Probiotics for Clostridium difficile infection in adults (PICO): Study protocol for a double-blind, randomized controlled trial

Positive Intervention of Distinct Peptides in Clostridioides difficile Infection in a Mouse Model

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a common healthcare-associated infection and the leading cause of gastroenteritis-related deaths worldwide. To investigate the effects of peptide composition of different protein products on CDI, we analyzed and compared the peptide sequences and compositions from Engraulis japonicus and Glycine max using Ultra High Performance Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS). An animal model of CDI was also established to investigate the potential therapeutic effects of these peptides in vivo. The peptide compositions of E. japonicus and G. max differed, with only 11% of the peptide sequences being identical. Oral administration of the tested peptides could reduce intestinal inflammation, repair the intestinal barrier, increase the proportion of beneficial bacteria, and reduce the proportion of harmful bacteria, providing a therapeutic effect against CDI. However, the peptides may differ considerably in some aspects. E. japonicus peptides were superior to G. max peptides in promoting colon epithelial cell proliferation and repairing tight intestinal cell junctions. Interestingly, the two sources of peptides have different effects on the cecal microbiome. E. japonicus peptides can effectively restore the diversity and richness of intestinal microbiota, while G. max peptides have poor regulatory effects on the intestinal microbiota structure. Overall, E. japonicus peptides showed better results than G. max peptides in treating CDI. This study supports the potential treatment of CDI with natural peptides and promotes the development of specialty foods for CDI enteritis. Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a common healthcare-associated infection and the leading cause of gastroenteritis-related deaths worldwide. To investigate the effects of peptide composition of different protein products on CDI, we analyzed and compared the peptide sequences and compositions from Engraulis japonicus and Glycine max using Ultra High Performance Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS). An animal model of CDI was also established to investigate the potential therapeutic effects of these peptides in vivo. The peptide compositions of E. japonicus and G. max differed, with only 11% of the peptide sequences being identical. Oral administration of the tested peptides could reduce intestinal inflammation, repair the intestinal barrier, increase the proportion of beneficial bacteria, and reduce the proportion of harmful bacteria, providing a therapeutic effect against CDI. However, the peptides may differ considerably in some aspects. E. japonicus peptides were superior to G. max peptides in promoting colon epithelial cell proliferation and repairing tight intestinal cell junctions. Interestingly, the two sources of peptides have different effects on the cecal microbiome. E. japonicus peptides can effectively restore the diversity and richness of intestinal microbiota, while G. max peptides have poor regulatory effects on the intestinal microbiota structure.

In-vitro determination of inhibitory effects of probiotic strains on Clostridioides difficile

Commercial probiotic strains inhibited C. difficile, and other Clostridium cultures with zones 14.2-78.9 mm. The highest inhibition was observed with commercial culture on C. difficile ATCC 700057. Organic acids were the leading cause of inhibition. Probiotic cultures may be used as a support culture or through fermented foods for treatment.

The development of live biotherapeutics against Clostridioides difficile infection towards reconstituting gut microbiota

Clostridioides difficile is the most prevalent pathogen of nosocomial diarrhea. In the United States, over 450,000 cases of C. difficile infection (CDI), responsible for more than 29,000 deaths, are reported annually in recent years. Because of the emergence of hypervirulent strains and strains less susceptible to vancomycin and fidaxomicin, new therapeutics other than antibiotics are urgently needed. The gut microbiome serves as one of the first-line defenses against C. difficile colonization. The use of antibiotics causes gut microbiota dysbiosis and shifts the status from colonization resistance to infection. Hence, novel CDI biotherapeutics capable of reconstituting normal gut microbiota have become a focus of drug development in this field.

