Elsevier

Translational Research

Volume 179, January 2017, Pages 204-222
Translational Research

Review Article
Gut microbiome interactions with drug metabolism, efficacy, and toxicity

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trsl.2016.08.002Get rights and content

The gut microbiota has both direct and indirect effects on drug and xenobiotic metabolisms, and this can have consequences for both efficacy and toxicity. Indeed, microbiome-driven drug metabolism is essential for the activation of certain prodrugs, for example, azo drugs such as prontosil and neoprontosil resulting in the release of sulfanilamide. In addition to providing a major source of reductive metabolizing capability, the gut microbiota provides a suite of additional reactions including acetylation, deacylation, decarboxylation, dehydroxylation, demethylation, dehalogenation, and importantly, in the context of certain types of drug-related toxicity, conjugates hydrolysis reactions. In addition to direct effects, the gut microbiota can affect drug metabolism and toxicity indirectly via, for example, the modulation of host drug metabolism and disposition and competition of bacterial-derived metabolites for xenobiotic metabolism pathways. Also, of course, the therapeutic drugs themselves can have effects, both intended and unwanted, which can impact the health and composition of the gut microbiota with unforeseen consequences.

Introduction

To state the obvious, the aim of very many studies in drug metabolism and toxicity is ultimately to understand the factors that cause compounds to be ineffective therapeutically or cause toxicity in patients and by using this knowledge to design better compounds, provide safe and effective treatments to patients. Although the presence of the gut microbiota has been acknowledged for many years, it was nevertheless generally ignored by those working in drug metabolism and toxicology as being largely an irrelevance (albeit an interesting one). However, there has been a revolution in our understanding of the complexity and system-wide effects of this forgotten organ brought about, in no small measure, by advances in molecular biology. This has revealed the diversity of the gut ecosystem, leading to a major re-evaluation of the role of the gut microbiota in human health and disease. Thus, in adult humans the gut microbiota comprises up to ca 1 kg of bacteria, most of which are obligate anaerobes from the genera Bacteroides, Clostridium, Lactobacillus, Escherichia, and Bifidobacteria together with an assortment of yeasts and other microorganisms, to say nothing of the many viruses. The result is a complex and dynamic ecology comprising at least 2000 species, with the composition varying depending on the region of the gut examined. These microbes then provide benefits to the host via enhanced energy recovery from undigested food, defense against pathogens, and interactions with both immune and nervous systems. These insights have led to a reaffirmation of the view that these microorganisms are not mere passengers but crew, providing multiple benefits for the host and as a by-product of their symbiotic relationship with the host, directly and indirectly affecting the pharmacologic or toxicologic effects of numerous drugs. The rediscovery of the impact that the microbes that go to form this important “external” organ can have has led to a reawakened interest in their study. Furthermore, there is now an increasing appreciation that the microbiome represents a “druggable target” as there is clear potential for altering the composition, and therefore metabolic capability of the microbiome using a range of approaches, including pharmaceuticals. Such manipulations might be intentional, aimed at beneficially modifying the activities of the gut microbiota to improve the health and well-being of the host such as those claimed for prebiotic and probiotic interventions. Alternatively, changes wrought to the microbiome might also cause unintentional “collateral damage” resulting from, for example, exposure to antibiotics, and these modifications may bring adverse consequences. As such changes can be long lasting, the effect of alterations in the composition and functionality of the gut microbiota, given its symbiotic role, should now perhaps be more actively considered as part of the risk assessment process for new drugs. However, it has been clear for a long time that the sheer complexity of the host–gut microbiome interaction means that modeling the various interactions between host and gut microbiota in such a way as to adequately predict the outcome of an intervention will require both novel approaches and the generation of much new knowledge.1, 2, 3

However, for the drug metabolism and toxicology communities, despite many early studies showing its importance in some instances of xenobiotic biotransformation (eg, see refs4, 5), the gut microbiota has not been a focus. Nevertheless, increased awareness is important not only because the microbiota performs a range of important metabolic reactions but because the gut microbiome also represents a source of physiological variability between both individuals and populations. Such variability can affect the disposition and toxicity of drugs and their metabolites. These effects can either be direct or through secondary interactions mediated through, for example, the metabolic exchange and the cometabolism and processing of many diverse endogenous and dietary substrates.6 These “metabolome–metabolome” interactions7 are still poorly understood, but it is clear that some bacterially derived metabolites have the potential to modulate the hosts' drug-metabolizing systems as discussed subsequently.4 There is, however, reason to believe, from the increasing number of research articles and reviews8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 on the topic, that the gut microbiota is moving out of the shadows and toward center stage in drug safety studies and personalized health care.

Section snippets

Direct Drug Metabolism by the Gut Microbiota

The gut microbiota has the capability of performing a wide range of metabolic reactions on drugs, drug metabolites, and other xenobiotics. As summarized subsequently, by far the most important biotransformations involve reductive metabolism and hydrolytic reactions (particularly of conjugates). In addition, decarboxylations, dehydroxylations, dealkylations, dehalogenations, and deaminations have also been described.

