammatory peripheral immune response in multiple sclerosis patients (134) there is a possibility they may also be beneficial for PD patients, although there are no reports corroborating this hypothesis.
One option is to take advantage of Lactobacilli’s ability to inhibit the formation of biofilms by pathogenic bacteria (135, 136). One caveat, however, is that the effects of probiotics are highly variable, being person-specific, as shown in a recent study (137).
This limitation may be counteracted with the use of genetically-modified probiotics able to deliver novel therapeutics efficiently and with site specificity (138). Despite the increasing number of probiotic products available to consumers and the aggressive marketing proclaiming their efficacy, there have been few studies addressing concerns about efficacy and, more importantly, the safety of these products (139).
There is an urgent need for more studies about the therapeutic potential of specific bacterial strains to help maintain oxidative and protein homeostasis in the ENS.
Concluding Remarks
Aging is the main risk factor for the development of PD (140) and delaying the aging process is neuroprotective to PD in animal models (141). Aging is also associated with the accumulation of neuroinflammatory sequelae and the breakdown of homeostatic mechanisms that protect against protein misfolding, oxidative stress, decreased mitochondrial function, etc.
The gut, as one of the main gateways to environmental exposure to the brain, may contribute to increasing the susceptibility to these factors. The microbiome has a protective effect mediating this exposure, and dysbiosis seems to be a pivotal risk factor for PD and other neurological disorders.
Thus, the adoption of preventive measures to ensure a healthy microbiome throughout the lifetime can potentially decrease the risk of developing PD and other neurodegenerative diseases. The widespread use of antibiotics, for instance, which can kill gut bacteria indiscriminately, can cause a shift of the microbiome to an alternative stable state with unknown consequences in the long term (142).
Source:
Karolinska Institute
Reference
20. Kaelberer MM, Buchanan KL, Klein ME, Barth BB, Montoya MM, Shen X, et al. . A gut-brain neural circuit for nutrient sensory transduction. Science. (2018) 361:eaat5236. 10.1126/science.aat5236 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
60. Balch WE, Morimoto RI, Dillin A, Kelly JW. Adapting proteostasis for disease intervention. Science. (2008) 319:916–9. 10.1126/science.1141448 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
61. Kikis EA, Gidalevitz T, Morimoto RI. Protein homeostasis in models of aging and age-related conformational disease. In: Tavernarakis N. editor. Protein Metabolism and Homeostasis in Aging Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology. Boston, MA: Springer; (2010). p. 138–59. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
62. Bobela W, Aebischer P, Schneider BL. Alpha-synuclein as a mediator in the interplay between aging and Parkinson’s disease. Biomolecules. (2015) 5:2675–700. 10.3390/biom5042675 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
63. Carabotti M, Scirocco A, Maselli MA, Severi C. The gut-brain axis: interactions between enteric microbiota, central and enteric nervous systems. Ann Gastroenterol Q Publ Hell Soc Gastroenterol. (2015) 28:203–9. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
64. Diaz Heijtz R, Wang S, Anuar F, Qian Y, Bjorkholm B, Samuelsson A, et al. . Normal gut microbiota modulates brain development and behavior. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. (2011) 108:3047–52. 10.1073/pnas.1010529108 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
65. Kelava I, Rentzsch F, Technau U. Evolution of eumetazoan nervous systems: insights from cnidarians. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. (2015) 370:20150065. 10.1098/rstb.2015.0065 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
66. Furness JB, Stebbing MJ. The first brain: species comparisons and evolutionary implications for the enteric and central nervous systems. Neurogastroenterol Motil. (2018) 30:13234. 10.1111/nmo.13234 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
67. Koizumi O. Origin and evolution of the nervous system considered from the diffuse nervous system of cnidarians. In: Goffredo S, Dubinsky Z. editors. The Cnidaria, Past, Present and Future: The World of Medusa and Her Sisters. Cham: Springer International Publishing; (2016). p. 73–91. [Google Scholar]
68. Shimizu H, Koizumi O, Fujisawa T. Three digestive movements in Hydra regulated by the diffuse nerve net in the body column. J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol. (2004) 190:623–30. 10.1007/s00359-004-0518-3 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
