Effect of probiotic Lactobacillus (Lacidofil® cap) for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study

Clinical efficacy of probiotics in prevention of infectious diseases among hospitalized patients in ICU and non-ICU wards in clinical randomized trials: A systematic review

Background and Aims

The present study aimed to review probiotics' clinical efficacy in preventing infectious diseases among hospitalized patients in ICU and non-ICU wards.

Methods

A search of Medline, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Open Grey, and Google Scholar was conducted for eligible publications from 2002 to 2020 following the requirements outlined in the PRISMA guideline. The search strategy was based on the combination of the following terms: "probiotics," "prebiotics," "synbiotics," and "cross-infection." The logical operators "AND" (or the equivalent operator for the databases) and "OR" (e.g., probiotics OR prebiotics OR synbiotics) were used.

Results

The results indicated that the probiotic consumption caused a significant reduction in antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) and Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) in 2/8 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating AAD/CDI. Also, 5/12 clinical trials highlighted the considerable effects of probiotics on the reduction or prevention of ventilator associated pneumoniae (VAP), so the mean prevalence of VAP was lower in the probiotic group than in the placebo group. The total rate of nosocomial infections among preterm infants was nonsignificantly higher in the probiotic group compared to the control group.

Conclusion

This systematic review shows that the administration of probiotics has moderate preventive or mitigating effects on the occurrence of VAP in ICU patients, CDI, AAD, and nosocomial infections among children. Consequently, applying antibiotics along with the proper probiotic species can be advantageous.

Qualitative Analysis of the Efficacy of Probiotic Strains in the Prevention of Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhea

Antibiotic-associated diarrhea is often managed by the withdrawal of the culprit antibiotics or the administration of alternative antibiotics when a Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is suspected, an infection that tends to be the most common causative agent of the disease. Probiotics are also gaining popularity as alternative therapies, and it was hypothesized in this article that a Lactobacillus strain is the most efficacious probiotic for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. This article conducted a literature review investigating the relative efficacy of the Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, and Saccharomyces probiotic strains as effective alternative therapies for antibiotic-associated diarrhea. The literature searched was from the PubMed database. The inclusion filters were: random control trials (RCTs), clinical trials, meta-analysis, last 10 years, full-text articles available in English, and all articles published in peer-reviewed journals. All three probiotic genera had strains that demonstrated significant efficacy in the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. However, Saccharomyces boulardii I-745 tends to outperform all the strains as the most effective and the one with the fewest, if any, adverse effects. Whenever probiotics are considered for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) in both pediatric and adult patients, S. boulardii I-745 should probably be prioritized.

The Emerging Role of the Gut Microbiome in the Cancer Response to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: A Narrative Review

The discovery of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has revolutionized the care of cancer patients. However, the response to ICI therapy exhibits substantial interindividual variability. Efforts have been directed to identify biomarkers that predict the clinical response to ICIs. In recent years, the gut microbiome has emerged as a critical player that influences the efficacy of immunotherapy. An increasing number of studies have suggested that the baseline composition of a patient's gut microbiota and its dysbiosis are correlated with the outcome of cancer immunotherapy. This review tackles the rapidly growing body of evidence evaluating the relationship between the gut microbiome and the response to ICI therapy. Additionally, this review highlights the impact of antibiotic-induced dysbiosis on ICI efficacy and discusses the possible therapeutic interventions to optimize the gut microbiota composition to augment immunotherapy efficacy.

Effects of Probiotics in Conditions or Infections Similar to COVID-19 on Health Outcomes: An Evidence Analysis Center Scoping Review

Probiotics have been suggested as a potential intervention for improving outcomes, particularly ventilatory-associated pneumonia, in patients infected with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, with the rapid development of the COVID-19 pandemic, there is little direct evidence available in infected patients. The objective of this scoping review is to examine the availability and nature of literature describing the effect of probiotics in adults with conditions or infections similar to COVID-19 infection on related health outcomes. MEDLINE, Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Databases were searched for studies published from 1999 to May 1, 2020, examining the effect of probiotics in conditions applicable to individuals infected with COVID-19, including, but not limited to, other forms of coronavirus, critical illness, and mechanical ventilation. The databases search identified 1925 unique articles, 77 full-text articles were reviewed, and 48 studies were included in this scoping review, including 31 primary studies and 17 systematic reviews. Primary studies examined a range of interventions that varied by probiotic diversity and types, including 8 studies that focused on synbiotics, which include both pre- and probiotics. Several systematic reviews examined the effect of probiotics on ventilator-associated pneumonia and other infections. Although most systematic reviews concluded probiotics may improve these outcomes, most systematic review authors concluded that the evidence was low in quality and high in heterogeneity. In the absence of direct evidence with patients infected with COVID-19, studies in comparable populations are currently the best resource to guide probiotics interventions in conjunction with clinical expertise and multidisciplinary health care planning.

