Your browser does not support the NLM PubReader view.

Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.

Bioactive metabolites: A clue to the link between MASLD and CKD?

Article information

Clin Mol Hepatol. 2025;31(1):56-73
Publication date (electronic) : 2024 October 21
doi : https://doi.org/10.3350/cmh.2024.0782
Wen-Ying Chen1, Jia-Hui Zhang2, Li-Li Chen1, Christopher D. Byrne3, Giovanni Targher4,5, Liang Luo6, Yan Ni7, Ming-Hua Zheng,1,8,9orcid_icon, Dan-Qin Sun,10,11,12orcid_icon
1MAFLD Research Center, Department of Hepatology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China
2Department of Pediatric Laboratory, Affiliated Children’s Hospital of Jiangnan University, Wuxi Children’s Hospital, Wuxi, Jiangsu, China
3Southampton National Institute for Health and Care Research Biomedical Research Centre, University Hospital Southampton and University of Southampton, Southampton General Hospital, Southampton, UK
4Department of Medicine, University of Verona, Verona, Italy
5Metabolic Diseases Research Unit, IRCCS Sacro Cuore - Don Calabria Hospital, Negrar di Valpolicella, Italy
6Intensive Care Medicine, Jiangnan University Medical Center, Wuxi, China
7Children’s Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, National Clinical Research Center for Child Health, Hangzhou, China
8Institute of Hepatology, Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, China
9Key Laboratory of Diagnosis and Treatment for the Development of Chronic Liver Disease in Zhejiang Province, Wenzhou, China
10Urologic Nephrology Center, Jiangnan University Medical Center, Wuxi, China
11Affiliated Wuxi Clinical College of Nantong University, Wuxi, China
12Department of Nephrology, Wuxi No.2 People’s Hospital, Wuxi, China
Corresponding author : Dan-Qin Sun Urologic Nephrology Center, Jiangnan University Medical Center, Wuxi 214000, Jiangsu Province, China Tel: +86-510-68562222, Fax: +86-510-68562052, E-mail: sundanqin@njmu.edu.cn
Ming-Hua Zheng MAFLD Research Center, Department of Hepatology, the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou 325000, Zhejiang Province, China Tel: +86-577-55579611, Fax: +86-577-55578522, E-mail: zhengmh@wmu.edu.cn
Editor: Seung Up Kim, Yonsei University, Korea
Received 2024 September 9; Revised 2024 October 15; Accepted 2024 October 18.

Abstract

Metabolites produced as intermediaries or end-products of microbial metabolism provide crucial signals for health and diseases, such as metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). These metabolites include products of the bacterial metabolism of dietary substrates, modification of host molecules (such as bile acids [BAs], trimethylamine-N-oxide, and short-chain fatty acids), or products directly derived from bacteria. Recent studies have provided new insights into the association between MASLD and the risk of developing chronic kidney disease (CKD). Furthermore, alterations in microbiota composition and metabolite profiles, notably altered BAs, have been described in studies investigating the association between MASLD and the risk of CKD. This narrative review discusses alterations of specific classes of metabolites, BAs, fructose, vitamin D, and microbiota composition that may be implicated in the link between MASLD and CKD.

Keywords: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease; Chronic kidney disease; Bioactive metabolites; Bile acids; Gut microbiota

INTRODUCTION

The metabolome is represented by all low-molecularweight molecules (metabolites) that are present in the cell and modulate other ‘omics’, such as the genome, epigenome, transcriptome and proteome. Through the inter-twined interactions between the metabolome and other ‘omics’, metabolites directly modulate biological processes and diseases [1]. Several metabolites, including bile acids (BAs), trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO), uremic toxins, short-chain fatty acids (SCFA), lipopolysaccharide (LPS), fructose and vitamin D (Vit D), have emerged as important regulators that may interact with the host [2-4]. Abnormalities in the composition and function of metabolites, especially altered BA profiles, might partly contribute to the development of metabolic diseases, such as metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) [5,6], also known as metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease [7], which may progress to metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH), cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma [8]. Recent studies also reported that individuals with MASLD have significantly lower values of estimated glomerular filtration rate and a greater prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) than those without liver disease, suggesting that MASLD may be associated with an increased risk of developing CKD [9-12]. Our previous study has also indicated that urine protein biomarkers are an accurate tool for the non-invasive diagnosis of liver fibrosis in MASLD [13]. Despite the difficulty in defining a causal relationship between MASLD and CKD (MLKD), increasing evidence suggests that alterations in the BA profile and gut microbiota are involved in the pathogenesis of MLKD [14,15]. Therefore, in this narrative review, we aim to discuss gut microbiota-derived metabolites, with a special focus on the alterations of the BA profile and gut microbiome and the interactions between gut microbiota and the host, via BAsensing receptors (mainly the Farnesoid X receptor [FXR] and Takeda G protein-coupled receptor 5 [TGR5]) together with other bioactive metabolites, such as fructose, and Vit D that are potentially implicated in the development of MLKD.

BILE ACIDS AND MLKD

Bile acid metabolism

Figure 1 schematically summarizes the metabolism of BAs [16,17]. In humans, the most abundant BAs are the primary bile acids (PBAs), i.e., cholic acid (CA), and chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA), which are initially produced by the enzymatic activities of cholesterol 7α-hydroxylase and cholesterol 27α-hydroxylase. These enzymatic processes are followed by the conjugation of CA and CDCA to either taurine or glycine by bile acyl-CoA synthetase and bile acid-CoA:amino acid N-acyltransferase to form taurocholic acid (TCA), glycocholic acid (GCA), taurochenodeoxycholic acid (TCDCA) and glycochenodeoxycholic acid (GCDCA) [18]. In the intestine, conjugated CA and CDCA are deconjugated and converted by 7-alpha-dehydroxylase to deoxycholic acid (DCA) and lithocholic acid (LCA), i.e., the main secondary BAs (SBAs) [16,18]. Subsequently, DCA and LCA can be transformed into iso-DCA and iso-LCA via the so-called iso-BA pathway [19].

Figure 1.

Bile acid biosynthesis, transport pathways, metabolism and excretion. Cholesterol is converted into primary bile acids (PBAs) via classical pathway and alternative pathway and conjugated to glycine or taurine in the hepatocytes, then secreted into bile, which flows through the bile duct to the intestine. At the terminal ileum, most BAs are recycled to the liver via portal circulation. Unabsorbed BAs are passed along from the small to large intestine. In the colon lumen, conjugated PBAs are metabolized into secondary bile acids (SBAs) by microbial enzymes from gut bacteria. Conjugated cholic acid (CA) and chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA) are deconjugated via bacterium with bile salt hydrolases, including Clostridium, Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Listeria, Enterococcus, Bacteroides, Stenotrophomonas and Brucella, and then 7α-dehydroxylated with Clostridium and Eubacterium to form deoxycholic acid (DCA) and lithocholic acid (LCA). The majority of CDCA is converted to α-muricholic acid (α-MCA) and β-MCA, which are predominant in mice and scarce in humans. Tauro-α-muricholic acid (Tα-MCA) is deconjugated to form α-MCA. α-MCA is C-6 epimerized with Bacteroides, Eubacterium, Clostridium, Escherichia, Eggerthella, Peptostreptococcus and Ruminococcus to form ω-MCA, and then ω-MCA is 7α-dehydroxylated to form hyodeoxycholic acid (HDCA). CDCA is transformed into ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) by the hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (HSDH) with Actinobacteria, Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, and Bacteroidetes. BAs that are not absorbed from the small and large intestine excreted in feces. In the kidney, cholesterol is converted into BAs via CYP27A1 and CYP7B1. After the first hepatic pass, BAs that have not been cleared are filtrated by the renal glomerulus and reabsorbed by proximal tubular cell of the kidney, and unabsorbed BAs are excreted into urine.

Altered bile acid profiles in MLKD

BAs play a crucial role in maintaining the host’s physiological functions and may influence the onset and progression of MLKD. Growing evidence has demonstrated that circulating BA levels are increased in humans or animal models with MASLD [20-24]. A population-based cohort study showed that circulating levels of total BAs, PBAs, and SBAs are significantly higher in patients with MASLD than in healthy controls (HC) [25]. Conversely, Caussy et al. [26] elucidated that PBAs are reduced, whereas conjugated PBAs are increased in patients with MASLD. Similarly, increases in individual BA concentrations and alterations of BA com-position have also been reported in patients with MASH. A cross-sectional study showed that increased total PBAs and decreased SBAs are characteristics of MASH; this increase in PBAs might be due to increased PBA synthesis, decreased intestinal SBA conversion, or decreased PBA dehydroxylation and reduced SBA formation [21]. Furthermore, in a study of 102 patients with biopsy-confirmed MASLD, Nimer et al. [27] reported that higher levels of individual BAs (i.e., increased levels of plasma GCDCA, GCA, 7-Keto-DCA, and glycoursodeoxycholic acid [GUDCA]) are associated with higher histological grades of hepatic inflammation and fibrosis. BAs are also important modulators of the intestinal microbiome, but the bidirectional impact between altered BA profile and microbiome composition is not fully understood. Smirnova et al. [22] reported that fecal SBAs are higher in patients with MASLD, whereas 7,12-diketo-LCA, glycodeoxycholic acid (GDCA) and LCA are higher in those with MASH. Furthermore, metabolites of deoxycholate, including 12-dehydrocholate acid (12-DHCA), 7-keto-DCA, DHCA and GDCA, are increased in individu-als with MASH and liver fibrosis, suggesting a relationship between specific changes in the fecal BA profile and the severity of liver disease activity [22].