69. Costa M, Brookes SJH, Hennig GW. Anatomy and physiology of the enteric nervous system. Gut. (2000) 47:iv15–9. 10.1136/gut.47.suppl_4.iv15 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
70. Kaas J. Evolution of Nervous Systems. 2nd ed. Academic Press; (2017). Available online at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/referencework/9780128040966/evolution-of-nervous-systems (accessed April 6, 2019). [Google Scholar]
71. Powell N, Walker MM, Talley NJ. The mucosal immune system: master regulator of bidirectional gut-brain communications. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. (2017) 14:143–59. 10.1038/nrgastro.2016.191 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
72. Rao M, Gershon MD. The bowel and beyond: the enteric nervous system in neurological disorders. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. (2016) 13:517–28. 10.1038/nrgastro.2016.107 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
73. Breit S, Kupferberg A, Rogler G, Hasler G. Vagus nerve as modulator of the brain–gut axis in psychiatric and inflammatory disorders. Front Psychiatry. (2018) 9:44. 10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00044 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
74. Johnson RL, Wilson CG. A review of vagus nerve stimulation as a therapeutic intervention. J Inflamm Res. (2018) 11:203–13. 10.2147/JIR.S163248 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
75. Gerritsen J, Smidt H, Rijkers GT, de Vos WM. Intestinal microbiota in human health and disease: the impact of probiotics. Genes Nutr. (2011) 6:209–40. 10.1007/s12263-011-0229-7 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
76. Ley RE, Lozupone CA, Hamady M, Knight R, Gordon JI. Worlds within worlds: evolution of the vertebrate gut microbiota. Nat Rev Microbiol. (2008) 6:776–88. 10.1038/nrmicro1978 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
77. Selber-Hnatiw S, Rukundo B, Ahmadi M, Akoubi H, Al-Bizri H, Aliu AF, et al. . Human gut microbiota: toward an ecology of disease. Front Microbiol. (2017) 8:1265. 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01265 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
78. Moeller AH, Caro-Quintero A, Mjungu D, Georgiev AV, Lonsdorf EV, Muller MN, et al. . Cospeciation of gut microbiota with hominids. Science. (2016) 353:380–2. 10.1126/science.aaf3951 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
79. Bailey MT, Dowd SE, Galley JD, Hufnagle AR, Allen RG, Lyte M. Exposure to a social stressor alters the structure of the intestinal microbiota: implications for stressor-induced immunomodulation. Brain Behav Immun. (2011) 25:397–407. 10.1016/j.bbi.2010.10.023 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
80. Galley JD, Nelson MC, Yu Z, Dowd SE, Walter J, Kumar PS, et al. . Exposure to a social stressor disrupts the community structure of the colonic mucosa-associated microbiota. BMC Microbiol. (2014) 14:189. 10.1186/1471-2180-14-189 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
81. Foster KR, Schluter J, Coyte KZ, Rakoff-Nahoum S. The evolution of the host microbiome as an ecosystem on a leash. Nature. (2017) 548:43–51. 10.1038/nature23292 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
82. Zilber-Rosenberg I, Rosenberg E. Role of microorganisms in the evolution of animals and plants: the hologenome theory of evolution. FEMS Microbiol Rev. (2008) 32:723–35. 10.1111/j.1574-6976.2008.00123.x [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
83. Hoffman BU, Lumpkin EA. A gut feeling. Science. (2018) 361:1203–4. 10.1126/science.aau9973 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
84. Feher J. 8.3—Intestinal and colonic chemoreception and motility. In: Feher J. editor. Quantitative Human Physiology, 2nd Edn. Boston: Academic Press; (2017). p. 796–809. [Google Scholar]
85. Latorre R, Sternini C, De Giorgio R, Greenwood-Van Meerveld B. Enteroendocrine cells: a review of their role in brain-gut communication. Neurogastroenterol Motil. (2016) 28:620–30. 10.1111/nmo.12754 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
86. Bogunovic M, Davé SH, Tilstra JS, Chang DTW, Harpaz N, Xiong H, et al. . Enteroendocrine cells express functional Toll-like receptors. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. (2007) 292:G1770–1783. 10.1152/ajpgi.00249.2006 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
87. Liddle RA. Neuropods. Cell Mol Gastroenterol Hepatol. (2019) 7:739–47. 10.1016/j.jcmgh.2019.01.006 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