Non-antibiotic therapy for Clostridioides difficile infection: a review

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a common infectious disease that is mainly caused by antibiotics. Antibiotic therapy is still the dominant treatment for CDI, although it is accompanied by side effects. Probiotics, fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), engineered microorganisms, bacteriophages, diet, natural active substances, nanoparticles and compounds are examples of emerging non-antibiotic therapies that have received a great amount of attention. In this review, we collected data about different non-antibiotic therapies for CDI and provided a comprehensive analysis and detailed comparison of these therapies. The mechanism of action, therapeutic efficacy, and the strengths and weaknesses of these non-antibiotic therapies have been investigated to provide a basis for the reasonable alternative of non-antibiotic therapies for CDI. In summary, probiotics and FMT are currently the best choice for non-antibiotic therapy for CDI.

A randomized controlled trial of probiotics for Clostridium difficile infection in adults (PICO)

Background

Clostridium difficile is the most common cause of hospital-acquired infections, responsible for >450000 infections annually in the USA. Probiotics provide a promising, well-tolerated adjunct therapy to standard C. difficile infection (CDI) treatment regimens, but there is a paucity of data regarding their effectiveness for the treatment of an initial CDI.

Objectives

We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial of 33 participants from February 2013 to February 2015 to determine the feasibility and health outcomes of adjunct probiotic use in patients with an initial mild to moderate CDI.

Methods

The intervention was a 28 day, once-daily course of a four-strain oral probiotic capsule containing Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM, Lactobacillus paracasei Lpc-37, Bifidobacterium lactis Bi-07 and B. lactis Bl-04. The control placebo was identical in taste and appearance. Registered at clinicaltrials.gov: trial registration number = NCT01680874.

Results

Probiotic adjunct therapy was associated with a significant improvement in diarrhoea outcomes. The primary duration of diarrhoea outcome (0.0 versus 1.0 days; P = 0.039) and two exploratory outcomes, total diarrhoea days (3.5 versus 12.0 days; P = 0.005) and rate of diarrhoea (0.1 versus 0.3 days of diarrhoea/stool diary days submitted; P = 0.009), all decreased in participants with probiotic use compared with placebo. There was no significant difference in the rate of CDI recurrence or functional improvement over time between treatment groups.

Conclusions

Probiotics are a promising adjunct therapy for treatment of an initial CDI and should be further explored in a larger randomized controlled trial.

Antibiotic treatment for Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea in adults