Recent observational studies have demonstrated that MASLD may be an independent risk factor for CKD [14,28-30]. In addition to the alterations of BAs reported in people with MASLD, clinical studies have also reported alterations in serum BA profile and BA homeostasis in people with CKD. For example, Chu et al. [31] reported increased serum BA levels and decreased urinary BA levels in patients with CKD, mainly due to decreased renal filtration of BAs. Increased plasma TCA and decreased CDCA levels were also observed in patients with hypertensive nephropathy compared to those with hypertension alone, possibly due to bile salt metabolism within the gut microbiome influencing renal disease [32]. Moreover, it has been reported that patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) have decreased levels of unconjugated BAs and SBAs, such as CA, CDCA, DCA, hyodeoxycholic acid (HDCA), ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), α+ω muricholic acid (MCA), γMCA, 7-keto-LCA, 12-keto-LCA and 6,7-diketo-LCA, while conjugated BAs and PBAs, including βMCA, GCA, GCDCA, TCA, TCDCA, taurohyocholic acid, tauro-α-muricholic acid (TαMCA) and tauroursodeoxycholic acid (TUDCA), were all significantly increased [33]. However, the precise roles of distinct BAs in the diagnosis and prognosis of patients with CKD remain unclear, suggesting the need for further studies.

In addition to the altered BA profiles observed in individuals with MASLD or CKD, similar studies evaluating BA profile have also been conducted in rodent models [34,35]. For example, MASLD mice fed with a high-fat diet (HFD) had significantly higher levels of taurodeoxycholic acid (TDCA), DCA, TCA, CA, and lower levels of MCA and TUDCA than control mice [36]. Similarly, MASH mice fed a methionine- and choline-deficient diet exhibited significantly higher serum levels of TDCA, CDCA, LCA, and taurolithocholic acid (TLCA) than control mice [35]. On the other hand, in diabetic nephropathy (DN) mice, Wei et al. [37] found that serum levels of total BAs, TCA, and Tβ-MCA were increased. Furthermore, in the feces of DN rats, there were increased total BAs, CA, DCA, and a decreased DCA-to-CA ratio, which might partly contribute to the progression of renal impairment by increasing mucosal permeability and gut inflammation [38].

Due to discrepancies in the published literature, we have focused on concordant results where the circulating levels of BA metabolites are described in patients with MASLD or CKD alone and in those with combined MLKD (Supplementary Table 1) [33,39]. When comparing MLKD patients to healthy individuals, a consistently altered BA signature was observed in the circulating levels of PBAs (principally increased plasma TCA [27,32,39-41], GCA [21,27,33], TUDCA [33,41] and GCDCA [21,27,39,41]). Similarly, in our unpublished study, we found an increase in plasma TCDCA and GCDCA levels in patients with MLKD, which is consistent with previously published literature [21,27]. Furthermore, some plasma BAs show an opposite trend in patients with MASLD (increased levels of CA [5], CDCA [5], HDCA [27], UDCA [5]) compared to those with CKD (decreased levels of CA [15], CDCA [32], HDCA [33], UDCA [33]). Previous studies also reached contradictory conclusions regarding the BA profile in MASLD or CKD. For example, increases in TCDCA and DCA are reported in MASLD or CKD patients [15,27], whereas Tan et al. have shown that TCDCA is decreased in MASLD and Li et al. found that DCA is reduced in ESRD patients [33,40]. Furthermore, HDCA is a metabolite of βMCA, generated by bacterial 6β-epimerization and additional 7β-dehydroxylation in the small intestine [42]. A recent study has indicated that MASLD was specifically characterized by decreased plasma levels of HDCA [43]. This study showed an improvement in hepatic steatosis via activation of the BA alternative synthetic pathway by inhibiting intestinal FXR signaling. Additionally, HDCA significantly increased the abundance of probiotic species by peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)-α signaling (further validated in mouse models) to upregulate hepatic FXR [43]. However, the underlying mechanisms linking HDCA and CKD are poorly understood. UDCA is a hydrophilic BA synthesized in the colon by bacterial 7β epimerization of CDCA and is considered the first-line treatment for primary biliary cholangitis [44,45]. It has been reported that UDCA strongly affects cholesterol and BA synthesis and induces neutral lipid accumulation in the liver by exerting FXR-antagonistic effects in patients with MASLD [46]. UDCA also affects the kidney by preventing over-expression of sodium-glucose cotransporter and oxidative stress, as shown in diabetic rats [47]. However, the precise mechanisms by which BAs may affect kidney disease in MLKD are not fully understood, and further research is needed.

BA-related gut microbiome changes and MLKD

Enteric dysbiosis increases gut permeability to produce active metabolites, such as TMAO, SCFA, and SBAs, and these are implicated in several conditions linked to MASLD [48-50]. Microbial enzymes from gut bacteria indirectly metabolize BAs via SCFA and TMAO, as described in detail in the following section.

The microbial genera involved in BA metabolism are Clostridium, Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Listeria, Enterococcus, Bacteroides, Stenotrophomonas and Brucella for BA deconjugation; Clostridium and Eubacterium for 7-dehydroxylation; and Bacteroides, Eubacterium, Clostridium, Escherichia, Eggerthella, Peptostreptococcus, and Ruminococcus for epimerization and oxidation of hydroxyl groups at ring positions 3, 7, or 12. Actinobacteria, Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, and Bacteroidetes with hydroxysteroid dehydrogenases (HSDH) attributed to the oxidation of hydroxyl, as well [16,42]. Enteric metabolites, such as SCFA and TMAO, play crucial roles in BA metabolism in patients with MLKD. SCFA (including acetate, sodium butyrate and propionate) originate from dietary fiber and escape fermentation until their passing into the colon and cecum, where they are metabolized by microbes. A study from China reported that circulating SCFA levels (mainly butyrate) were lower in patients with CKD than control subjects, thus increasing the synthesis of uremic toxins, such as tryptophan metabolites and TMAO, and inducing kidney dysfunction [51]. TMAO is mainly produced from the microbial processing of dietary components, such as choline and carnitine [52]. Emerging evidence suggests that plasma TMAO levels are increased in patients with MLKD [53,54]. Recent data have also shown disturbances in TMAO-mediated crosstalk with gut microbiota may disrupt the sinusoidal vasculature to promote liver fibrosis in MASH [55]. TMAO may also aggravate the progression of kidney dysfunction by promoting tubular-interstitial fibrosis and collagen deposition [56]. A previous animal study in apolipoprotein (Apo) E−/− mice reported that increased TMAO levels may alter cholesterol transport and decrease the total BA pool size [57]. However, Tan et al. reported that in a murine model, TMAO administration increased hepatic steatosis, increased BA synthesis and shifted hepatic BA composition towards FXR-antagonistic activity [40].

Using results from the bacterial contribution to metabolite production, we have focused on the bacterial effects on BA synthesis metabolism, summarizing results according to the taxonomic level (bacterial phylum, class, family and genus) associated with the presence and severity of MLKD. Compared to healthy controls, there are significant increases in the phylum Bacteroidetes and decreases in the phylum Firmicutes in the feces of MASLD patients, accounting for more than 90% of the total gut microbiota in humans [49,58-64]. In contrast, the phylum Proteobacteria was consistently increased, leading to increased levels of microbial gut toxins in MASLD patients [60,61,65]. Two predominant members of the Firmicutes family, i.e., Lachnospiraceae and Ruminococcaceae were markedly decreased in MASLD patients, which can affect the SCFA synthesis and potentially impact intestinal integrity and permeability in the pathogenesis of MASLD [58,66,67]. Furthermore, the genus Escherichia_Shigella is an ethanol-producing bacterium that affects fatty acid metabolism and exacerbates gut leakiness, and this organism was found to be markedly increased in patients with MASLD [68-72]. Additionally, the genus Lactobacillus was increased across the whole spectrum of MASLD (MASL, MASH, advanced fibrosis, and cirrhosis) [60,61,73].

That said, several findings disagree with previous results in the study of the gut microbiota in MASLD. For example, it has been reported that patients with MASLD have reduced abundance of the phylum Bacteroidetes [73,74], but increased phylum Firmicutes [65,74], family Lactobacillaceae and Ruminococcaceae [49,61]. Moreover, some studies have concentrated on microbiome signatures in MASLD severity. Schwimmer et al. [60] found that the phyla Bacteroidetes and Proteobacteria and genus Lactobacillus were more abundant in MASLD patients with moderate-to-severe liver fibrosis (F≥2), whereas Firmicutes were more abundant in those with absent or mild fibrosis (F≤1).

Some evidence has also related CKD to the microbial metabolites and composition of the intestine [75-77]. A study of 50 patients with CKD and 22 healthy control subjects has shown that patients with CKD had reduced abundance of the phylum Actinobacteria and increased genera Lactobacillus in their fecal samples [78]. Studies involving different animal models of CKD have also reported the presence of intestinal dysbiosis. Hu et al. [79] found that in the high salt-induced CKD mouse, there were decreased levels of Firmicutes and increased levels of Bacteroidetes. However, DN mice exhibited increased levels of the phylum Firmicutes but decreased Bacteroidetes compared to nondiabetic control mice. Simultaneously, Bacteroides and Ruminococcus were reduced at the genus level [80]. An experimental study of an adenine-induced CKD mouse model showed that the genus Lactobacillus was increased [81] and an unclassified Lactobacillaceae family and Clostridia class were decreased, whereas genus Bifidobacterium and Clostridium were increased in this adenineinduced CKD mouse model [82]. Similarly, gut microbiota and its metabolites, indoxyl sulfate (IS), p-cresyl sulfate (PCS) and TMAO, are also known as uremic toxins, and may also contribute to the progression of CKD [83]. As a potent uremic toxin, IS is generated by intestinal bacteria such as Lactobacilli, exerting its adverse effects on the kidney and vascular system [84,85]. IS may also promote vascular inflammation in CKD [86]. PCS is another uremic toxin specifically produced by microbiome like Bacteroides fragilis that may promote renal fibrosis by increasing reactive oxygen species (ROS), transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) and stimulating the renal-angiotensin-aldosterone system, thus inducing renal tubular damage [87,88].

Studying the alterations of the gut microbiome in MLKD, we noted that there are four bacteria, phylum Firmicutes and Proteobacteria, and genus Lactobacillus, Escherichia_Shigella that are changed in patients with MLKD (Supplementary Table 2). In particular, Proteobacteria and Lactobacillus were increased in patients with MLKD. Escherichia_Shigella was increased in patients with MASLD but decreased in those with CKD. In contrast, Firmicutes was reduced in patients with MASLD but increased in those with CKD.

It is well known that a HFD may alter the gut microbiome composition [74,89]. Exposure to oral antibiotics in HFD-fed mice induced lower levels of the genera Lactobacillus and decreased bile salt hydrolase activity, which led to in-creased levels of Tβ-MCA, by inhibiting activation of intestinal FXR and resisting HFD-induced MASLD, thus suggesting that there is an endogenous pathway controlling metabolic fitness that involves BAs, gut bacteria and FXR receptors [90]. Treatment with Lactobacillus in CKD rats ameliorated the increased urinary protein excretion and inflammation associated with renal failure, suggesting that Lactobacillus may be protective against CKD progression [91]. However, the precise role of gut microbiota in the progression of MLKD is not fully understood and requires further extensive research.

Bile acid signaling pathways

Pathogenic mechanisms of FXR

The human BA composition is influenced by microbial transformations and gut metabolites, affecting the activity of BA-associated receptors, such as FXR and TGR5. In Figure 2, we illustrate the possible molecular mechanisms relating to BA metabolism that underlie the development of liver and kidney damage in the process of MLKD. It is reported that levels of FXR and TGR5 are associated with the presence of MASLD [92]; several studies have also demonstrated that hepatic and renal expression of FXR and TGR5 are mainly downregulated in the presence of MLKD (Table 1). FXR is a ligand-activated transcription factor highly expressed in the liver, intestine and kidneys that controls all aspects of metabolism, including BA homeostasis and glucose-lipid metabolism. The FXR agonist activity ranking for BAs is CDCA, DCA, CA, and LCA in sequence, whereas TαMCA, Tβ-MCA, TUDCA and GUDCA serve as inhibitors of FXR [93]. FXR can modulate BA homeostasis via three main pathways: the small heterodimer partner (SHP) pathway, the mouse fibroblast growth factor-15 (FGF-15) or fibroblast growth factor-19 (FGF-19) pathway, and the c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) pathway. SHP, as a downstream target of FXR, inhibits the expression of CYP7A1, which is a rate-limiting enzyme responsible for the hydroxylation of the cholesterol ring structure at carbon atom position 7 in BA biosynthesis [94,95]. Additionally, when FXR is activated, FGF-15/19 are upregulated in the intestine, thus entering the liver through the enterohepatic circulation. FGF-15/19 may act on the fibroblast growth factor receptor-4 and SHP in the liver mainly via the JNK-depend pathway to inhibit the CYP7A1 expression, thus reducing the BA pool [96]. With regards to FXR involvement in lipid metabolism, FXR suppresses the upregulation of sterol regulatory element-binding protein-1c (SREBP-1c), which is essential in the fatty acid biosynthesis, thus resulting in the repression of lipogenic genes, such as fatty acid synthase, acetyl CoA carboxylase and stearoyl CoA desaturase (SCD) [97-99]. This FXR-induced effect may reduce the production of triglyceride (TG) and very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) particles. Moreover, FXR may induce the expression of the VLDL receptor and the microsomal TG transfer protein to suppress VLDL formation. Additionally, FXR activation increases the expression of the lipoprotein lipase (LPL) activator, apolipoprotein (Apo) CII, and inhibits the expression of the LPL inhibitor, Apo CIII, thereby increasing LPL activity that promotes the clearance of TG-rich lipoproteins by stimulating TG hydrolysis in VLDL [17]. Not only is VLDL clearance affected, but high-density lipoprotein (HDL) metabolism is also subject to modulation by FXR agonists. Administration of an FXR ligand increases the expression of scavenger receptor B1, a molecule in charge of hepatic HDL uptake that increases HDL clearance and consequently lowers plasma HDL-cholesterol levels.

Figure 2.

Differential expression of FXR and TGR5 receptors and putative pathogenic mechanisms in MASLD and CKD. FXR and TGR5 are expressed in the liver (mainly in hepatocytes), kidney (mainly in the glomerulus and tubular cells, especially the proximal tubular cells), and other tissues, such as skeletal muscle and adipose tissue (BAT, brown adipose tissue). Activation of both FXR and TGR5 facilitates a decrease in lipid accumulation in the liver and kidneys, whilst improving insulin sensitivity and hepatocyte inflammation and apoptosis by inhibiting endoplasmic reticulum stress and oxidative stress in MASLD. Activation of both FXR and TGR5 represses the expression of multiple profibrotic growth factors and proinflammatory cytokines to improve glomerulosclerosis, tubulointerstitial fibrosis and proteinuria in CKD. Activation of both FXR and TGR5 promotes mitochondrial activity in BAT and skeletal muscle cells and increases energy expenditure.

FXR and TGR5 expression levels in patients with MASLD or CKD and preclinical models of MASLD or CKD

In addition, FXR activation may exert a significant effect on glucose metabolism. It has been reported that impaired insulin sensitivity and elevated blood glucose levels are found in FXR-deficient mice in random-fed and fasting states. Activation of the hepatic FXR nuclear receptor induces the expression of phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase and glucose 6-phosphatase, decreasing hepatic glucose production and lowering plasma glucose levels in both wild-type and diabetic mice, thus improving glucose tolerance and insulin sensitivity [100,101]. However, in a mouse model of gestational diabetes mellitus, McIlvride et al. [102] reported that FXR activation by obeticholic acid reduced the impact of pregnancy on insulin resistance but did not change glucose tolerance. Thus, the overall effects of FXR agonism on glucose levels need to be elucidated. Additionally, activation of gut-restricted FXR may induce STC-1 in enteroendocrine cells to stimulate glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) secretion to improve glucose tolerance and hepatic insulin sensitivity [103]. In addition to its impact on physiological metabolism, FXR also suppresses low-grade inflammation, endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress, oxidative stress, and hepatocyte death in patients with MASLD. Yan et al. [104] have studied the mechanism(s) of the hepatoprotective effects of FXR agonists in MASLD progression by hepatocytes or other tissue/cell-specific FXR-null mice. Hepatic FXR activation enables the antagonization of nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) activation to reduce hepatic inflammation. FXR activation also represses ER stress by downregulating protein kinase-like ER kinase (p-PERK)/CCAAT-enhancer-binding protein homologous protein pathway Metallothionein 1, which is an antioxidant protein primarily induced by FXR to suppress ROS. Meanwhile, in rodent models of MASH, activation of FXR via obeticholic acid enables the inhibition of p53 activation, protecting hepatocytes from cell death and reducing hepatic fibrogenesis in MASH [104].

FXR is also localized in renal glomeruli and proximal tubules, but its expression in proximal tubules is higher than in glomeruli [105]. Studies indicate a crucial role for FXR in regulating lipid metabolism, fibrogenesis, and inflammation in the kidney. Virchow et al. [106] first reported that the progression of CKD was associated with abnormal lipid metabolism. SREBP-1, SCD-1 and SCD-2, which are genes regulating lipogenesis pathways, were all increased in HFD-fed mice. In contrast, this effect was reversed by FXR activation, which was also observed in DN mice models [105,107]. Additionally, in DN mice models, FXR activation ameliorates glomerulosclerosis, tubulointerstitial fibrosis, and proteinuria by reducing renal gene expression, such as mesangial matrix proteins fibronectin, fibrosis markers fibroblast-specific protein-1 and α-smooth muscle actin, as well as the profibrotic growth factors TGF-β, the proinflammatory cytokines tumor necrosis factor-β; these experimental data collectively support a renal-protective role for FXR [105]. Further, it is reported that activation of FXR may suppress kidney fibrosis and downregulate Smad3 expression, which has a central role in renal fibrogenesis [108]. Marquardt et al. [109] also found that the TUDCA-induced FXR-dependent genes suppressor of cytokine signaling and dimethylarginine dimethylaminohydrolase-1 expression in tubular cells ameliorates maladaptive ER stress signaling and protects the tubular compartment via FXR agonism in DN mice, thereby suggesting another potentially protective mechanism linking FXR agonism to protection from renal disease.

Pathogenic mechanisms of TGR5

TGR5 is activated by natural or synthetic ligands and it is widely expressed in adipocytes, myocytes, Kupffer cells, enteroendocrine cells and renal cells [110]. TGR5 is, therefore, relevant for regulating energy expenditure, glucose metabolism and immunity in MASLD/MASH [110]. In the intestine, activation of TGR5 induces the release of GLP-1 from enteroendocrine L-cells and acts on pancreatic β cells to potentiate insulin secretion in response to glucose [111]. The activation of TGR5 increases thermogenesis in the brown adipose tissue (BAT) and skeletal muscle by upregulating the gene encoding type 2 iodothyronine-deiodinase; this enzyme converts inactive thyroxine to active 3,5,3´-tri-iodothyronine, thus increasing oxygen consumption and energy expenditure [110,112]. In Kupffer cells, the activation of TGR5 is implicated in the inflammatory response, inducing an antiinflammatory effect mainly through inhibition of nuclear NF-κB translocation and suppression of cytokine production [113,114].

