Impact of Targeted Specific Antibiotic Delivery for Gut Microbiota Modulation on High-Fructose-Fed Rats
- 706 Downloads
The objective of present investigation was to study the effect of gut microbiota alteration by oral administration of targeted delivery of pH sensitive cefdinir microspheres to high-fructose-fed (HFD) rats. Rats were fed with a high-fructose diet with or without cefdinir microsphere administration for 30 days. The fecal microbiota community, oral glucose tolerance, the markers of liver injury, plasma and hepatic lipids profile, and histological evaluation were investigated. The levels of blood glucose, liver injury markers, lipid profile in plasma and liver, and fat tissue were significantly increased in high-fructose-fed rats. However, after pH-sensitive cefdinir microsphere administration, the elevation of these parameters was significantly suppressed. Cef EL significantly lowered the increased AST (p < 0.05) and ALT (p < 0.001) levels in HFD group. There is a significant lower (p < 0.01) AUCglucose level in Cef EL group than HFD group The histological changes in the liver and the small and large intestines were more profound in HFD group as compared to cefdinir-treated HFD and control groups. Feeding of cefdinir microsphere sustained lactobacilli and bifidobacteria and significantly decreased (p < 0.05) the number of Enterobacteriaceae induced by HFD. Experimental evidences demonstrated that the effectiveness of pH-specific cefdinir microsphere on reducing insulin resistance and development of metabolic changes in high-fructose-fed rats and suggested that it may be a promising therapeutic agent in treating type 2 diabetes. Intestinal-targeted antibiotic delivery needs to be further explored for its therapeutic applications.
KeywordsCefdinir Microspheres Fructose Gut microbiota Diabetes Inflammation
The authors are thankful to Nirma Education and Research Foundation (NERF), Ahmedabad for providing infrastructure and financial support. Authors are also thankful for the help and cooperation rendered by Dr. Sanjiv Acharya and Mr. Prerak Patel (Institute of Pharmacy, Nirma University).
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
- 1.International Diabetes Federation. (2012). Diabetes atlas (5th ed.). Brussels: International Diabetes Federation.Google Scholar
- 6.Willett, W., Manson, J., & Liu, S. (2001). Glycemic index, glycemic load, and risk of type 2 diabetes. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 76, 274S–280S.Google Scholar
- 30.Polavarapu, R., Spitz, D. R., Sim, J. E., Follansbee, M. H., et al. (1998). Increased lipid peroxidation and impaired antioxidant enzyme function is associated with pathological liver injury in experimental alcoholic liver disease in rats fed diets high in corn oil and fish oil. Hepatology, 27, 1317–1323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 32.Singh, V., & Chaudhary, A. K. (2011). Preparation of Eudragit E100 microspheres by modified solvent evaporation method. Acta Poloniae Pharmaceutica-Drug Research, 68(6), 975–980.Google Scholar
- 33.Trapani, A., Laquintana, V., Denora, N., Lopedota, A., Cutrignelli, A., & Franco, M. (2007). Eudragit RS 100 microparticles containing 2-hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin and glutathione: physicochemical characterization, drug release and transport studies. European Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, 30, 64–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar