Quantitative Risk-Benefit Analysis of Probiotic Use for Irritable Bowel Syndrome and Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Probiotics an emerging therapeutic approach towards gut-brain-axis oriented chronic health issues induced by microplastics: A comprehensive review

Applications for plastic polymers can be found all around the world, often discarded without any prior care, exacerbating the environmental issue. When large waste materials are released into the environment, they undergo physical, biological, and photo-degradation processes that break them down into smaller polymer fragments known as microplastics (MPs). The time it takes for residual plastic to degrade depends on the type of polymer and environmental factors, with some taking as long as 600 years or more. Due to their small size, microplastics can contaminate food and enter the human body through food chains and webs, causing gastrointestinal (GI) tract pain that can range from local to systemic. Microplastics can also acquire hydrophobic organic pollutants and heavy metals on their surface, due to their large surface area and surface hydrophobicity. The levels of contamination on the microplastic surface are significantly higher than in the natural environment. The gut-brain axis (GB axis), through which organisms interact with their environment, regulate nutritional digestion and absorption, intestinal motility and secretion, complex polysaccharide breakdown, and maintain intestinal integrity, can be altered by microplastics acting alone or in combination with pollutants. Probiotics have shown significant therapeutic potential in managing various illnesses mediated by the gut-brain axis. They connect hormonal and biochemical pathways to promote gut and brain health, making them a promising therapy option for a variety of GB axis-mediated illnesses. Additionally, taking probiotics with or without food can reduce the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, reactive oxygen species (ROS), neuro-inflammation, neurodegeneration, protein folding, and both motor and non-motor symptoms in individuals with Parkinson's disease. This study provides new insight into microplastic-induced gut dysbiosis, its associated health risks, and the benefits of using both traditional and next-generation probiotics to maintain gut homeostasis.

Preclinical evidence of probiotics in ulcerative colitis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

The imbalance of gastrointestinal microbial composition has been identified as the main factor of chronic inflammatory diseases. At present, probiotics have a beneficial effect on the microbial composition of the human gastrointestinal tract, but it is still controversial and the specific mechanism is unknown. The purpose of this network meta-analysis is to compare the mechanism of different probiotics on ulcerative colitis. PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science were searched till 16 November 2022. The SYRCLE risk bias assessment tool was used to assess the quality of the research studies. A total of 42 studies, 839 ulcerative colitis models, and 24 kinds of probiotics were finally included. The results showed that L. rhamnosus has the best effect in relieving weight loss and improving the Shannon index in the ulcerative colitis model. E. faecium has the best effect in reducing colon injury; L. reuteri has the best effect in reducing the DAI; L. acidophilus has the best effect in reducing the HIS index and increasing the expression of tight junction protein ZO-1; and L. coryniformis has the best effect in reducing the content of serum pro-inflammatory factor TNF-α. It indicated that probiotics can improve ulcerative colitis by improving histopathological manifestations, reducing inflammatory reaction, and repairing the mucosal barrier, and different probiotics showed different effects. However, considering the limitations of this study, preclinical studies that require more large samples and high-quality and more reliable and rigorous experimental designs and reports need to be conducted in the future. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/#record details, identifier CRD42022383383.

Available Methods for Benefit-risk Assessment: Lessons for Inflammatory Bowel Disease Drugs

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Medical treatment for inflammatory bowel disease has advanced significantly over the two past decades. The advent of biologics and small molecules has revolutionised outcomes for patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Knowledge of drug pharmacology, indications, and adverse events is essential to ensure the best clinical care while minimising toxicity. Our aim was to review the literature on current methods of benefit-risk assessment, and consider their practical applicability to inflammatory bowel disease.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted to investigate studies documenting benefit-risk assessment.

RESULTS

Several structured frameworks and quantitative methodologies have been developed to evaluate benefit-risk profiles of drugs in a more comprehensive and consistent framework. Quantitative methods integrate benefit and risk outcome measures or incorporate preference weights for benefit and risk criteria into the evaluation. Incorporation of preference weights from patients is an essential aspect of quantitative benefit-risk assessment. Benefit-risk assessment is still evolving in inflammatory bowel disease.

CONCLUSIONS

The risks and benefits of each medical therapy must be discussed with the patient and a shared decision-making process is recommended. Future initiatives should be developed to perform a benefit-risk assessment considering the characteristics of inflammatory bowel disease drugs.

How to manage irritable bowel syndrome in children

AIM

This paper discusses the risk factors and management of paediatric irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), with a focus on the role of the gastrointestinal microbiome.

METHODS

English articles of interest published in PubMed and Google Scholar were searched using subject heading and keywords of interest.

RESULTS

Only few randomised controlled trials on the management of IBS in children have been published. The vast majority of these intervention trials target to change the composition of the gastrointestinal microbiome. Most studies are underpowered. Major heterogeneities in study designs such as differences in inclusion criteria, including patients with different pain-related functional gastrointestinal disorders and differences in primary outcomes, make it impossible to formulate recommendations. Overall, few adverse events are reported what could indicate safety or point to suboptimal conduction of clinical trials and safety reporting. However, it can also not be excluded that some interventions such as the administration of selected probiotic products may result in benefit.

CONCLUSION

There is insufficient evidence to recommend any therapeutic intervention in paediatric IBS, including manipulation of the gastrointestinal tract microbiome, despite the evidence that dysbiosis seems an associated pathophysiologic factor. More designed prospective trials are needed since IBS is not a rare condition during childhood.

Probiotic VSL#3 Treatment Reduces Colonic Permeability and Abdominal Pain Symptoms in Patients With Irritable Bowel Syndrome

Background: Little is known regarding the clinical impact of treatment and treatment duration of probiotic VSL#3 on gut and microbiome function in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). As part of a safety trial, we assessed the effect of VSL#3 treatment duration on abdominal pain, stooling, gut permeability, microbiome composition and function.

Methods: Adults with IBS were randomized into an open label trial to receive the probiotic VSL#3 for 4 or 8 weeks. Adverse events, abdominal pain, and stooling patterns were recorded daily. Gut permeability, fecal bile acid levels, and microbiome composition were profiled at baseline and after treatment.

Results: Fifteen subjects completed the trial (4-week: n = 8; 8-week: n = 7). Number of pain episodes decreased in both groups (P = 0.049 and P = 0.034; 4- vs. 8-week, respectively). Probiotic organisms contained in VSL#3 were detected in feces by whole shotgun metagenomic sequencing analysis and relative abundances of Streptococcus thermophilus, Bifidobacterium animalis, Lactobacillus plantarum, and Lactobacillus casei subsp. paraccasei correlated significantly with improved abdominal pain symptoms and colonic permeability at study completion. Although abdominal pain correlated significantly with the detection of probiotic species at study completion, a composite view of gut microbiome structure showed no changes in community diversity or composition after VSL#3 treatment.

Conclusions: Probiotic organisms identified in stool correlated significantly with improvement in colonic permeability and clinical symptoms, prompting future studies to investigate the mechanistic role of VSL#3 and colonic permeability in IBS pathophysiology in a larger randomized controlled trial.

Clinical Trial Registration:www.clinicaltrials.gov, Identifier: NCT00971711.

Predicting Regulatory Product Approvals Using a Proposed Quantitative Version of FDA's Benefit-Risk Framework to Calculate Net-Benefit Score and Benefit-Risk Ratio

Background

Approval of regulated medical products in the USA is based upon a rigorous review of the benefits and risks as performed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) staff of scientists and is summarized in a descriptive and qualitative format called the FDA’s Benefit–Risk Framework (BRF). This present method highlights the key factors in regulatory decision-making, but does not clearly define the reason for its final approval.

Method

This study proposes a quantitative version of FDA’s BRF to calculate a Net-Benefit Score and a Benefit–Risk Ratio as a method to define a single-value summary of the tradeoffs between benefits and risks and allow comparisons among other products. In this retrospective review of five years of new molecular entities and new biologic (N = 185 products) regulatory decision-making, this proposed scoring system codifies and quantitates the information about a product’s benefits, risks, and risk management information in a format that may predict why regulated medical products are approved in the USA.

Results

Simple calculation of codified benefits, risks, and risk mitigations with numerical limits is proposed to provide a repeatable process and transparency for documenting the net-benefit of regulatory product approval.

Conclusion

Use of a strict process of collecting, codifying, and analyzing public information to determine a Net-Benefit score and a Benefit–Risk Ratio is possible to anticipate regulatory product approval.

Side Effects Associated with Probiotic Use in Adult Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Probiotics demonstrated to be effective in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, the safety profile of probiotics is insufficiently explored. In the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we examined the occurrence of side effects related to probiotic/synbiotic use in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of IBD patients as compared with placebo. Eligible RCTs in adult patients with IBD were identified by accessing the Medline database via PubMed, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the Cochrane central register of controlled trials up to December 2018. Occurrence of side effects was retrieved and recorded. Data were pooled and the relative risks (RRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The low-moderate study heterogeneity, assessed by the I² statistic, allowed to use of a fixed-effects modelling for meta-analysis. Nine RCTs among 2337, including 826 patients (442 treated with probiotics/symbiotic and 384 with placebo) were analyzed. Eight were double-blind RCTs, and six enrolled ulcerative colitis (UC) patients. Although the risk for the overall side effects (RR 1.35, 95%CI 0.93–1.94; I² = 25%) and for gastrointestinal symptoms (RR 1.78, 95%CI 0.99–3.20; I² = 20%) was higher in IBD patients taking probiotics than in those exposed to placebo, statistical significance was achieved only for abdominal pain (RR 2.59, 95%CI 1.28–5.22; I² = 40%). In conclusion, despite the small number of RCTs and the variety of probiotic used and schedule across studies, these findings highlight the level of research effort still required to identify the most appropriate use of probiotics in IBD.