Probiotics for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate existing evidence for the use of probiotics in preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD) in adults.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

We performed a literature search of the electronic databases CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, MEDLINE (Ovid) and Web of Science from database inception to May 2021 as well as hand searching of trial registries and reference lists of related reviews.

STUDY SELECTION

Two reviewers identified whether RCTs met the following inclusion criteria: adult population to whom antibiotics were administered; a probiotic intervention; a placebo, alternative dose, alternative probiotic strain or no treatment control; and incidence of AAD as the outcome.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently collected data and assessed risk of bias using preconstructed data extraction forms. We used a random effects model for all analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed to evaluate species-specific and dose-specific response.

RESULTS

Forty-two studies (11,305 participants) were included in this review. The pooled analysis suggests that co-administration of probiotics with antibiotics reduces the risk of AAD in adults by 37% (risk ratio (RR)=0.63 (95% CI 0.54 to 0.73), p<0.00001). The overall quality of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) criteria was found to be moderate. In subgroup analyses, high dose compared with low dose of the same probiotic demonstrated a positive protective effect (RR 0.54 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.76), p<0.01), and only certain species, mainly of the lactobacillus and bifidobacteria genera, were found to be effective. Studies with a low baseline AAD risk did not show any difference in risk but studies with moderate or high baseline AAD risk demonstrated a significant risk reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Probiotics are effective for preventing AAD. Secondary analyses of higher dosages and certain species have shown increased effectiveness. Our results may not be applicable in clinical scenarios of lower baseline AAD risk.

Probiotics for the Prevention of Antibiotic-associated Diarrhea in Adults: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aims to combine the latest research evidence to assess the effect of probiotics on preventing antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) in adults.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science were searched for randomized placebo-controlled trials on probiotics preventing AAD. A random or fixed effect model was used to combine the incidence of AAD (primary outcome) and the adverse event rates. The authors performed subgroup analyses to explore the effects of different participants population, probiotics species, and dosage.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies were included with 9312 participants. Probiotics reduced the incidence of AAD by 38% (pooled relative risk, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.74). The protective effect of probiotics was still significant when grouped by reasons for antibiotics treatment, probiotic duration, probiotic dosage, and time from antibiotic to probiotic. However, there were no statistically significant increased adverse events in the probiotics group (relative risk, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-1.14).

CONCLUSIONS

This updated meta-analysis suggested that using probiotics as early as possible during antibiotic therapy has a positive and safe effect on preventing AAD in adults. Further studies should focus on the optimal dosage and duration of probiotics to develop a specific recommendation.

Clinical characteristics and factors related to antibiotic-associated diarrhea in elderly patients with pneumonia: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) is a common problem among elderly inpatients because many elderly patients are admitted for pneumonia or other conditions that necessitate antibiotic treatment. In the super aging population, more patients are suffering from pneumonia than before, but the incidence or risk factors for AAD among many elderly patients have not been well scrutinized.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of elderly patients diagnosed with pneumonia from April 2014 to March 2019 who were admitted to the Department of General Medicine of a Tertiary Care Hospital in Japan. Patients (≥ 65 years of age) who were diagnosed with bacterial pneumonia or aspiration pneumonia and treated with antibiotics were included. We defined AAD by diarrhea with more than three loose or watery stools per day and included patients who had these symptoms for either one day or two or more consecutive days. We also assessed the length of hospital stay and in-hospital mortality. The potential risk factors for AAD included age, sex, body weight, body mass index, smoking, alcohol, activities of daily living (ADL),　comorbidities, vital signs, laboratories, the severity of pneumonia, antibiotic and other medication use.

RESULTS

There were 1,067 patients, the mean age was 83 years, and men accounted for 59 %. β-Lactamase inhibitors were frequently prescribed antibiotics in 703 patients (66 %), and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) were also commonly administered (48 %). AAD developed in 322 patients (30 %). The multivariate logistic regression model showed that β-lactamase inhibitors (OR 1.43, 95 % CI 1.05-1.95) and PPIs (OR 1.37, 95 % CI 1.03-1.83) were associated with AAD as well as age (OR 1.03 per year, 95 % CI 1.01-1.05).