Wang et al. [115] have studied CKD mice models and human renal cells, establishing a role for TGR5 in CKD. TGR5 is expressed in the highest levels in the renal tubules. In DN mice, a selective TGR5 synthetic agonist INT-777 induced renal mitochondrial biogenesis, reduced oxidative stress, and induced fatty acid β-oxidation [115]. Meanwhile, TGR5 activation reduced TGF-β1 and fibronectin expressions by suppressing sphingosine 1-phosphate/sphingosine 1-phosphate receptor signaling to ameliorate DN [116]. This was thought to prevent DN development by decreasing urinary albumin excretion, glomerular mesangial expansion, accumulation of extracellular matrix proteins, macrophage accumulation, and podocyte injury in the kidneys. Similar to DN mice models, there is a higher abundance of p-AMPK, PGC-1α, and SIRT3 in obesity-associated nephropathy mice treated with the TGR5 synthetic agonist INT-777. TGR5 activation in these obesity-associated nephropathy mice also attenuated proteinuria, podocyte injury, mesangial expansion, and renal fibrosis by reducing the accumulation of extracellular matrix proteins fibronectin and type IV collagen, profibrotic growth factors TGF-β, CD68 macrophages, and proinflammatory cytokine monocyte chemoattractant protein (MCP)-1 [115]. Additionally, in human podocytes exposed to high glucose, TGR5 activation-induced mitochondrial biogenesis, decreased oxidative stress and increased fatty acid β-oxidation [115], thus further suggesting a favorable effect of TGR5 activation in the kidney to protect against renal disease.

FRUCTOSE AND MLKD

Fructose metabolism and pathology in MLKD

Fructose that is mainly metabolized by the liver in humans is commonly found in high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) [117]. Due to its lipogenic potential, an increased fructose intake may also promote the development of MASLD [118]. Fructose intake is nearly 2-3 fold higher in patients with MASLD than in healthy controls [119]. Additionally, serum uric acid concentrations are increased in individuals who consume HFCS-sweetened beverages compared with those consuming SSB [118]. Increased fructose intake might also contribute, directly or indirectly, to the development of MLKD possibly through a fructose-induced increase in uric acid concentration and/or a fructose-induced stimulation of hepatic lipogenesis.

Fructose-induced gut microbiome changes and MLKD

Various human gut microbiota species encode fructose uptake and metabolizing genes, thus fructose may contribute to the development of MASLD through effects on the gut [120]. Increased fructose consumption may contribute to intestinal dysbiosis as observed in recent studies. Experimentally, it has been reported that the composition of the phyla Bacteroidetes or Proteobacteria, which are the major phyla constituting the Gram-negative bacteria, was substantially increased in mice fed with high fructose intake [121]. Alteration of the Gram-negative bacteria, featured by bacterial endotoxin or LPS, was a significant factor for increasing gut permeability and inducing low-grade inflammation [122]. On the other hand, dietary fructose intake increases the abundance of Escherichia, which is required for the generation of trimethylamine that is metabolized into TMAO, a risk factor for CKD [117]. It is believed that bacteria are coupled with the host pathologies of MLKD in the presence of high fructose intake [123].

VIT D AND MLKD

Vit D metabolism and pathologies in MLKD

Vit D is an essential steroid hormone, which is synthesized initially in the skin, predominantly in the liver to produce 25-hydroxyvitamin D, and dominantly occurs in the proximal tubule of the kidney to generate 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D [124]. Vit D deficiency (VDD) is frequently present in MLKD, with an estimation of over 1 billion people worldwide suffering a Vit D deficiency (<15 ng/mL) or Vit D insufficiency (<30 ng/mL) [4]. Nelson et al. [125] found that VDD is associated with increased histologic severity of hepatic steatosis, ballooning, lobular inflammation grade and fibrosis in people with MASLD, possibly through upregulating liver tissue expression of multiple genes involved in hepatic inflammation and oxidative stress. On the other hand, VDD is a risk factor for all-cause mortality in patients with advanced CKD due to disturbance of calcium and phosphorus homeostasis, dysregulation of the innate and adaptive immune system, and low-grade chronic inflammation [126]. Conversely, patients with CKD are also susceptible to developing VDD, which may further exacerbate the progression of CKD [126].

Vit D-induced gut microbiome changes in MLKD

Recent studies have revealed the functions of Vit D, particularly its role in regulating the immune system, one of which is mediated by a Vit D-induced modulation of gut microbiota [127]. Bacterial-produced LPS is involved in developing low-grade inflammation and activating the immune system in MASLD. Besides, gut microbiota can interact with the progression of MASLD, possibly through toll-like receptors (TLR), expressed on the gut epithelium, to mediate immune functions and stimulate inflammation [128]. Meanwhile, the immune system is also affected in patients with CKD, particularly TLRs, which play an essential role in synthesizing multiple proinflammatory cytokines in response to a bacterial challenge [129]. VDD causing intestinal dysbiosis, such as an increase in Bacteriodetes and Proteobacteria phyla, may contribute to the dysregulation of the immune system of host pathologies in MLKD [130].

POTENTIAL TREATMENTS FOR MLKD BY ALTERATION OF GUT MICROBIOTA

Despite there being no single definitive treatment available for MLKD, drugs like vitamin E, statins, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors were extensively reviewed [14]. In particular, GLP-1RAs and SGLT2 inhibitors, which are drugs approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, have the potential to benefit MLKD due to their abilities to reduce obesity and improve MASLD and CKD at least partly via regulating gut microbiota [123]. Experimentally, the GLP-1RA liraglutide can modify the gut microbiota structure by increasing Lactobacillus reuteri species, which enhance the weight-loss and fat-browning effects of GLP-1RAs [131]. Conversely, SGLT2 inhibitors can reduce metabolites from uremic toxins to improve CKD by increasing Akkermansia and Lachnoclostridium species [132].

CONCLUSION

A growing body of experimental and clinical evidence indicates that alteration of metabolites from the intestine and BA metabolism can influence the physiopathology of MLKD [21,31]. BAs and microbiota signatures could serve as non-invasive diagnostic biomarkers [27,68,78] and potential therapeutic targets for MLKD [133,134], but further research is needed. The presence of MASLD and advanced liver fibrosis is associated with a higher prevalence and incidence of CKD [28,135], and certain circulating BAs, increased fructose intake, VDD and altered gut microbiota may influence the development and progression of CKD via various mechanisms. GLP-1RAs and SGLT-2 inhibitors are attractive and promising treatments for MLKD, partly exerting their beneficial effects through drug-induced changes in the gut microbiota composition [136,137]. Three individual BAs are significantly higher in MASLD patients with coexisting CKD, and FXR and TGR5, as two BA-associated receptors, are potentially involved in the development and progression of MLKD [115,138]. Reliable biomarkers of BAs and their signaling pathways and microbiota signature are now needed to test therapeutic responses in MLKD.

Notes

Authors’ contribution

Dan-Qin Sun, Ming-Hua Zheng and Wen-Ying Chen drafted the manuscript and prepared the figures. Jia-Hui Zhang and Liang Luo collected the paper. Li-Li Chen drew the figures. Christopher D. Byrne, Giovanni Targher, and Yan Ni contributed to writing and proofreading the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82370577, 82070588, 82000690) and supported by China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2023M732681). Dan-Qin Sun is supported in part by grants from the Top Talent Support Program for young and middle-aged people of Wuxi Health Committee and scientific technological innovation and venture capital fund in Wuxi (BJ2023023), scientific technological innovation and venture capital fund in Wuxi (Y20232011). GT is supported in part by grants from the School of Medicine, University of Verona, Italy. CDB is supported in part by the Southampton NIHR Biomedical Research Centre (NIHR 203319), UK.

Abbreviations

Apo

apolipoprotein

BAT

brown adipose tissue

CA

cholic acid

CDCA

chenodeoxycholic acid

CKD

chronic kidney disease

DCA

deoxycholic acid

DN

diabetic nephropathy

ER

endoplasmic reticulum

ERRα

estrogen related receptor-α

ESRD

end-stage renal disease

FGF

fibroblast growth factor

FXR

farnesoid X receptor

GCA

glycocholic acid

GCDCA

glycochenodeoxycholic acid

GDCA

glycodeoxycholic acid

GLP-1

glucagon-like peptide-1

GLP-1RA

glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist

GUDCA

glycoursodeoxycholic acid

HC

healthy controls

HDCA

hyodeoxycholic acid

HDL-C

high density lipoprotein-cholesterol

HFCS

high-fructose corn syrup

HFD

high fat diet

HSDH

hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase

IS

indoxyl sulfate

LPL

lipoprotein lipase

LPS

lipopolysaccharide

MASH

metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis

MASLD

metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease

MCA

muricholic acid

MLKD

MASLD and CKD

NF-κB

nuclear factor-κB

PBA

primary bile acid

PCS

p-cresyl sulfate

PGC-1α

PPARγ coactivator-1α

PPAR

peroxisome proliferator activated receptor

ROS

reactive oxygen species

SBA

secondary bile acid

SCD

stearoyl CoA desaturase

SCFA

short chain fatty acids

SGLT-2

sodium glucose co-transporter 2

SHP

small heterodimer partner

SREBP-1c

sterol regulatory element-binding protein-1c

SSB

sugar-sweetened beverages

TCA

taurocholic acid

TCDCA

taurochenodeoxycholic acid

TDCA

taurodeoxycholic acid

TG

triglyceride

TGF-β

transforming growth factor-β

TGR5

Takeda G protein coupled receptor 5

TLCA

taurolithocholic acid

TMAO

trimethylamine-N-oxide

TUDCA

tauroursodeoxycholic acid

TαMCA

tauro-α-muricholic acid

UDCA

ursodeoxycholic acid

VDD

vitamin D deficiency

Vit D

vitamin D

VLDL

very low density lipoprotein

SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL

Supplementary material is available at Clinical and Molecular Hepatology website (http://www.e-cmh.org).

Supplementary Table 1.

Summary of altered bile acid profile in patients with MASLD or CKD and animal models of MASLD or CKD

cmh-2024-0782-Supplementary-Table-1.pdf
Supplementary Table 2.