88. Dinan TG, Cryan JF. Gut feelings on ParkinsonŠs and depression. Cerebrum. (2017) 2017:cer-04-17. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
89. Hsiao EY, McBride SW, Hsien S, Sharon G, Hyde ER, McCue T, et al. . Microbiota modulate behavioral and physiological abnormalities associated with neurodevelopmental disorders. Cell. (2013) 155:1451–63. 10.1016/j.cell.2013.11.024 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
90. Kelly JR, Minuto C, Cryan JF, Clarke G, Dinan TG. Cross talk: the microbiota and neurodevelopmental disorders. Front Neurosci. (2017) 11:490. 10.3389/fnins.2017.00490 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
91. Pellegrini C, Antonioli L, Colucci R, Blandizzi C, Fornai M. Interplay among gut microbiota, intestinal mucosal barrier and enteric neuro-immune system: a common path to neurodegenerative diseases? Acta Neuropathol. (2018) 136:345–61. 10.1007/s00401-018-1856-5 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
92. Unger MM, Spiegel J, Dillmann K-U, Grundmann D, Philippeit H, Bürmann J, et al. . Short chain fatty acids and gut microbiota differ between patients with Parkinson’s disease and age-matched controls. Parkinson Relat Disord. (2016) 32:66–72. 10.1016/j.parkreldis.2016.08.019 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
93. Johnson KV-A, Foster KR. Why does the microbiome affect behaviour? Nat Rev Microbiol. (2018) 16:647–55. 10.1038/s41579-018-0014-3 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
94. Akami M, Andongma AA, Zhengzhong C, Nan J, Khaeso K, Jurkevitch E, et al. . Intestinal bacteria modulate the foraging behavior of the oriental fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae). PLoS ONE. (2019) 14:e0210109. 10.1371/journal.pone.0210109 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
95. Schretter CE, Vielmetter J, Bartos I, Marka Z, Marka S, Argade S, et al. . A gut microbial factor modulates locomotor behaviour in Drosophila. Nature. (2018) 563:402. 10.1038/s41586-018-0634-9 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
96. Lewin-Epstein O, Aharonov R, Hadany L. Microbes can help explain the evolution of host altruism. Nat Commun. (2017) 8:14040. 10.1038/ncomms14040 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
97. Pasquaretta C, Gómez-Moracho T, Heeb P, Lihoreau M. Exploring interactions between the gut microbiota and social behavior through nutrition. Genes. (2018) 9:E534. 10.3390/genes9110534 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
98. Freestone P. Communication between bacteria and their hosts. Scientifica. (2013) 2013:361073. 10.1155/2013/361073 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
99. Mazzoli R, Pessione E. The Neuro-endocrinological Role of Microbial Glutamate and GABA Signaling. Front Microbiol. (2016) 7:1934. 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01934 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
100. Liu R, Hong J, Xu X, Feng Q, Zhang D, Gu Y, et al. . Gut microbiome and serum metabolome alterations in obesity and after weight-loss intervention. Nat Med. (2017b) 23:859–68. 10.1038/nm.4358 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
101. Strandwitz P, Kim KH, Terekhova D, Liu JK, Sharma A, Levering J, et al. . GABA-modulating bacteria of the human gut microbiota. Nat Microbiol. (2019) 4:396. 10.1038/s41564-018-0307-3 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
102. Vodolazov IR, Dbar SD, Oleskin AV, Stoyanova LG. Exogenous and endogenous neuroactive biogenic amines: studies with Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis Appl Biochem Microbiol. (2018) 54:603–10. 10.1134/S0003683818060157 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
103. Yano JM, Yu K, Donaldson GP, Shastri GG, Ann P, Ma L, et al. . Indigenous bacteria from the gut microbiota regulate host serotonin biosynthesis. Cell. (2015) 161:264–76. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.02.047 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
104. Vadder FD, Grasset E, Holm LM, Karsenty G, Macpherson AJ, Olofsson LE, et al. . Gut microbiota regulates maturation of the adult enteric nervous system via enteric serotonin networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. (2018) 115:6458–63. 10.1073/pnas.1720017115 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
105. Agus A, Planchais J, Sokol H. Gut microbiota regulation of tryptophan metabolism in health and disease. Cell Host Microbe. (2018) 23:716–24. 10.1016/j.chom.2018.05.003 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
106. Keszthelyi D, Troost FJ, Jonkers DM, van Donkelaar EL, Dekker J, Buurman WA, et al. . Does acute tryptophan depletion affect peripheral serotonin metabolism in the intestine? Am J Clin Nutr. (2012) 95:603–8. 10.3945/ajcn.111.028589 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