CONCLUSIONS

AAD was common among elderly inpatients with pneumonia, and β-lactamase inhibitors and PPIs were associated with AAD. Strict use of such medication should be considered to decrease the risk of AAD.

Probiotic stool secretory immunoglobulin A modulation in children with gastroenteritis: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

We previously conducted the Probiotic Regimen for Outpatient Gastroenteritis Utility of Treatment (PROGUT) study, which identified no improvements in children with acute gastroenteritis (AGE) administered a probiotic. However, the aforementioned study did not evaluate immunomodulatory benefits.

OBJECTIVES

The object of this study was to determine if stool secretory immunoglobulin A (sIgA) concentrations in children with AGE increase more among participants administered a Lactobacillus rhamnosus/helveticus probiotic compared with those administered placebo.

METHODS

This a priori planned multicenter, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled ancillary study enrolled children presenting for emergency care who received a 5-d probiotic or placebo course. Participants submitted stool specimens on days 0, 5, and 28. The primary endpoint was the change in stool sIgA concentrations on day 5 compared with baseline.

RESULTS

A total of 133 (n = 66 probiotic, 67 placebo) of 886 PROGUT participants (15.0%) provided all 3 specimens. Median stool sIgA concentrations did not differ between the probiotic and placebo groups at any of the study time points: day 0 median (IQR): 1999 (768, 4071) compared with 2198 (702, 5278) (P = 0.27, Cohen's d = 0.17); day 5: 2505 (1111, 5310) compared with 3207 (982, 7080) (P = 0.19, Cohen's d = 0.16); and day 28: 1377 (697, 2248) compared with 1779 (660, 3977) (P = 0.27, Cohen's d = 0.19), respectively. When comparing measured sIgA concentrations between days 0 and 5, we found no treatment allocation effects [β: -0.24 (-0.65, 0.18); P = 0.26] or interaction between treatment and specimen collection day [β: -0.003 (-0.09, 0.09); P = 0.95]. Although stool sIgA decreased between day 5 and day 28 within both groups (P < 0.001), there were no differences between the probiotic and placebo groups in the median changes in sIgA concentrations when comparing day 0 to day 5 median (IQR) [500 (-1135, 2362) compared with 362 (-1122, 4256); P = 0.77, Cohen's d = 0.075] and day 5 to day 28 [-1035 (-3130, 499) compared with -1260 (-4437, 843); P = 0.70, Cohen's d = 0.067], respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no effect of an L. rhamnosus/helveticus probiotic, relative to placebo, on stool IgA concentrations. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01853124.

Efficacy of Single-Strain Probiotics Versus Multi-Strain Mixtures: Systematic Review of Strain and Disease Specificity

The diversity of probiotic products makes choosing an appropriate probiotic challenging. One unanswered question is whether single-strain probiotics are more effective than multi-strain mixtures. The aim of this review is to account for both disease and strain specificity to determine whether single strains or multiple strains are equivalent or more effective. This literature review of randomized controlled trials from 1973 to 2019 was used to compare the pooled efficacy of trials with a single strain versus the probiotic mixture with same matched strain within the same type of disease indication. A total of 65 RCTs were included (41 with single strains, 22 multi-strain mixtures and 2 comparing single strain to mixture arms) for eight different disease indications (N = 10,863). Only three strains (L. rhamnosus GG, L. helveticus R52 and B. lactis Bb12) had corresponding trials with matching mixtures. Use of L. rhamnosus GG only was significantly more protective for necrotizing enterocolitis compared to two mixtures also containing different strains of B. lactis. The mixture of L. rhamnosus GG and B. lactis Bb12 was significantly more effective than L. rhamnosus GG alone for the eradication of H. pylori. In most cases, single strains were equivalent to mixtures. Choice of an appropriate probiotic should be based, not on the number of strains in the product, rather based on evidence-based trials of efficacy. In most cases, multi-strain mixtures were not significantly more effective than single-strain probiotics.

Utility of Probiotics for Maintenance or Improvement of Health Status in Older People - A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the available evidence on probiotic use in older adults from human studies.

DESIGN

systematic review.

METHODS

The databases Embase, CINAHL and Medline were searched in December of 2017 for studies in humans where probiotics were used to modify a health outcome in older people. The quality of studies was evaluated using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) assessment tool and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment tool.