Demethylations, Deaminations, Dehydroxylations, Deacylations, Decarboxylations, and Oxidations

Important as reductive metabolism is, the gut microbiota is also capable of a range of additional biotransformations including those involving demethylation, deamination, dehydroxylation, deacylation, decarboxylation, or oxidation. The microbial demethylation of drugs such as methamphetamine and 4-hydroxymethamphetamine has been shown in vitro.55 O- and N-demethylation of drugs incubated with rat-derived microbiota has been investigated with the observation of the gut microbial metabolism of

Gut Microbial–Mediated Hydrolysis of Drugs, Prodrugs, and Xenobiotic Conjugates

In addition to reductions, the gut microflora are adept at hydrolytic reactions, which can occur on the drugs themselves, prodrugs, or conjugated metabolites. An early example of drug biotransformation via hydrolysis was the observation that methotrexate was metabolized by the intestinal flora of normal mice.72 Subsequent studies involved the incubation of radiolabeled [3H]-methotrexate with CDF1 mouse cecal contents.73 At least 3 metabolites were formed, the principal one being identified by

Microbial Processing of Xenobiotic Glutathione Conjugates

Many xenobiotics, drugs, agrochemicals, natural products, and industrial chemicals are subject to metabolism, generally through cytochrome (CYP) P450-related biotransformations, resulting in the formation of reactive and potentially toxic metabolites to varying degrees. The glutathione conjugates formed during the detoxication process in the liver are subsequently excreted in the bile where the gut microflora acts on them through bacterial C-S lyases. Studies (on agrochemicals)95 have

Bacterial Acetylation

Reports of conjugation reactions performed by the gut microbiota are comparatively rare but not completely unknown. Both N- and O-acetylation by bacterial n-acetyltransferases (NATs) have been shown, with the former highlighted as potentially important for the bioactivation of genotoxic aromatic amines.97, 98 In addition, the conversion of 5-aminosalicylic acid to n-acetyl-5-aminosalicylic acid by bacterial N-acetylation activity was demonstrated for a number of species.99, 100 4-Aminosalicylic

Microbiome-Conditional Effects and Consequences

The direct effects that the gut microbiota can exert on the metabolism and toxicity of drugs, their metabolites, and related xenobiotics summarized previously in all likelihood represent only the tip of the iceberg as the contribution made by this forgotten organ is not routinely assessed. However, the influence of the gut microbiota extends beyond these direct effects and a number of indirect mechanisms, whereby the microbiome affect the metabolism, disposition, and (potentially) the toxicity

Drug Effects on the Gut Microbiota

Given the interplay between host and gut microbiota, permanent changes in the composition of the latter resulting from drug treatment may have important long-term consequences for the host. So, considering the effects of the microbiota on drug metabolism, there is also the need to consider the potential for the administration of drugs to radically alter its composition either directly on the microorganisms themselves or as a result of toxic or pharmacologic effects on the gut. Clearly, the most

Summary

The range of effects that the gut microbiota can have on drugs and vice versa has obvious implications for drug toxicity testing, where differences in outcomes may reflect not only the strain of animal but also the microbiome-specific effects. Clearly, when moving from animals to patients such effects also have the potential to produce unexpected, and potentially unwelcome, variability in response to the administration of drugs to both individual patients and populations. The resurgence in

Acknowledgments

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have read the journal's policy on disclosure of potential conflicts of interest and have none to declare.

All authors confirm that they have read the journal's authorship agreement and have reviewed and approved the manuscript.

References (137)

  • A.W. Basit et al.

    Susceptibility of the H2-receptor antagonists cimetidine, famotidine and nizatidine, to metabolism by the gastrointestinal microflora

    Int J Pharm

    (2002)
  • J. Lindenbaum et al.

    Urinary excretion of reduced metabolites of digoxin

    Am J Med

    (1981)
  • K. Sasahara et al.

    Dosage form design for improvement of bioavailability of levodopa IV: possible causes of low bioavailability of oral levodopa in dogs

    J Pharm Sci

    (1981)
  • M. Bashir et al.

    Anaerobic metabolism of 2-amino-3-methyl-3H-imidazo[4,5-f]quinoline (IQ) by human fecal flora

    Mutat Res

    (1987)
  • D.M. Valerino et al.

    Studies of the metabolism of methotrexate by intestinal flora-I: identification and study of biological properties of the metabolite 4-amino-4-deoxy-N10-methylpteroic acid

    Biochem Pharmacol

    (1972)
  • D.H. Kim et al.

    The role of intestinal bacteria in the transformation of sodium picosulfate

    Jpn J Pharmacol

    (1992)
  • E. Bowey et al.

    Metabolism of isoflavones and lignans by the gut microflora: a study in germ-free and human flora associated rats

    Food Chem Toxicol

    (2003)
  • B.D. Wallace et al.