Intestinal BA-modifying bacteria spectrum in patients with MASLD or CKD and animal models of MASLD or CKD

cmh-2024-0782-Supplementary-Table-2.pdf

References

1. Rinschen MM, Ivanisevic J, Giera M, Siuzdak G. Identification of bioactive metabolites using activity metabolomics. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2019;20:353–367.
2. Canfora EE, Meex RCR, Venema K, Blaak EE. Gut microbial metabolites in obesity, NAFLD and T2DM. Nat Rev Endocrinol 2019;15:261–273.
3. Herman MA, Birnbaum MJ. Molecular aspects of fructose metabolism and metabolic disease. Cell Metab 2021;33:2329–2354.
4. Holick MF. Vitamin D deficiency. N Engl J Med 2007;357:266–281.
5. Jiao N, Baker SS, Chapa-Rodriguez A, Liu W, Nugent CA, Tsompana M, et al. Suppressed hepatic bile acid signalling despite elevated production of primary and secondary bile acids in NAFLD. Gut 2018;67:1881–1891.
6. Liu AN, Xu CF, Liu YR, Sun DQ, Jiang L, Tang LJ, et al. Secondary bile acids improve risk prediction for non-invasive identification of mild liver fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2023;57:872–885.
7. Chen L, Tao X, Zeng M, Mi Y, Xu L. Clinical and histological features under different nomenclatures of fatty liver disease: NAFLD, MAFLD, MASLD and MetALD. J Hepatol 2024;80:e64–e66.
8. Feng G, Valenti L, Wong VW, Fouad YM, Yilmaz Y, Kim W, et al. Recompensation in cirrhosis: unravelling the evolving natural history of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2024;21:46–56.
9. Sun DQ, Jin Y, Wang TY, Zheng KI, Rios RS, Zhang HY, et al. MAFLD and risk of CKD. Metabolism 2021;115:154433.
10. Jung CY, Ryu GW, Kim HW, Ahn SH, Kim SU, Kim BS. Advanced liver fibrosis measured by transient elastography predicts chronic kidney disease development in individuals with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Diabetologia 2022;65:518–527.
11. Jung CY, Lee JI, Ahn SH, Kim SU, Kim BS. Agile 3+ and Agile 4 scores predict chronic kidney disease development in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2024;60:1051–1061.
12. Jung CY, Koh HB, Park KH, Joo YS, Kim HW, Ahn SH, et al. Metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease and risk of incident chronic kidney disease: a nationwide cohort study. Diabetes Metab 2022;48:101344.
13. Feng G, Zhang X, Zhang L, Liu WY, Geng S, Yuan HY, et al, ; CHESS-MAFLD Consortium. Novel urinary protein panels for the non-invasive diagnosis of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and fibrosis stages. Liver Int 2023;43:1234–1246.
14. Wang TY, Wang RF, Bu ZY, Targher G, Byrne CD, Sun DQ, et al. Association of metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease with kidney disease. Nat Rev Nephrol 2022;18:259–268.
15. Jimenez F, Monte MJ, El-Mir MY, Pascual MJ, Marin JJ. Chronic renal failure-induced changes in serum and urine bile acid profiles. Dig Dis Sci 2002;47:2398–2406.
16. Jia W, Xie G, Jia W. Bile acid-microbiota crosstalk in gastrointestinal inflammation and carcinogenesis. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018;15:111–128.
17. Taoka H, Yokoyama Y, Morimoto K, Kitamura N, Tanigaki T, Takashina Y, et al. Role of bile acids in the regulation of the metabolic pathways. World J Diabetes 2016;7:260–270.
18. Thomas C, Pellicciari R, Pruzanski M, Auwerx J, Schoonjans K. Targeting bile-acid signalling for metabolic diseases. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2008;7:678–693.
19. Devlin AS, Fischbach MA. A biosynthetic pathway for a prominent class of microbiota-derived bile acids. Nat Chem Biol 2015;11:685–690.
20. Mouzaki M, Wang AY, Bandsma R, Comelli EM, Arendt BM, Zhang L, et al. Bile acids and dysbiosis in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. PLoS One 2016;11e0151829.
21. Puri P, Daita K, Joyce A, Mirshahi F, Santhekadur PK, Cazanave S, et al. The presence and severity of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis is associated with specific changes in circulating bile acids. Hepatology 2018;67:534–548.
22. Smirnova E, Muthiah MD, Narayan N, Siddiqui MS, Puri P, Luketic VA, et al. Metabolic reprogramming of the intestinal microbiome with functional bile acid changes underlie the development of NAFLD. Hepatology 2022;76:1811–1824.
23. Lin D, Sun Q, Liu Z, Pan J, Zhu J, Wang S, et al. Gut microbiota and bile acids partially mediate the improvement of fibroblast growth factor 21 on methionine-choline-deficient diet-induced non-alcoholic fatty liver disease mice. Free Radic Biol Med 2023;195:199–218.
24. Tang Y, Zhang J, Li J, Lei X, Xu D, Wang Y, et al. Turnover of bile acids in liver, serum and caecal content by high-fat diet feeding affects hepatic steatosis in rats. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Biol Lipids 2019;1864:1293–1304.
25. Chen F, Esmaili S, Rogers GB, Bugianesi E, Petta S, Marchesini G, et al. Lean NAFLD: a distinct entity shaped by differential metabolic adaptation. Hepatology 2020;71:1213–1227.
26. Caussy C, Hsu C, Singh S, Bassirian S, Kolar J, Faulkner C, et al. Serum bile acid patterns are associated with the presence of NAFLD in twins, and dose-dependent changes with increase in fibrosis stage in patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2019;49:183–193.
27. Nimer N, Choucair I, Wang Z, Nemet I, Li L, Gukasyan J, et al. Bile acids profile, histopathological indices and genetic variants for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease progression. Metabolism 2021;116:154457.
28. Sun DQ, Targher G, Byrne CD, Wheeler DC, Wong VW, Fan JG, et al. An international Delphi consensus statement on metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease and risk of chronic kidney disease. Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr 2023;12:386–403.
29. Mantovani A, Petracca G, Beatrice G, Csermely A, Lonardo A, Schattenberg JM, et al. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and risk of incident chronic kidney disease: an updated meta-analysis. Gut 2022;71:156–162.
30. Byrne CD, Targher G. NAFLD as a driver of chronic kidney disease. J Hepatol 2020;72:785–801.
31. Chu L, Zhang K, Zhang Y, Jin X, Jiang H. Mechanism underlying an elevated serum bile acid level in chronic renal failure patients. Int Urol Nephrol 2015;47:345–351.
32. Li X, Wang L, Ma S, Lin S, Wang C, Wang H. Combination of Oxalobacter formigenes and Veillonella parvula in gastrointestinal microbiota related to bile-acid metabolism as a biomarker for hypertensive nephropathy. Int J Hypertens 2022;2022:5999530.
33. Li R, Zeng L, Xie S, Chen J, Yu Y, Zhong L. Targeted metabolomics study of serum bile acid profile in patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing hemodialysis. PeerJ 2019;7e7145.
34. Li C, Zhou W, Li M, Shu X, Zhang L, Ji G. Salvia-Nelumbinis naturalis extract protects mice against MCD diet-induced steatohepatitis via activation of colonic FXR-FGF15 pathway. Biomed Pharmacother 2021;139:111587.
35. Li Q, Li M, Li F, Zhou W, Dang Y, Zhang L, et al. Qiang-Gan formula extract improves non-alcoholic steatohepatitis via regulating bile acid metabolism and gut microbiota in mice. J Ethnopharmacol 2020;258:112896.
36. He B, Jiang J, Shi Z, Wu L, Yan J, Chen Z, et al. Pure total flavonoids from citrus attenuate non-alcoholic steatohepatitis via regulating the gut microbiota and bile acid metabolism in mice. Biomed Pharmacother 2021;135:111183.
37. Wei H, Wang L, An Z, Xie H, Liu W, Du Q, et al. QiDiTang-Shen granules modulated the gut microbiome composition and improved bile acid profiles in a mouse model of diabetic nephropathy. Biomed Pharmacother 2021;133:111061.
38. Zhao J, Zhang QL, Shen JH, Wang K, Liu J. Magnesium lithospermate B improves the gut microbiome and bile acid metabolic profiles in a mouse model of diabetic nephropathy. Acta Pharmacol Sin 2019;40:507–513.
39. Lake AD, Novak P, Shipkova P, Aranibar N, Robertson D, Reily MD, et al. Decreased hepatotoxic bile acid composition and altered synthesis in progressive human nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 2013;268:132–140.
40. Tan X, Liu Y, Long J, Chen S, Liao G, Wu S, et al. Trimethylamine N-oxide aggravates liver steatosis through modulation of bile acid metabolism and inhibition of farnesoid X receptor signaling in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Mol Nutr Food Res 2019;63e1900257.
41. Sydor S, Best J, Messerschmidt I, Manka P, Vilchez-Vargas R, Brodesser S, et al. Altered microbiota diversity and bile acid signaling in cirrhotic and noncirrhotic NASH-HCC. Clin Transl Gastroenterol 2020;11e00131.
42. Wahlström A, Sayin SI, Marschall HU, Bäckhed F. Intestinal crosstalk between bile acids and microbiota and its impact on host metabolism. Cell Metab 2016;24:41–50.
43. Kuang J, Wang J, Li Y, Li M, Zhao M, Ge K, et al. Hyodeoxycholic acid alleviates non-alcoholic fatty liver disease through modulating the gut-liver axis. Cell Metab 2023;35:1752–1766.e8.
44. Bachrach WH, Hofmann AF. Ursodeoxycholic acid in the treatment of cholesterol cholelithiasis. part I. Dig Dis Sci 1982;27:737–761.
45. Shah RA, Kowdley KV. Current and potential treatments for primary biliary cholangitis. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020;5:306–315.
46. Mueller M, Thorell A, Claudel T, Jha P, Koefeler H, Lackner C, et al. Ursodeoxycholic acid exerts farnesoid X receptor-antagonistic effects on bile acid and lipid metabolism in morbid obesity. J Hepatol 2015;62:1398–1404.
47. Osorio H, Coronel I, Arellano A, Franco M, Escalante B, Bautista R. Ursodeoxycholic acid decreases sodium-glucose cotransporter (SGLT2) expression and oxidative stress in the kidney of diabetic rats. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2012;97:276–282.