BACKGROUND

Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) is recognized as a frequent cause of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea and colitis. This review is an update of a previously published Cochrane review.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review is to investigate the efficacy and safety of antibiotic therapy for C. difficile-associated diarrhoea (CDAD), or C. difficile infection (CDI), being synonymous terms.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and the Cochrane IBD Group Specialized Trials Register from inception to 26 January 2017. We also searched clinicaltrials.gov and clinicaltrialsregister.eu for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials assessing antibiotic treatment for CDI were included in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three authors independently assessed abstracts and full text articles for inclusion and extracted data. The risk of bias was independently rated by two authors. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI). We pooled data using a fixed-effect model, except where significant heterogeneity was detected, at which time a random-effects model was used. The following outcomes were sought: sustained symptomatic cure (defined as initial symptomatic response and no recurrence of CDI), sustained bacteriologic cure, adverse reactions to the intervention, death and cost.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two studies (3215 participants) were included. The majority of studies enrolled patients with mild to moderate CDI who could tolerate oral antibiotics. Sixteen of the included studies excluded patients with severe CDI and few patients with severe CDI were included in the other six studies. Twelve different antibiotics were investigated: vancomycin, metronidazole, fusidic acid, nitazoxanide, teicoplanin, rifampin, rifaximin, bacitracin, cadazolid, LFF517, surotomycin and fidaxomicin. Most of the studies were active comparator studies comparing vancomycin with other antibiotics. One small study compared vancomycin to placebo. There were no other studies that compared antibiotic treatment to a placebo or a 'no treatment' control group. The risk of bias was rated as high for 17 of 22 included studies. Vancomycin was found to be more effective than metronidazole for achieving symptomatic cure. Seventy-two per cent (318/444) of metronidazole patients achieved symptomatic cure compared to 79% (339/428) of vancomycin patients (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.97; moderate quality evidence). Fidaxomicin was found to be more effective than vancomycin for achieving symptomatic cure. Seventy-one per cent (407/572) of fidaxomicin patients achieved symptomatic cure compared to 61% (361/592) of vancomycin patients (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.31; moderate quality evidence). Teicoplanin may be more effective than vancomycin for achieving a symptomatic cure. Eightly-seven per cent (48/55) of teicoplanin patients achieved symptomatic cure compared to 73% (40/55) of vancomycin patients (RR 1.21, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.46; very low quality evidence). For other comparisons including the one placebo-controlled study the quality of evidence was low or very low due to imprecision and in many cases high risk of bias because of attrition and lack of blinding. One hundred and forty deaths were reported in the studies, all of which were attributed by study authors to the co-morbidities of the participants that lead to acquiring CDI. Although many other adverse events were reported during therapy, these were attributed to the participants' co-morbidities. The only adverse events directly attributed to study medication were rare nausea and transient elevation of liver enzymes. Recent cost data (July 2016) for a 10 day course of treatment shows that metronidazole 500 mg is the least expensive antibiotic with a cost of USD 13 (Health Warehouse). Vancomycin 125 mg costs USD 1779 (Walgreens for 56 tablets) compared to fidaxomicin 200 mg at USD 3453.83 or more (Optimer Pharmaceuticals) and teicoplanin at approximately USD 83.67 (GBP 71.40, British National Formulary).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No firm conclusions can be drawn regarding the efficacy of antibiotic treatment in severe CDI as most studies excluded patients with severe disease. The lack of any 'no treatment' control studies does not allow for any conclusions regarding the need for antibiotic treatment in patients with mild CDI beyond withdrawal of the initiating antibiotic. Nonetheless, moderate quality evidence suggests that vancomycin is superior to metronidazole and fidaxomicin is superior to vancomycin. The differences in effectiveness between these antibiotics were not too large and the advantage of metronidazole is its far lower cost compared to the other two antibiotics. The quality of evidence for teicoplanin is very low. Adequately powered studies are needed to determine if teicoplanin performs as well as the other antibiotics. A trial comparing the two cheapest antibiotics, metronidazole and teicoplanin, would be of interest.

Importance of Molecular Methods to Determine Whether a Probiotic is the Source of Lactobacillus Bacteremia

There has been an increasing interest in the use of probiotic products for the prevention of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). Bio-K+(®) is a commercial probiotic product comprising three strains of lactobacilli--Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285(®), Lact. casei LBC80R(®) and Lact. rhamnosus CLR2(®)--that have been applied to prevent CDI. Generally considered as safe, lactobacilli have potential to cause bacteremia, endocarditis and other infections. The source of Lactobacillus bacteremia can be normal human flora or lactobacilli-containing probiotic. The aim of this study was to assess whether probiotic lactobacilli caused bacteremia and to show the value of molecular identification and typing techniques to determine probiotic and patient strain relatedness. We report an episode of Lactobacillus bacteremia in a 69-year-old man admitted to a hospital with severe congestive heart failure. During his hospitalization, he required long-term antibiotic therapy. Additionally, the patient received Bio-K+(®) probiotic as part of a quality improvement project to prevent CDI. Subsequently, Lactobacillus bacteremia occurred. Two independent blinded laboratory evaluations, using pulse field gel electrophoresis, 16S rRNA gene sequencing and DNA fingerprint analysis (rep-PCR), were performed to determine whether the recovered Lact. acidophilus originated from the probiotic product. Ultimately, the patient strain was identified as Lact. casei and both laboratories found no genetic relation between the patient's strain and any of the probiotic lactobacilli. This clinical case of lactobacillus bacteremia in the setting of probiotic exposure demonstrates the value of using discriminatory molecular methods to clearly determine whether there were a link between the patient's isolate and the probiotic strains.