    Cell, structure and inhibition of microbiome β-glucuronidases essential to the alleviation of cancer drug toxicity

    Cell

    (2015)
  • S. Ahmad et al.

    Potential repurposing of known drugs as potent bacterial β-glucuronidase inhibitors

    J Biomol Screen

    (2012)
  • M. Mikov et al.

    The role of intestinal microflora in the formation of the methylthio adduct metabolites of paracetamol. Studies in neomycin-pretreated and germ-free mice

    Biochem Pharmacol

    (1988)
  • B.J. Dull et al.

    Role of the intestinal flora in the acetylation of sulfasalazine metabolites

    Biochem Pharmacol

    (1987)
  • J.K. Nicholson et al.

    The challenges of modelling mammalian biocomplexity

    Nat Biotechnol

    (2004)
  • J.K. Nicholson et al.

    Host-gut microbiota metabolic interactions

    Science

    (2012)
  • E. Holmes et al.

    Therapeutic modulation of microbiota-host metabolic interactions

    Sci Transl Med

    (2012)
  • H.P. Illing

    Techniques for microfloral and associated metabolic studies in relation to the absorption and enterohepatic circulation of drugs

    Xenobiotica

    (1981)
  • H.G. Boxenbaum et al.

    Influence of gut microflora on bioavailability

    Drug Metab Rev

    (1979)
  • J.K. Nicholson et al.

    Understanding ‘global’ systems biology: metabonomics and the continuum of metabolism

    Nat Rev Drug Discov

    (2003)
  • J.K. Nicholson et al.

    Gut microorganisms, mammalian metabolism and personalized health care

    Nat Rev Microbiol

    (2005)
  • H.J. Haiser et al.

    Is it time for a metagenomic basis of therapeutics?

    Science

    (2012)
  • R. Saad et al.

    Gut pharmacomicrobiomics: the tip of an iceberg of complex interactions between drugs and gut-associated microbes

    Gut Pathog

    (2012)
  • M.J. Kang et al.

    The effect of gut microbiota on drug metabolism

    Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol

    (2013)
  • H. Li et al.

    Cometabolism of microbes and host: implications for drug metabolism and drug-induced toxicity

    Clin Pharmacol Ther

    (2013)
  • H.G. Jeong et al.

    Role of intestinal microflora in xenobiotic-induced toxicity

    Mol Nutr Food Res

    (2013)
  • R.N. Carmody et al.

    Host-microbial interactions in the metabolism of therapeutic and diet-derived xenobiotics

    J Clin Invest

    (2014)
  • C.D. Klaassen et al.

    Mechanisms of how the intestinal microbiota alters the effects of drugs and bile acids

    Drug Metab Dispos

    (2015)
  • H.I. Swanson

    Drug metabolism by the host and gut microbiota: a partnership or rivalry?

    Drug Metab Dispos

    (2015)
  • R. Gingel et al.

    The role of the gut flora in the metabolism of prontosil and neoprontasil in the rat

    Xenobiotica

    (1971)
  • R. Gingel et al.

    Intestinal azo-reduction and glucuronide conjugation of prontosil

    Xenobiotica

    (1973)
  • M.A. Peppercorn et al.

    The role of intestinal bacteria in the metabolism of salicylazosulfapyridine

    J Pharmacol Exp Ther

    (1972)
  • H. Schroder et al.

    Azo reduction of salicyl-azo-sulphapyridine in germ-free and conventional rats

    Xenobiotica

    (1973)
  • S.C. Truelove

    Evolution of olsalazine

    Scand J Gastroenterol

    (1988)
  • R.P. Chan et al.

    Studies of two novel sulfasalazine analogs, ipsalazide and balsalazide

    Dig Dis Sci

    (1983)
  • F. Rafii et al.

    Reduction of azo dyes and nitroaromatic compounds by bacterial enzymes from the human intestinal tract

    Environ Health Perspect

    (1995)
  • S. Takeno et al.

    Involvement of the intestinal microflora in nitrazepam-induced teratogenicity in rats and its relationship to nitroreduction

    Teratology

    (1991)
  • G.W. Elmer et al.

    Role of the intestinal microflora in clonazepam metabolism in the rat

    Xenobiotica

    (1984)
  • J. Fujii et al.

    Degradation of bromazepam by the intestinal microflora

    Chem Pharm Bull

    (1987)
  • R.L. Koch et al.

    The anaerobic metabolism of metronidazole forms n-(2-hydroxyethyl)-oxamic acid

    J Pharmacol Exp Ther

    (1979)
  • A. Wise et al.

    Dietary influence on caecal microbial nitroreduction of a drug: metronidazole

    Drug Nutr Interact

    (1982)
  • A.A. Yunis

    Chloramphenicol toxicity: 25 years of research

    Am J Med

    (1989)
  • Y. Deng et al.

    Investigations of hydrazine cleavage of eltrombopag in humans, investigations of hydrazine cleavage of eltrombopag in humans

    Drug Metab Dispos

    (2011)
  • Cited by (399)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text