PARTICIPANTS

Subjects aged over sixty years either through specified selection criteria or where the mean participant age was greater than sixty.

INTERVENTIONS

Probiotic supplements.

MEASUREMENTS

Pre-specified clinically measurable health outcomes in age related conditions.

RESULTS

1210 articles were identified. After quality assessment and selection criteria were applied, 33 articles were identified to be included for review. As these studies cover a variety of applications and used customised protocols accordingly, meta-analysis was not possible and synthesis is in narrative form.

CONCLUSIONS

A growing body of research has applied commercially available probiotic preparations across care settings for age related conditions including gut dysmotility, osteoporosis, common infectious diseases and cognitive impairment. Although methodologies vary, randomised controlled trials have reproduced results in these areas, and so warrant consideration of probiotics as a low risk adjuvant treatment for specific indications in the elderly.

A practical guide for probiotics applied to the case of antibiotic-associated diarrhea in The Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) is a side-effect frequently associated with the use of broad spectrum antibiotics. Although a number of clinical studies show that co-administration of specific probiotics reduces the risk for AAD, there is still unclarity among healthcare professionals on the recommendation of probiotic products. This paper aims at a practical guide to inform healthcare professionals, patients and consumers about the exact product characteristics of available probiotics with a proven efficacy to prevent AAD.

METHODS

The workflow in this paper includes three consecutive steps: 1) systematic review of relevant clinical studies for effective probiotics by a meta-analysis, 2) compilation of a list of available probiotic products, and 3) recommendation of probiotic products that match effective formulations. Our systematic review on the efficacy of probiotics for the prevention of AAD included only studies with randomized, double blind placebo-controlled trials, a clear definition of antibiotic associated diarrhea, and a probiotic administration regime for at least the duration of the antibiotic therapy.

RESULTS

Using our inclusion criteria, we selected 32 out of 128 identified trials and pooled the results of these studies for each specific dairy product and food supplement. The results indicate a total of seven single or multiple-strain formulations favoring the probiotic treatment group, with the strain Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG being the most effective [relative risk ratio of probiotic versus placebo 0.30 (95% CI 0.16-0.5)]. We selected products for recommendation from a compiled list of all probiotic dairy products and food supplements available in The Netherlands and categorized them into groups of products showing effects against the incidence of AAD in at least one, two or three independent clinical studies. We excluded all products which did not unambiguously declare on the label the specific probiotic strain(s) and the number of colony forming units.

CONCLUSION

Here we present a practical guide that informs healthcare professionals and patients on the availability of probiotic products with a proven efficacy for the prevention of AAD.

Strain-Specificity and Disease-Specificity of Probiotic Efficacy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

As the use and diversity of probiotic products expands, the choice of an appropriate type of probiotic is challenging for both medical care professionals and the public alike. Two vital factors in choosing the appropriate probiotic are often ignored, namely, the probiotic strain-specificity and disease-specificity for efficacy. Reviews and meta-analyses often pool together different types of probiotics, resulting in misleading conclusions of efficacy.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature (1970-2017) assessing strain-specific and disease-specific probiotic efficacy was conducted. Trials were included for probiotics with an identifiable strain (either single strain or mixtures of strains) that had at least two randomized, controlled trials for each type of disease indication. The goal was to determine if probiotic strains have strain and/or disease-specific efficacy.

Results

We included 228 trials and found evidence for both strain specificity and disease specificity for the efficacy of specific probiotic strains. Significant efficacy evidence was found for 7 (70%) of probiotic strain(s) among four preventive indications and 11 (65%) probiotic strain(s) among five treatment indications. Strain-specific efficacy for preventing adult antibiotic-associated diarrhea was clearly demonstrated within the Lactobacillus species [e.g., by the mixture of Lactobacillus acidophilus CL1285, Lactobacillus casei LBC80R, and Lactobacillus rhamnosus CLR2 (Bio-K+^®), by L. casei DN114001 (Actimel^®) and by Lactobacillus reuteri 55730], while other Lactobacillus strains did not show efficacy. Significant disease-specific variations in efficacy was demonstrated by L. rhamnosus GG and Saccharomyces boulardii CNCM I-745, as well as other probiotic strains.

Conclusion

Strong evidence was found supporting the hypothesis that the efficacy of probiotics is both strain-specific and disease-specific. Clinical guidelines and meta-analyses need to recognize the importance of reporting outcomes by both specific strain(s) of probiotics and the type of disease. The clinical relevance of these findings indicates that health-care providers need to take these two factors into consideration when recommending the appropriate probiotic for their patient.