48. Volynets V, Küper MA, Strahl S, Maier IB, Spruss A, Wagnerberger S, et al. Nutrition, intestinal permeability, and blood ethanol levels are altered in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). Dig Dis Sci 2012;57:1932–1941.
49. Boursier J, Mueller O, Barret M, Machado M, Fizanne L, Araujo-Perez F, et al. The severity of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease is associated with gut dysbiosis and shift in the metabolic function of the gut microbiota. Hepatology 2016;63:764–775.
50. Leung C, Rivera L, Furness JB, Angus PW. The role of the gut microbiota in NAFLD. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016;13:412–425.
51. Wang S, Lv D, Jiang S, Jiang J, Liang M, Hou F, et al. Quantitative reduction in short-chain fatty acids, especially butyrate, contributes to the progression of chronic kidney disease. Clin Sci (Lond) 2019;133:1857–1870.
52. Ravid JD, Kamel MH, Chitalia VC. Uraemic solutes as therapeutic targets in CKD-associated cardiovascular disease. Nat Rev Nephrol 2021;17:402–416.
53. Tang WH, Wang Z, Kennedy DJ, Wu Y, Buffa JA, Agatisa-Boyle B, et al. Gut microbiota-dependent trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO) pathway contributes to both development of renal insufficiency and mortality risk in chronic kidney disease. Circ Res 2015;116:448–455.
54. Chen YM, Liu Y, Zhou RF, Chen XL, Wang C, Tan XY, et al. Associations of gut-flora-dependent metabolite trimethylamine-N-oxide, betaine and choline with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in adults. Sci Rep 2016;6:19076.
55. Zhou D, Zhang J, Xiao C, Mo C, Ding BS. Trimethylamine-N-oxide (TMAO) mediates the crosstalk between the gut microbiota and hepatic vascular niche to alleviate liver fibrosis in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Front Immunol 2022;13:964477.
56. Zeng Y, Guo M, Fang X, Teng F, Tan X, Li X, et al. Gut microbiota-derived trimethylamine N-oxide and kidney function: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Adv Nutr 2021;12:1286–1304.
57. Koeth RA, Wang Z, Levison BS, Buffa JA, Org E, Sheehy BT, et al. Intestinal microbiota metabolism of L-carnitine, a nutrient in red meat, promotes atherosclerosis. Nat Med 2013;19:576–585.
58. Wang B, Jiang X, Cao M, Ge J, Bao Q, Tang L, et al. Altered fecal microbiota correlates with liver biochemistry in nonobese patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Sci Rep 2016;6:32002.
59. Wong VW, Tse CH, Lam TT, Wong GL, Chim AM, Chu WC, et al. Molecular characterization of the fecal microbiota in patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis--a longitudinal study. PLoS One 2013;8e62885.
60. Schwimmer JB, Johnson JS, Angeles JE, Behling C, Belt PH, Borecki I, et al. Microbiome signatures associated with steatohepatitis and moderate to severe fibrosis in children with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Gastroenterology 2019;157:1109–1122.
61. Ponziani FR, Bhoori S, Castelli C, Putignani L, Rivoltini L, Del Chierico F, et al. Hepatocellular carcinoma is associated with gut microbiota profile and inflammation in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatology 2019;69:107–120.
62. Lelouvier B, Servant F, Païssé S, Brunet AC, Benyahya S, Serino M, et al. Changes in blood microbiota profiles associated with liver fibrosis in obese patients: a pilot analysis. Hepatology 2016;64:2015–2027.
63. Loomba R, Seguritan V, Li W, Long T, Klitgord N, Bhatt A, et al. Gut microbiome-based metagenomic signature for noninvasive detection of advanced fibrosis in human nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Cell Metab 2017;25:1054-1062.e5. Erratum in: Cell Metab 2019;30:607.
64. Ley RE, Turnbaugh PJ, Klein S, Gordon JI. Microbial ecology: human gut microbes associated with obesity. Nature 2006;444:1022–1023.
65. Rahman K, Desai C, Iyer SS, Thorn NE, Kumar P, Liu Y, et al. Loss of junctional adhesion molecule A promotes severe steatohepatitis in mice on a diet high in saturated fat, fructose, and cholesterol. Gastroenterology 2016;151:733–746.e12.
66. Schnabl B, Brenner DA. Interactions between the intestinal microbiome and liver diseases. Gastroenterology 2014;146:1513–1524.
67. Raman M, Ahmed I, Gillevet PM, Probert CS, Ratcliffe NM, Smith S, et al. Fecal microbiome and volatile organic compound metabolome in obese humans with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2013;11:868–75.e1-3.
68. Shen F, Zheng RD, Sun XQ, Ding WJ, Wang XY, Fan JG. Gut microbiota dysbiosis in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2017;16:375–381.
69. Oh TG, Kim SM, Caussy C, Fu T, Guo J, Bassirian S, et al. A universal gut-microbiome-derived signature predicts cirrhosis. Cell Metab 2020;32:878-888.e6. Erratum in: Cell Metab 2020;32:901.
70. Jiang W, Wu N, Wang X, Chi Y, Zhang Y, Qiu X, et al. Dysbiosis gut microbiota associated with inflammation and impaired mucosal immune function in intestine of humans with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Sci Rep 2015;5:8096.
71. Clark DP. The fermentation pathways of Escherichia coli. FEMS Microbiol Rev 1989;5:223–234.
72. Croxen MA, Law RJ, Scholz R, Keeney KM, Wlodarska M, Finlay BB. Recent advances in understanding enteric pathogenic Escherichia coli. Clin Microbiol Rev 2013;26:822–880.
73. Da Silva HE, Teterina A, Comelli EM, Taibi A, Arendt BM, Fischer SE, et al. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease is associated with dysbiosis independent of body mass index and insulin resistance. Sci Rep 2018;8:1466.
74. Carbajo-Pescador S, Porras D, García-Mediavilla MV, Martínez-Flórez S, Juarez-Fernández M, Cuevas MJ, et al. Beneficial effects of exercise on gut microbiota functionality and barrier integrity, and gut-liver crosstalk in an in vivo model of early obesity and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Dis Model Mech 2019;12:dmm039206.
75. Vanholder R, Glorieux G. The intestine and the kidneys: a bad marriage can be hazardous. Clin Kidney J 2015;8:168–179.
76. Wang YF, Zheng LJ, Liu Y, Ye YB, Luo S, Lu GM, et al. The gut microbiota-inflammation-brain axis in end-stage renal disease: perspectives from default mode network. Theranostics 2019;9:8171–8181.
77. Pivari F, Mingione A, Piazzini G, Ceccarani C, Ottaviano E, Brasacchio C, et al. Curcumin supplementation (Meriva®) modulates inflammation, lipid peroxidation and gut microbiota composition in chronic kidney disease. Nutrients 2022;14:231.
78. Li F, Wang M, Wang J, Li R, Zhang Y. Alterations to the gut microbiota and their correlation with inflammatory factors in chronic kidney disease. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2019;9:206.
79. Hu J, Luo H, Wang J, Tang W, Lu J, Wu S, et al. Enteric dysbiosis-linked gut barrier disruption triggers early renal injury induced by chronic high salt feeding in mice. Exp Mol Med 2017;49e370.
80. Li YJ, Chen X, Kwan TK, Loh YW, Singer J, Liu Y, et al. Dietary fiber protects against diabetic nephropathy through short-chain fatty acid-mediated activation of G protein-coupled receptors GPR43 and GPR109A. J Am Soc Nephrol 2020;31:1267–1281.
81. Huang H, Li K, Lee Y, Chen M. Preventive effects of Lactobacillus mixture against chronic kidney disease progression through enhancement of beneficial bacteria and downregulation of gut-derived uremic toxins. J Agric Food Chem 2021;69:7353–7366.
82. Mishima E, Fukuda S, Shima H, Hirayama A, Akiyama Y, Takeuchi Y, et al. Alteration of the intestinal environment by lubiprostone is associated with amelioration of adenine-induced CKD. J Am Soc Nephrol 2015;26:1787–1794.
83. Schwarz A, Hernandez L, Arefin S, Sartirana E, Witasp A, Wernerson A, et al. Sweet, bloody consumption - what we eat and how it affects vascular ageing, the BBB and kidney health in CKD. Gut Microbes 2024;16:2341449.
84. Koshida T, Gohda T, Sugimoto T, Asahara T, Asao R, Ohsawa I, et al. Gut microbiome and microbiome-derived metabolites in patients with end-stage kidney disease. Int J Mol Sci 2023;24:11456.
85. Opdebeeck B, Maudsley S, Azmi A, De Maré A, De Leger W, Meijers B, et al. Indoxyl sulfate and p-cresyl sulfate promote vascular calcification and associate with glucose intolerance. J Am Soc Nephrol 2019;30:751–766.
86. Nakano T, Katsuki S, Chen M, Decano JL, Halu A, Lee LH, et al. Uremic toxin indoxyl sulfate promotes proinflammatory macrophage activation via the interplay of OATP2B1 and Dll4-Notch signaling. Circulation 2019;139:78–96.
87. Wu IW, Hsu KH, Lee CC, Sun CY, Hsu HJ, Tsai CJ, et al. p-Cresyl sulphate and indoxyl sulphate predict progression of chronic kidney disease. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2011;26:938–947.
88. Watanabe H, Miyamoto Y, Honda D, Tanaka H, Wu Q, Endo M, et al. p-Cresyl sulfate causes renal tubular cell damage by inducing oxidative stress by activation of NADPH oxidase. Kidney Int 2013;83:582–592.
89. Li H, Xi Y, Xin X, Tian H, Hu Y. Salidroside improves high-fat diet-induced non-alcoholic steatohepatitis by regulating the gut microbiota-bile acid-farnesoid X receptor axis. Biomed Pharmacother 2020;124:109915.
90. Gonzalez FJ, Jiang C, Patterson AD. An intestinal microbiota-farnesoid X receptor axis modulates metabolic disease. Gastroenterology 2016;151:845–859.
91. Yoshifuji A, Wakino S, Irie J, Tajima T, Hasegawa K, Kanda T, et al. Gut Lactobacillus protects against the progression of renal damage by modulating the gut environment in rats. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2016;31:401–412.
