Cited by 23Gut microbiota and healthSepsis Diagnosis and TreatmentClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research

Gut microbiota and sepsis and sepsis-related death: a Mendelian randomization investigation

Open access
Shang, Weifeng, Zhang, Sheng, Qian, Hang, Huang, Sisi, Li, Hui, Liu, Jiao, Chen, Dechang·2024·Frontiers in Immunology

Abstract

Background: It is unclear what the causal relationship is between the gut microbiota and sepsis. Therefore, we employed Mendelian randomization (MR) to determine whether a causal link exists between the two. Methods: This study used publicly available genome-wide association studies (GWAS) summary data of gut microbiota, sepsis, sepsis (critical care), and sepsis (28-day death in critical care) to perform a two-sample MR analysis. To ensure the robustness of the results, we also conducted a sensitivity analysis. Results: For sepsis susceptibility, inverse variance weighted (IVW) estimates revealed that Victivallales (OR = 0.86, 95% CI, 0.78–0.94, p = 0.0017) was protective against sepsis, while Lentisphaerae (OR = 0.89, 95% CI, 0.80–0.99), Gammaproteobacteria (OR = 1.37, 95% CI, 1.08–1.73), Clostridiaceae1 (OR = 1.21, 95% CI, 1.04–1.40), RuminococcaceaeUCG011 (OR = 1.10, 95% CI, 1.01–1.20), Dialister (OR = 0.85, 95% CI, 0.74–0.97), and Coprococcus2 (OR = 0.81, 95% CI, 0.69–0.94) presented a suggestive association with the development of sepsis (all p < 0.05). For sepsis (critical care), IVW estimates indicated that Lentisphaerae (OR = 0.70, 95% CI, 0.53–0.93), Victivallales (OR = 0.67, 95% CI, 0.50–0.91), Anaerostipes (OR = 0.49, 95% CI, 0.31–0.76), LachnospiraceaeUCG004 (OR = 0.51, 95% CI, 0.34–0.77), and Coprococcus1 (OR = 0.66, 95% CI, 0.44–0.99) showed a suggestive negative correlation with sepsis (critical care) (all p < 0.05). For sepsis (28-day death in critical care), IVW estimates suggested that four bacterial taxa had a normally significant negative correlation with the risk of sepsis-related death, including Victivallales (OR = 0.54, 95% CI, 0.30–0.95), Coprococcus2 (OR = 0.34, 95% CI, 0.14–0.83), Ruminiclostridium6 (OR = 0.43, 95% CI, 0.22–0.83), and Coprococcus1 (OR = 0.45, 95% CI, 0.21–0.97), while two bacterial taxa were normally significantly positively linked to the risk of sepsis-related death, namely, Mollicutes (OR = 2.03, 95% CI, 1.01–4.08) and Bacteroidales (OR = 2.65, 95% CI, 1.18–5.96) (all p < 0.05). The robustness of the above correlations was verified by additional sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: This MR research found that several gut microbiota taxa were causally linked to the risk of sepsis, sepsis in critical care, and sepsis-related 28-day mortality in critical care.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fimmu.2024.1266230

Cites

49 of 49 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Challenges include high inter-individual variability, lack of standardized timing/strain/dosing, no consensus on an "ideal microbiota," and potential risks - especially in immunocompromised patients.

    “Challenges include high inter-individual variability, lack of standardized timing/strain/dosing, no consensus on an “ideal microbiota,” and potential risks – especially in immunocompromised patients (Han et al., 2024; Shang et al., 2024).”

    From Progress on the correlation between sepsis and gut microbiota: a narrative review (2026) · cites this paper as Shang et al., 2024

    The Discussion (page not specified) says gut microbiota is influenced by diet, lifestyle, and medication, which lends limited support to variability as a challenge. It does not establish high inter-individual variability or discuss standardized timing, strains, or dosing, an “ideal microbiota,” or risks for immunocompromised patients. Its stated limitations concern the genetic analysis rather than those intervention challenges. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shang, W., Zhang, S., Qian, H., Huang, S., Li, H., Liu, J., & Chen, D.
Affiliations
Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Liu, Jiao
  • Chen, Dechang
Venue
Frontiers in Immunology
Published
2024-01-31
Volume
15
Pages
1266230-1266230
ISSN
1664-3224 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4391397023
Cited by
23
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6
FWCI
3.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Immunology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
National Natural Science Foundation of China (82172152, 82241044)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Clostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Keywords
gut microbiota, sepsis, sepsis mortality, causal inference, Lentisphaerae, Gammaproteobacteria, Clostridiaceae, Ruminococcaceae, Dialister, Coprococcus, Anaerostipes, Lachnospiraceae, intensive care, host-microbe interactions
MeSH terms
Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Humans, Sepsis, Bacteroidetes, Genome-Wide Association Study, Mendelian Randomization Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review