Systematic review: probiotics in the management of lower gastrointestinal symptoms - an updated evidence-based international consensus

BACKGROUND

In 2013, a systematic review and Delphi consensus reported that specific probiotics can benefit adult patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and other gastrointestinal (GI) problems.

AIM

To update the consensus with new evidence.

METHODS

A systematic review identified randomised, placebo-controlled trials published between January 2012 and June 2017. Evidence was graded, previously developed statements were reassessed by an 8-expert panel, and agreement was reached via Delphi consensus.

RESULTS

A total of 70 studies were included (IBS, 34; diarrhoea associated with antibiotics, 13; diarrhoea associated with Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy, 7; other conditions, 16). Of 15 studies that examined global IBS symptoms as a primary endpoint, 8 reported significant benefits of probiotics vs placebo. Consensus statements with 100% agreement and "high" evidence level indicated that specific probiotics help reduce overall symptom burden and abdominal pain in some patients with IBS and duration/intensity of diarrhoea in patients prescribed antibiotics or H. pylori eradication therapy, and have favourable safety. Statements with 70%-100% agreement and "moderate" evidence indicated that, in some patients with IBS, specific probiotics help reduce bloating/distension and improve bowel movement frequency/consistency.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated review indicates that specific probiotics are beneficial in certain lower GI problems, although many of the new publications did not report benefits of probiotics, possibly due to inclusion of new, less efficacious preparations. Specific probiotics can relieve lower GI symptoms in IBS, prevent diarrhoea associated with antibiotics and H. pylori eradication therapy, and show favourable safety. This study will help clinicians recommend/prescribe probiotics for specific symptoms.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of probiotics for antibiotic-associated diarrhea: Systematic review with network meta-analysis

Background

Probiotics are commonly used for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD). However, the optimum regimen remains controversial.

Objective

The objective of this article is to compare and rank the relative efficacy and tolerability among all available probiotic agents for AAD through a network meta-analysis.

Methods

Eligible studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane library and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the efficacy of probiotic therapy for AAD. A random-effects model was applied within a frequentist framework. Quality of evidence was performed by the GRADE approach. The project was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD 42016050776).

Results

Fifty-one articles (60 comparisons, 9569 participants), including 10 probiotic interventions, were identified. Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) had the highest probability of being ranked best both in effectiveness (odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.28 (0.17, 0.47)) and tolerance (0.44 (0.23, 0.84)) on prevention of AAD. With regard to reducing Clostridium difficile infection rate, Lactobacillus casei (L. casei) was considered better efficacy (0.04 (0.00, 0.77)) and medium tolerance (0.56 (0.19, 1.66)). Strain combination reported no superiority over single strain in either efficacy or tolerability.

Conclusions

LGG is probably the best option to consider when AAD is indicated. L. casei appears to be the most efficacious choice when associated with severe C. difficile-related cases.

Genome adaptive evolution of Lactobacillus casei under long-term antibiotic selection pressures

Background

The extensive use of antibiotics in medicine has raised serious concerns about biosafety. However, the effect of antibiotic application on the adaptive evolution of microorganisms, especially to probiotic bacteria, has not been well characterized. Thus, the objective of the current work was to investigate how antibiotic selection forces might drive genome adaptation using Lactobacillus (L.) casei Zhang as a model.

Methods

Two antibiotics, amoxicillin and gentamicin, were consistently applied to the laboratory culture of L. casei Zhang. We then monitored the mutations in the bacterial genome and changes in the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of these two antibiotics along a 2000-generation-cultivation lasted over 10 months.

Results

We found an approximately 4-fold increase in the genome mutation frequency of L. casei Zhang, i.e. 3.5 × 10^-9 per base pair per generation under either amoxicillin or gentamicin stress, when compared with the parallel controls grown without application of any antibiotics. The increase in mutation frequency is significantly lower than that previously reported in Escherichia (E.) coli. The rate of de novo mutations, i.e. 20 per genome, remained low and stable throughout the long-term cultivation. Moreover, the accumulation of new mutations stopped shortly after the maximum bacterial fitness (i.e. the antibiotic MICs) was reached.