92. Nobili V, Alisi A, Mosca A, Della Corte C, Veraldi S, De Vito R, et al. Hepatic farnesoid X receptor protein level and circulating fibroblast growth factor 19 concentration in children with NAFLD. Liver Int 2018;38:342–349.
93. Fiorucci S, Distrutti E. Linking liver metabolic and vascular disease via bile acid signaling. Trends Mol Med 2022;28:51–66.
94. Goodwin B, Jones SA, Price RR, Watson MA, McKee DD, Moore LB, et al. A regulatory cascade of the nuclear receptors FXR, SHP-1, and LRH-1 represses bile acid biosynthesis. Mol Cell 2000;6:517–526.
95. Gupta S, Stravitz RT, Dent P, Hylemon PB. Down-regulation of cholesterol 7alpha-hydroxylase (CYP7A1) gene expression by bile acids in primary rat hepatocytes is mediated by the c-Jun N-terminal kinase pathway. J Biol Chem 2001;276:15816–15822.
96. Holt JA, Luo G, Billin AN, Bisi J, McNeill YY, Kozarsky KF, et al. Definition of a novel growth factor-dependent signal cascade for the suppression of bile acid biosynthesis. Genes Dev 2003;17:1581–1591.
97. Watanabe M, Houten SM, Wang L, Moschetta A, Mangelsdorf DJ, Heyman RA, et al. Bile acids lower triglyceride levels via a pathway involving FXR, SHP, and SREBP-1c. J Clin Invest 2004;113:1408–1418.
98. Liu M, Zhang G, Wu S, Song M, Wang J, Cai W, et al. Schaftoside alleviates HFD-induced hepatic lipid accumulation in mice via upregulating farnesoid X receptor. J Ethnopharmacol 2020;255:112776.
99. Xiong X, Wang X, Lu Y, Wang E, Zhang Z, Yang J, et al. Hepatic steatosis exacerbated by endoplasmic reticulum stressmediated downregulation of FXR in aging mice. J Hepatol 2014;60:847–854.
100. Zhang Y, Lee FY, Barrera G, Lee H, Vales C, Gonzalez FJ, et al. Activation of the nuclear receptor FXR improves hyperglycemia and hyperlipidemia in diabetic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006;103:1006–1011.
101. Shen C, Pan Z, Wu S, Zheng M, Zhong C, Xin X, et al. Emodin palliates high-fat diet-induced nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in mice via activating the farnesoid X receptor pathway. J Ethnopharmacol 2021;279:114340.
102. McIlvride S, Nikolova V, Fan HM, McDonald JAK, Wahlström A, Bellafante E, et al. Obeticholic acid ameliorates dyslipidemia but not glucose tolerance in mouse model of gestational diabetes. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab 2019;317:E399–E410.
103. Pathak P, Xie C, Nichols RG, Ferrell JM, Boehme S, Krausz KW, et al. Intestine farnesoid X receptor agonist and the gut microbiota activate G-protein bile acid receptor-1 signaling to improve metabolism. Hepatology 2018;68:1574–1588.
104. Yan N, Yan T, Xia Y, Hao H, Wang G, Gonzalez FJ. The pathophysiological function of non-gastrointestinal farnesoid X receptor. Pharmacol Ther 2021;226:107867.
105. Jiang T, Wang XX, Scherzer P, Wilson P, Tallman J, Takahashi H, et al. Farnesoid X receptor modulates renal lipid metabolism, fibrosis, and diabetic nephropathy. Diabetes 2007;56:2485–2493.
106. Virchow R. Cellular pathology. As based upon physiological and pathological histology. Lecture XVI--Atheromatous affection of arteries. 1858. Nutr Rev 1989;47:23–25.
107. Wang XX, Wang D, Luo Y, Myakala K, Dobrinskikh E, Rosenberg AZ, et al. FXR/TGR5 dual agonist prevents progression of nephropathy in diabetes and obesity. J Am Soc Nephrol 2018;29:118–137.
108. Zhao K, He J, Zhang Y, Xu Z, Xiong H, Gong R, et al. Activation of FXR protects against renal fibrosis via suppressing Smad3 expression. Sci Rep 2016;6:37234.
109. Marquardt A, Al-Dabet MM, Ghosh S, Kohli S, Manoharan J, ElWakiel A, et al. Farnesoid X receptor agonism protects against diabetic tubulopathy: potential add-on therapy for diabetic nephropathy. J Am Soc Nephrol 2017;28:3182–3189.
110. Pols TW, Noriega LG, Nomura M, Auwerx J, Schoonjans K. The bile acid membrane receptor TGR5 as an emerging target in metabolism and inflammation. J Hepatol 2011;54:1263–1272.
111. Katsuma S, Hirasawa A, Tsujimoto G. Bile acids promote glucagon-like peptide-1 secretion through TGR5 in a murine enteroendocrine cell line STC-1. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2005;329:386–390.
112. Duboc H, Taché Y, Hofmann AF. The bile acid TGR5 membrane receptor: from basic research to clinical application. Dig Liver Dis 2014;46:302–312.
113. Schaap FG, Trauner M, Jansen PL. Bile acid receptors as targets for drug development. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol 2014;11:55–67.
114. Perino A, Schoonjans K. TGR5 and immunometabolism: insights from physiology and pharmacology. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2015;36:847–857.
115. Wang XX, Edelstein MH, Gafter U, Qiu L, Luo Y, Dobrinskikh E, et al. G protein-coupled bile acid receptor TGR5 activation inhibits kidney disease in obesity and diabetes. J Am Soc Nephrol 2016;27:1362–1378.
116. Yang Z, Xiong F, Wang Y, Gong W, Huang J, Chen C, et al. TGR5 activation suppressed S1P/S1P2 signaling and resisted high glucose-induced fibrosis in glomerular mesangial cells. Pharmacol Res 2016;111:226–236.
117. Jung S, Bae H, Song WS, Jang C. Dietary fructose and fructose-induced pathologies. Annu Rev Nutr 2022;42:45–66.
118. Softic S, Gupta MK, Wang GX, Fujisaka S, O’Neill BT, Rao TN, et al. Divergent effects of glucose and fructose on hepatic lipogenesis and insulin signaling. J Clin Invest 2017;127:4059-4074. Erratum in: J Clin Invest 2018;128:1199.
119. Ouyang X, Cirillo P, Sautin Y, McCall S, Bruchette JL, Diehl AM, et al. Fructose consumption as a risk factor for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. J Hepatol 2008;48:993–999.
120. Payne AN, Chassard C, Lacroix C. Gut microbial adaptation to dietary consumption of fructose, artificial sweeteners and sugar alcohols: implications for host-microbe interactions contributing to obesity. Obes Rev 2012;13:799–809.
121. Do MH, Lee E, Oh MJ, Kim Y, Park HY. High-glucose or -fructose diet cause changes of the gut microbiota and metabolic disorders in mice without body weight change. Nutrients 2018;10:761.
122. Wang Y, Qi W, Song G, Pang S, Peng Z, Li Y, et al. High-fructose diet increases inflammatory cytokines and alters gut microbiota composition in rats. Mediators Inflamm 2020;2020:6672636.
123. Theofilis P, Vordoni A, Kalaitzidis RG. Interplay between metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease and chronic kidney disease: epidemiology, pathophysiologic mechanisms, and treatment considerations. World J Gastroenterol 2022;28:5691–5706.
124. Kitson MT, Roberts SK. D-livering the message: the importance of vitamin D status in chronic liver disease. J Hepatol 2012;57:897–909.
125. Nelson JE, Roth CL, Wilson LA, Yates KP, Aouizerat B, Morgan-Stevenson V, et al. Vitamin D deficiency is associated with increased risk of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis in adults with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: possible role for MAPK and NF-κB? Am J Gastroenterol 2016;111:852–863.
126. Goldsmith DJ, Cunningham J. Mineral metabolism and vitamin D in chronic kidney disease--more questions than answers. Nat Rev Nephrol 2011;7:341–346.
127. Malaguarnera L. Vitamin D and microbiota: two sides of the same coin in the immunomodulatory aspects. Int Immunopharmacol 2020;79:106112.
128. Kwok RM, Torres DM, Harrison SA. Vitamin D and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD): is it more than just an association? Hepatology 2013;58:1166–1174.
129. Sterling KA, Eftekhari P, Girndt M, Kimmel PL, Raj DS. The immunoregulatory function of vitamin D: implications in chronic kidney disease. Nat Rev Nephrol 2012;8:403–412.
130. Bellerba F, Muzio V, Gnagnarella P, Facciotti F, Chiocca S, Bossi P, et al. The association between vitamin D and gut microbiota: a systematic review of human studies. Nutrients 2021;13:3378.
131. Lin K, Dong C, Zhao B, Zhou B, Yang L. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist regulates fat browning by altering the gut microbiota and ceramide metabolism. MedComm (2020) 2023;4e416.
132. Billing AM, Kim YC, Gullaksen S, Schrage B, Raabe J, Hutzfeldt A, et al. Metabolic communication by SGLT2 inhibition. Circulation 2024;149:860–884.
133. Gay MD, Cao H, Shivapurkar N, Dakshanamurthy S, Kallakury B, Tucker RD, et al. Proglumide reverses nonalcoholic steatohepatitis by interaction with the farnesoid X receptor and altering the microbiome. Int J Mol Sci 2022;23:1899.
134. Luo M, Yan J, Wu L, Wu J, Chen Z, Jiang J, et al. Probiotics alleviated nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in high-fat diet-fed rats via gut microbiota/FXR/FGF15 signaling pathway. J Immunol Res 2021;2021:2264737.
135. Targher G, Chonchol MB, Byrne CD. CKD and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Am J Kidney Dis 2014;64:638–652.
136. Hata S, Okamura T, Kobayashi A, Bamba R, Miyoshi T, Nakajima H, et al. Gut microbiota changes by an SGLT2 inhibitor, luseogliflozin, alters metabolites compared with those in a low carbohydrate diet in db/db mice. Nutrients 2022;14:3531.
137. Grasset E, Puel A, Charpentier J, Collet X, Christensen JE, Tercé F, et al. A specific gut microbiota dysbiosis of type 2 diabetic mice induces GLP-1 resistance through an enteric NO-dependent and gut-brain axis mechanism. Cell Metab 2017;25:1075-1090.e5. Erratum in: Cell Metab 2017;26:278.
138. Deng Y, Wang H, Lu Y, Liu S, Zhang Q, Huang J, et al. Identification of chemerin as a novel FXR target gene downregulated in the progression of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. Endocrinology 2013;154:1794–1801.

