Any study involving human subjects is a challenge to conduct, especially when it comes to obtaining meaningful control subjects that are necessary to accurately assess any data collected. Since microbiomes are unique to each individual, it’s even more challenging to identify which microbiome differences are associated with diseases and which are due to person-to-person variability. However, for this work, Dr. Dey shares that “an exciting aspect of this study was the study design [itself]. Our collaborators at Seattle Children’s Hospital and the NIH recruited not just children afflicted with JDM but their entire family units. They selected for patients with an unaffected sibling to enable downstream paired statistical comparisons, thereby allowing us to adjust for (to the greatest extent possible) factors that would affect entire family units such as shared diet and culture, as well as co-habitation, to home in on differences specific to JDM.” Critical to this were Drs. Anne Stevens and Susan Shenoi at Seattle Children’s and Dr. Lisa Rider at the NIH, who were responsible for leading the study design and recruitment processes. In their multi-center cohort study, the researchers asked if JDM is associated with specific oral or gut microbiome signatures. To do so, authors generated 16S rRNA sequencing data to identify specific microbial strains from fecal and oral samples from individuals afflicted with JDM and their healthy family members. While a strength of this study was having familial cohorts recruited which allowed for control of family attributes, a challenge of this work was the lack of a true healthy cohort. “To overcome this challenge, we used previously published data from healthy adults and children to see if there are observable differences between JDM and non-JDM families – which surprisingly there were considerable differences,” explains Koester.
After adjusting for microbiome differences attributed to family, Koester notes, “we found differences in several potentially immunomodulatory bacteria in patients with JDM,” which include differences in Faecalibacterium in the gut and Streptococcus in the oral cavity. However, “future studies will be needed to understand the role of these bacteria in JDM pathogenesis and whether interventions targeting them has therapeutic value,” Koester adds. This work emphasizes the importance of focusing on “family units in characterizing the microbiomes of patients,” the authors describe. More broadly, these findings “raise the question of whether microbiome-based therapies can ultimately succeed in treating individuals in isolation, or whether familial and social network units need to be addressed as a whole.”
“When it comes to JDM, I think the answer to what role the microbiome plays in the disease pathogenesis is a complicated one. There is still so much left to be learned about the microbiome and the role it plays in immune system regulation and how genetic factors influence this relationship. It is also unlikely to be the end all be all. Rather, the microbiome is one piece of the puzzle that when put together with other pieces can pave the way for JDM to develop. Importantly, this study offers a framework to guide future projects and research inquiries into JDM,” acknowledges Koester. Dr. Dey adds, “The microbiome is one piece of the puzzle, and observing dysbiosis is not much different from arriving at the scene of the crime and needing to conduct a forensic investigation to figure out what happened before you got there: it’s tough.”