Conclusions

Our study has shown that the probiotic species, L. casei Zhang, has high genome stability even in the presence of long-term antibiotic stresses. However, whether this is a species-specific or universal characteristic for all probiotic bacteria remains to be explored.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12864-017-3710-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Selection of a candidate probiotic strain of Pediococcus pentosaceus from the faecal microbiota of horses by in vitro testing and health claims in a mouse model of Salmonella infection

AIMS

The aim of this study was to verify the suitable use of candidate 'probiotics' selected by in vitro tests and the importance of in vivo assays to nominate micro-organisms as probiotics and alternative prophylactic treatments for Salmonella Typhimurium infection.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Thirty-three lactic acid bacteria (LAB) isolated from foal's faeces were assessed based on the main desirable functional in vitro criteria. Based on these results, Pediococcus pentosaceus strain 40 was chosen to evaluate its putative probiotic features in a mouse model of Salmonella infection. Daily intragastric doses of Ped. pentosaceus 40 for 10 days before and 10 days after Salmonella challenge (10⁶ CFU of Salm. Typhimurium per mouse) led to a significant aggravation in mouse health by increasing weight loss, worsening clinical symptoms and anticipating the time and the number of deaths by Salmonella. Pediococcus pentosaceus modulated cell-mediated immune responses by up-regulation of the gene expression of the proinflammatory cytokines IFN-γ and TNF-α in the small intestine.

CONCLUSION

The usual criteria were used for in vitro screening of a large number of LAB for desirable probiotic functional properties. However, the best candidate probiotic strain identified, Ped. pentosaceus #40, aggravated the experimental disease in mice.

SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY

These findings emphasize the need for prophylactic or therapeutic effectiveness to be demonstrated in in vivo models to make precise health claims.

Evaluation of chitosan hydrochloride-alginate as enteric micro-probiotic-carrier with dual protective barriers

In this study, the cells-free and cells-loaded chitosan hydrochloride-alginate (CHC-Alg) microcapsules were firstly fabricated with polyelectrolyte complexes via an orifice-polymerization method. Scanning electron microscope images showed that the CHC-Alg microcapsules had a typical shell-core structure and the model probiotic cells (Bacillus licheniformis) were embedded in the core in cells-loaded microcapsules. The microcapsules prepared had good thermal stability and moisture property (3.89%). Cells survival and release studies showed that the number of probiotic cells released from the cells-loaded microcapsules (approx. 6.36logCFUml^-1) was 6.19logCFUml^-1 when they were performed in the simulated gastric fluid (SGF, pH 2.0) for 1h and subsequently in the simulated intestinal fluid (SIF, 0.3%) for 4h. The CHC-Alg microcapsules with favorable swelling performances were helpful to permeate the harsh acid to protect the cells in the SGF (pH 2.0). The CHC-Alg microcapsules effectively protected the model probiotic cells, which was attributed to the "dual protective barriers" of the shell-core structure, that is, the primary barrier of the Alg hydrogel layer formed with a compact polymer matrix and the secondary barrier of the PEC film formed on the surface. The microcapsules prepared could be used as an enteric micro-probiotic-carrier for designing potential probiotic delivery systems.

Effectiveness of Lactobacillus helveticus and Lactobacillus rhamnosus for the management of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in healthy adults: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Broad-spectrum antibiotic use can disrupt the gastrointestinal microbiota resulting in diarrhoea. Probiotics may be beneficial in managing this type of diarrhoea. The aim of this 10-week randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel study was to investigate the effect of Lactobacillus helveticus R0052 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus R0011 supplementation on antibiotic-associated diarrhoea in healthy adults. Subjects were randomised to receive 1 week of amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (875 mg/125 mg) once per day, plus a daily dose of 8×109 colony-forming units of a multi-strain probiotic (n 80) or placebo (n 80). The probiotic or placebo intervention was maintained for 1 week after completion of the antibiotic. Primary study outcomes of consistency and frequency of bowel movements were not significantly different between the probiotic and placebo groups. The secondary outcomes of diarrhoea-like defecations, Gastrointestinal Symptoms Rating Scale scores, safety parameters and adverse events were not significantly different between the probiotic intervention and the placebo. A post hoc analysis on the duration of diarrhoea-like defecations showed that probiotic intervention reduced the length of these events by 1 full day (probiotic, 2·70 (sem 0·36) d; placebo, 3·71 (sem 0·36) d; P=0·037; effect size=0·52). In conclusion, this study provides novel evidence that L. helveticus R0052 and L. rhamnosus R0011 supplementation significantly reduced the duration of diarrhoea-like defecations in healthy adults receiving antibiotics.