107. Lim CK, Fernández-Gomez FJ, Braidy N, Estrada C, Costa C, Costa S, et al. . Involvement of the kynurenine pathway in the pathogenesis of Parkinson’s disease. Prog Neurobiol. (2017) 155:76–95. 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2015.12.009 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
108. Böttner M, Zorenkov D, Hellwig I, Barrenschee M, Harde J, Fricke T, et al. . Expression pattern and localization of alpha-synuclein in the human enteric nervous system. Neurobiol Dis. (2012) 48:474–80. 10.1016/j.nbd.2012.07.018 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
109. Gray MT, Munoz DG, Gray DA, Schlossmacher MG, Woulfe JM. Alpha-synuclein in the appendiceal mucosa of neurologically intact subjects. Mov Disord. (2014) 29:991–8. 10.1002/mds.25779 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
110. Barrenschee M, Zorenkov D, Böttner M, Lange C, Cossais F, Scharf AB, et al. . Distinct pattern of enteric phospho-alpha-synuclein aggregates and gene expression profiles in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Acta Neuropathol Commun. (2017) 5:1. 10.1186/s40478-016-0408-2 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
111. Chen SG, Stribinskis V, Rane MJ, Demuth DR, Gozal E, Roberts AM, et al. . Exposure to the functional bacterial amyloid protein curli enhances alpha-synuclein aggregation in aged fischer 344 rats and Caenorhabditis elegans. Sci Rep. (2016) 6:34477. 10.1038/srep34477 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
112. Sampson TR, Debelius JW, Thron T, Janssen S, Shastri GG, Ilhan ZE, et al. . Gut microbiota regulate motor deficits and neuroinflammation in a model of Parkinson’s disease. Cell. (2016) 167:1469–80.e12. 10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.018 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
113. Friedland RP, Chapman MR. The role of microbial amyloid in neurodegeneration. PLoS Pathog. (2017) 13:e1006654. 10.1371/journal.ppat.1006654 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
114. Soto C, Pritzkow S. Protein misfolding, aggregation, and conformational strains in neurodegenerative diseases. Nat Neurosci. (2018) 21:1332–40. 10.1038/s41593-018-0235-9 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
115. McNaught KSP, Olanow CW, Halliwell B, Isacson O, Jenner P. Failure of the ubiquitin–proteasome system in Parkinson’s disease. Nat Rev Neurosci. (2001) 2:589–94. 10.1038/35086067 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
116. Manrique P, Dills M, Young MJ. The human gut phage community and its implications for health and disease. Viruses. (2017) 9:E141. 10.3390/v9060141 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
117. Duerkop BA. Bacteriophages shift the focus of the mammalian microbiota. PLoS Pathog. (2018) 14:e1007310. 10.1371/journal.ppat.1007310 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
118. Scanlan PD. Bacteria–bacteriophage coevolution in the human gut: implications for microbial diversity and functionality. Trends Microbiol. (2017) 25:614–23. 10.1016/j.tim.2017.02.012 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
119. Gogokhia L, Buhrke K, Bell R, Hoffman B, Brown DG, Hanke-Gogokhia C, et al. . Expansion of bacteriophages is linked to aggravated intestinal inflammation and colitis. Cell Host Microbe. (2019) 25:285–99.e8. 10.1016/j.chom.2019.01.008 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
120. Tetz G, Tetz V, Tetz G, Tetz V. Bacteriophages as new human viral pathogens. Microorganisms. (2018b) 6:54. 10.3390/microorganisms6020054 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
121. Tetz G, Brown SM, Hao Y, Tetz V. Parkinson’s disease and bacteriophages as its overlooked contributors. Sci Rep. (2018a) 8:10812. 10.1038/s41598-018-29173-4 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
122. Darby TM, Owens JA, Saeedi BJ, Luo L, Matthews JD, Robinson BS, et al. . Lactococcus lactis subsp. cremoris is an efficacious beneficial bacterium that limits tissue injury in the intestine iScience. (2019) 12:356–67. 10.1016/j.isci.2019.01.030 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
123. Houser MC, Tansey MG. The gut-brain axis: is intestinal inflammation a silent driver of Parkinson’s disease pathogenesis? NPJ Parkinson Dis. (2017) 3:3. 10.1038/s41531-016-0002-0 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
124. Chan BK, Abedon ST, Loc-Carrillo C. Phage cocktails and the future of phage therapy. Future Microbiol. (2013) 8:769–83. 10.2217/fmb.13.47 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