Article information Continued

Copyright © 2025 by The Korean Association for the Study of the Liver

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Bile acid biosynthesis, transport pathways, metabolism and excretion. Cholesterol is converted into primary bile acids (PBAs) via classical pathway and alternative pathway and conjugated to glycine or taurine in the hepatocytes, then secreted into bile, which flows through the bile duct to the intestine. At the terminal ileum, most BAs are recycled to the liver via portal circulation. Unabsorbed BAs are passed along from the small to large intestine. In the colon lumen, conjugated PBAs are metabolized into secondary bile acids (SBAs) by microbial enzymes from gut bacteria. Conjugated cholic acid (CA) and chenodeoxycholic acid (CDCA) are deconjugated via bacterium with bile salt hydrolases, including Clostridium, Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Listeria, Enterococcus, Bacteroides, Stenotrophomonas and Brucella, and then 7α-dehydroxylated with Clostridium and Eubacterium to form deoxycholic acid (DCA) and lithocholic acid (LCA). The majority of CDCA is converted to α-muricholic acid (α-MCA) and β-MCA, which are predominant in mice and scarce in humans. Tauro-α-muricholic acid (Tα-MCA) is deconjugated to form α-MCA. α-MCA is C-6 epimerized with Bacteroides, Eubacterium, Clostridium, Escherichia, Eggerthella, Peptostreptococcus and Ruminococcus to form ω-MCA, and then ω-MCA is 7α-dehydroxylated to form hyodeoxycholic acid (HDCA). CDCA is transformed into ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) by the hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (HSDH) with Actinobacteria, Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, and Bacteroidetes. BAs that are not absorbed from the small and large intestine excreted in feces. In the kidney, cholesterol is converted into BAs via CYP27A1 and CYP7B1. After the first hepatic pass, BAs that have not been cleared are filtrated by the renal glomerulus and reabsorbed by proximal tubular cell of the kidney, and unabsorbed BAs are excreted into urine.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Differential expression of FXR and TGR5 receptors and putative pathogenic mechanisms in MASLD and CKD. FXR and TGR5 are expressed in the liver (mainly in hepatocytes), kidney (mainly in the glomerulus and tubular cells, especially the proximal tubular cells), and other tissues, such as skeletal muscle and adipose tissue (BAT, brown adipose tissue). Activation of both FXR and TGR5 facilitates a decrease in lipid accumulation in the liver and kidneys, whilst improving insulin sensitivity and hepatocyte inflammation and apoptosis by inhibiting endoplasmic reticulum stress and oxidative stress in MASLD. Activation of both FXR and TGR5 represses the expression of multiple profibrotic growth factors and proinflammatory cytokines to improve glomerulosclerosis, tubulointerstitial fibrosis and proteinuria in CKD. Activation of both FXR and TGR5 promotes mitochondrial activity in BAT and skeletal muscle cells and increases energy expenditure.

Table 1.

FXR and TGR5 expression levels in patients with MASLD or CKD and preclinical models of MASLD or CKD

Author Groups Subject Model Level of receptors Findings
Jiao et al. [5] (2018) MASH (n=16) vs. HC (n=11) Human MASLD Hepatic FXR expression↑ Patients with MASH have increased production of DCA, which may suppress FXR signaling in the liver and gut
Tang et al. [24] (2019) MASLD (n=5) vs. HC (n=5) Rats MASLD Hepatic FXR mRNA↑ THDCA ameliorates hepatic steatosis by activating FXR in vitro
Li et al. [34] (2021) MASH (n=8) vs. HC (n=8) Mice MASLD Hepatic, Intestinal and Colonic FXR protein↓ SNN increases colonic FXR expression and suppresses liver metabolic inflammation by reducing macrophage accumulation and hepatic IL-1β expression
Intestinal and Colonic TGR5 protein remain unchanged
He et al. [36] (2021) MASLD (n=6) vs. HC (n=6) Mice MASLD Hepatic FXR and TGR5 mRNA↓ PTFC increases the FXR and TGR5 protein level and mRNA expression, attenuating HFD-induced MASH symptoms
Li et al. [35] (2020) MASH (n=12) vs. HC (n=12) Human MASLD Hepatic TGR5 and FXR mRNA↓ QGE treatment prevents MASH by regulation of gut microbiota-mediated LCA production, promotion of TGR5 expression and suppression of NF-κB activation
Hepatic TGR5 and FXR protein↓
Tan et al. [40] (2019) MASLD (n=34) vs. HC (n=14) Human MASLD Hepatic FXR mRNA↓ TMAO aggravates hepatic steatosis by suppressing BA-mediated hepatic FXR signaling
Li et al. [89] (2020) MASLD (n=8) vs. HC (n=8) Mice MASLD Hepatic FXR mRNA↓ Salidroside improves inflammation and lipid metabolism disorders by increasing FXR expression and modulating bile acid metabolism
Intestinal FXR and FGF15 protein↓
Nobili et al. [92] (2018) MASH (n=19) vs. MAFL (n=14) vs. HC (n=5) Human MASLD Hepatic FXR protein ↓ Levels of FXR protein progressively decrease from subjects with normal liver to MAFL and MASH
Liu et al. [98] (2020) HFD (n=12) vs. HC (n=12) Mice MASLD Hepatic FXR mRNA and protein ↓ Schaftoside alleviates HFD-induced hepatic lipid accumulation via upregulating FXR
Xiong et al. [99] (2014) MASLD (n=6) vs. HC (n=6) Mice MASLD Hepatic FXR mRNA and protein ↓ FXR downregulation plays a role in dysregulated hepatic lipid metabolism and activation of ER stress
LXR and LRH-1 mRNA unchanged
Shen et al. [101] (2021) MASLD (n=50) vs. HC (n=12) Mice MASLD Hepatic FXR mRNA and protein ↓ EMO improves HFD-induced lipid accumulation, insulin resistance, inflammation, and oxidative stress by up-regulating FXR expression
Wang et al. [107] (2018) DM (n=6) vs. HC (n=6) Mice CKD Renal TGR5 and FXR mRNA↓ INT-767 stimulates FXR and TGR5 mRNA and protein expression, by decreasing albuminuria, mesangial matrix expansion, podocyte loss, renal fibrosis, extracellular matrix protein fibronectin, oxidative stress, and inflammation
Renal TGR5 and FXR protein↓
Zhao et al. [108] (2016) Fibrotic kidney (n=15) vs. HC (n=15) Human CKD Hepatic FXR mRNA↓ Activation of FXR suppresses kidney fibrosis and downregulates Smad3 expression
Yang et al. [116] (2016) DM (n=6) vs. HC (n=6) Rats CKD Renal TGR5 protein↓ TGR5 activation decreases expression of ICAM-1, TGF-β1 and FN induced by high glucose in GMCs
Gay et al. [133] (2022) MASH (n=10) vs. HC (n=10) Mice MASLD Hepatic FXR mRNA and protein↓ FXR expression is decreased in the livers of CDE-fed mice compared to control livers, and proglumide restores FXR expression to normal levels
Hepatic FGFR4 protein↓
Luo et al. [134] (2021) MASLD (n=6) vs. HC (n=6) Mice MASLD Hepatic FXR and FGF15 mRNA↑ Probiotics increase expression of FXR, FGF15 mRNA and protein levels in the liver to improve plasma lipids and liver pathology
Hepatic FXR protein and FGF15 protein↓
Deng et al. [138] (2013) MASLD (n=8) vs. HC (n=8) Mice MASLD Hepatic FXR mRNA↓ Chemerin, a novel target gene of FXR, is associated with MASH

MASLD, metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic fatty liver disease; MASH, metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis; MAFL, metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver; HC, healthy control; DM, diabetes mellitus; BA, bile acid; HFD, high-fat diet; DCA, deoxycholic acid; THDCA, taurohyodeoxycholic acid; FGFR, fibroblast growth factor receptor; TMAO, trimethylamine-N-oxide; SNN, Salvia-Nelumbinis naturalis; QGE, Qiang-Gan formula extract; NF-κB: nuclear factor-κB; EMO, emodin; ICAM-1, intercellular adhesion molecule-1; TGF-β1, transforming growth factor β-1; FN, fibronectin; GMCs, glomerular mesangial cells; CDE, choline deficient ethionine; AA, acanthoic acid; PTFC, pure total flavonoids from citrus.