The administration of probiotics and synbiotics in immune compromised adults: is it safe?

This study aimed to systematically evaluate safety of probiotics and synbiotics in immune compromised adults (≥18 years). Safety was analysed using the Common Terminology Clinical Adverse Events (CTCAE version 4.0) classification, thereby providing an update on previous reports using the most recent available clinical data (2008-2013). Safety aspects are represented and related to number of participants per probiotic strain/culture, study duration, dosage, clinical condition and selected afflictions. Analysis of 57 clinical studies indicates that probiotic and/or synbiotic administration in immune compromised adults is safe with regard to the current evaluated probiotic strains, dosages and duration. Individuals were considered immune compromised if HIV-infected, critically ill, underwent surgery or had an organ- or an autoimmune disease. There were no major safety concerns in the study, as none of the serious adverse events (AE)s were related, or suspected to be related, to the probiotic or synbiotic product and the study products were well tolerated. Overall, AEs occurred less frequent in immune compromised subjects receiving probiotics and/or synbiotics compared to the control group. In addition, the results demonstrated a flaw in precise reporting and classification of AE in most studies. Furthermore, generalisability of conclusions are greatly limited by the inconsistent, imprecise and potentially incomplete reporting as well as the variation in probiotic strains, dosages, administration regimes, study populations and reported outcomes. We argue that standardised reporting on adverse events (CTCAE) in 'food' studies should be obligatory, thereby improving reliability of data and re-enforcing the safety profile of probiotics.

Probiotics for Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhoea (PAAD): a prospective observational study of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (including Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea) in care homes

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic prescribing rates in care homes are higher than in the general population. Antibiotics disrupt the normal gut flora, sometimes causing antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD). Clostridium difficile (Hall and O'Toole 1935) Prévot 1938 is the most commonly identified cause of AAD. Little is known either about the frequency or type of antibiotics prescribed in care homes or about the incidence and aetiology of AAD in this setting.

OBJECTIVES

The Probiotics for Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhoea (PAAD) study was designed as a two-stage study. PAAD stage 1 aimed to (1) prospectively describe antibiotic prescribing in care homes; (2) determine the incidence of C. difficile carriage and AAD (including C. difficile-associated diarrhoea); and (3) to consider implementation challenges and establish the basis for a sample size estimation for a randomised controlled trial (RCT) of probiotic administration with antibiotics to prevent AAD in care homes. If justified by PAAD stage 1, the RCT would be implemented in PAAD stage 2. However, as a result of new evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness of probiotics on the incidence of AAD, a decision was taken not to proceed with PAAD stage 2.

DESIGN

PAAD stage 1 was a prospective observational cohort study in care homes in South Wales with up to 12 months' follow-up for each resident.

SETTING

Recruited care homes had management and owner's agreement to participate and three or more staff willing to take responsibility for implementing the study.

PARTICIPANTS

Eleven care homes were recruited, but one withdrew before any residents were recruited. A total of 279 care home residents were recruited to the observational study and 19 withdrew, 16 (84%) because of moving to a non-participating care home.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were the rate of antibiotic prescribing, incidence of AAD, defined as three or more loose stools (type 5-7 on the Bristol Stool Chart) in a 24-hour period, and C. difficile carriage confirmed on stool culture.

RESULTS

Stool samples were obtained at study entry from 81% of participating residents. Over half of the samples contained antibiotic-resistant isolates, with Enterobacteriaceae resistant to ciprofloxacin in 47%. Residents were prescribed an average of 2.16 antibiotic prescriptions per year [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.90 to 2.46]. Antibiotics were less likely to be prescribed to residents from dual-registered homes. The incidence of AAD was 0.57 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.81) episodes per year among those residents who were prescribed antibiotics. AAD was more likely in residents who were prescribed co-amoxiclav than other antibiotics and in those residents who routinely used incontinence pads. AAD was less common in residents from residential homes.

CONCLUSIONS

Care home residents, particularly in nursing homes, are frequently prescribed antibiotics and often experience AAD. Antibiotic resistance, including ciprofloxacin resistance, is common in Enterobacteriaceae isolated from the stool of care home residents. Co-amoxiclav is associated with greater risk of AAD than other commonly prescribed antibiotics.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 7954844.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 18, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Commercially available probiotic drinks containing Lactobacillus casei DN-114001 reduce antibiotic-associated diarrhea

AIM: To investigate the effect of Lactobacillus-containing commercially available probiotic formulations in Germany during antibiotic treatment with an analysis of cost-efficiency.