125. Górski A, Miedzybrodzki R, Weber-Dabrowska B, Fortuna W, Letkiewicz S, Rogóz P, et al. . Phage therapy: combating infections with potential for evolving from merely a treatment for complications to targeting diseases. Front Microbiol. (2016) 7:1515. 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01515 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
126. Barichella M, Pacchetti C, Bolliri C, Cassani E, Iorio L, Pusani C, et al. . Probiotics and prebiotic fiber for constipation associated with Parkinson disease: an RCT. Neurology. (2016) 87:1274–80. 10.1212/WNL.0000000000003127 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
127. Wang H, Lee I-S, Braun C, Enck P. Effect of probiotics on central nervous system functions in animals and humans: a systematic review. J Neurogastroenterol Motil. (2016) 22:589–605. 10.5056/jnm16018 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
128. Bedarf JR, Hildebrand F, Coelho LP, Sunagawa S, Bahram M, Goeser F, et al. Functional implications of microbial and viral gut metagenome changes in early stage L-DOPA-naïve Parkinson’s disease patients. Genome Med. (2017) 9:39 10.1186/s13073-017-0428-y [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
129. Petrov VA, Saltykova IV, Zhukova IA, Alifirova VM, Zhukova NG, Dorofeeva YB, et al. . Analysis of gut microbiota in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Bull Exp Biol Med. (2017) 162:734–7. 10.1007/s10517-017-3700-7 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
130. Forsyth CB, Shannon KM, Kordower JH, Voigt RM, Shaikh M, Jaglin JA, et al. . Increased intestinal permeability correlates with sigmoid mucosa alpha-synuclein staining and endotoxin exposure markers in early Parkinson’s disease. PLoS ONE. (2011) 6:e28032. 10.1371/journal.pone.0028032 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
131. Miraglia F, Colla E. Microbiome, Parkinson’s disease and molecular mimicry. Cells. (2019) 8:222. 10.3390/cells8030222 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
132. Taglialegna A, Lasa I, Valle J. Amyloid Structures as Biofilm Matrix Scaffolds. J Bacteriol. (2016) 198:2579–88. 10.1128/JB.00122-16 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
133. Van Gerven N, Van der Verren SE, Reiter DM, Remaut H. The role of functional amyloids in bacterial virulence. J Mol Biol. (2018) 430:3657–84. 10.1016/j.jmb.2018.07.010 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
134. Tankou SK, Regev K, Healy BC, Tjon E, Laghi L, Cox LM, et al. . A probiotic modulates the microbiome and immunity in multiple sclerosis. Ann Neurol. (2018) 83:1147–61. 10.1002/ana.25244 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
135. Söderling EM, Marttinen AM, Haukioja AL. Probiotic lactobacilli interfere with Streptococcus mutans biofilm formation in vitro. Curr Microbiol. (2011) 62:618–22. 10.1007/s00284-010-9752-9 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
136. Vuotto C, Longo F, Donelli G. Probiotics to counteract biofilm-associated infections: promising and conflicting data. Int J Oral Sci. (2014) 6:189–94. 10.1038/ijos.2014.52 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
137. Zmora N, Zilberman-Schapira G, Suez J, Mor U, Dori-Bachash M, Bashiardes S, et al. . Personalized gut mucosal colonization resistance to empiric probiotics is associated with unique host and microbiome features. Cell. (2018) 174:1388–405. 10.1016/j.cell.2018.08.041 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
138. Singh B, Mal G, Marotta F. Designer probiotics: paving the way to living therapeutics. Trends Biotechnol. (2017) 35:679–82. 10.1016/j.tibtech.2017.04.001 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
139. Cohen PA. Probiotic safety—no guarantees. JAMA Intern Med. (2018) 178:1577–8. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2018.5403 [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
140. Driver JA, Logroscino G, Gaziano JM, Kurth T. Incidence and remaining lifetime risk of Parkinson disease in advanced age. Neurology. (2009) 72:432–8. 10.1212/01.wnl.0000341769.50075.bb [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
141. Cooper JF, Dues DJ, Spielbauer KK, Machiela E, Senchuk MM, Raamsdonk JMV. Delaying aging is neuroprotective in Parkinson’s disease: a genetic analysis in C. elegans models NPJ Parkinson Dis. (2015) 1:15022. 10.1038/npjparkd.2015.22 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
142. Dethlefsen L, Relman DA. Incomplete recovery and individualized responses of the human distal gut microbiota to repeated antibiotic perturbation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. (2011) 108 (Suppl. 1):4554–61. 10.1073/pnas.1000087107 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