METHODS: In an observational study, we analyzed the frequency of bowel movements from 258 patients with infections in a primary care hospital in western Germany; 107 of the patients were offered a probiotic drink containing at least 10 billion cultures of Lactobacillus casei DN 114001 b.i.d. The economic analysis was based on the costs of patient isolation vs preventive intake of probiotics. In a second pilot study, two commercially available probiotic drinks with different Lactobacillus casei strains were directly compared in 60 patients in a randomized controlled fashion.

RESULTS: In the first study, the incidence of antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) was significantly reduced in the intervention group (6.5% vs 28.4%), and the duration of AAD in days was significantly shorter (1.7 ± 1.1 vs 3.1 ± 2.1). Higher age and creatinine and lower albumin were identified as risk factors for AAD. Ampicillin was the antibiotic with the highest rate of AAD (50%) and with the greatest AAD reduction in the probiotic group (4.2%, relative risk reduction 92%). The economic analysis showed a cost advantage of nearly 60000 €/year in a department of this size. The second study confirmed the preventive effect of the drink with Lactobacillus casei DN114001; however, there were no advantages found for the other tested probiotic drink containing Lactobacillus casei Shirota.

CONCLUSION: In contrast to a drink containing Lactobacillus casei Shirota, a commercially available probiotic drink containing Lactobacillus casei DN 114001 cost-efficiently reduces the prevalence of AAD during antibiotic treatment.

Probiotics, prebiotics and the gastrointestinal tract in health and disease

The microbiome located in the human gastrointestinal tract (GIT) comprises the largest community (diverse and dense) of bacteria, and in conjunction with a conducive internal milieu, promotes the development of regulated pro- and anti-inflammatory signals within the GIT that promotes immunological and metabolic tolerance. In addition, host-microbial interactions govern GIT inflammation and provide cues for upholding metabolic regulation in both the host and microbes. Failure to regulate inflammatory responses can increase the risk of developing inflammatory conditions in the GIT. Here, we review clinical studies regarding the efficacy of probiotics/prebiotics and the role they may have in restoring host metabolic homeostasis by rescuing the inflammatory response. The clinical studies reviewed included functional constipation, antibiotic-associated diarrhoea, Clostridium difficile diarrhoea, infectious diarrhoea/gastroenteritis, irritable bowel syndrome, inflammatory bowel diseases and necrotizing enterocolitis. We have demonstrated that there was an overall reduction in risk when probiotics were administered over placebo in the majority of GIT inflammatory conditions. The effect size of a cumulative reduction in relative risk for the GIT conditions/diseases investigated was 0.65 (0.61-0.70) (z = 13.3); p < 0.0001 that is an average reduction in risk of 35 % in favour of probiotics. We also progress a hypothesis that the GIT comprises numerous micro-axes (e.g. mucus secretion, Th1/Th2 balance) that are in operational homeostasis; hence probiotics and prebiotics may have a significant pharmacobiotic regulatory role in maintaining host GIT homeostasis in disease states partially through reactive oxygen species signalling.

Systematic review: probiotics in the management of lower gastrointestinal symptoms in clinical practice -- an evidence-based international guide

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that the gut microbiota play an important role in gastrointestinal problems.

AIM

To give clinicians a practical reference guide on the role of specified probiotics in managing particular lower gastrointestinal symptoms/problems by means of a systematic review-based consensus.

METHODS

Systematic literature searching identified randomised, placebo-controlled trials in adults; evidence for each symptom/problem was graded and statements developed (consensus process; 10-member panel). As results cannot be generalised between different probiotics, individual probiotics were identified for each statement.

RESULTS

Thirty seven studies were included; mostly on irritable bowel syndrome [IBS; 19 studies; treatment responder rates: 18-80% (specific probiotics), 5-50% (placebo)] or antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD; 10 studies). Statements with 100% agreement and 'high' evidence levels indicated that: (i) specific probiotics help reduce overall symptom burden and abdominal pain in some IBS patients; (ii) in patients receiving antibiotics/Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy, specified probiotics are helpful as adjuvants to prevent/reduce the duration/intensity of AAD; (iii) probiotics have favourable safety in patients in primary care. Items with 70-100% agreement and 'moderate' evidence were: (i) specific probiotics help relieve overall symptom burden in some patients with diarrhoea-predominant IBS, and reduce bloating/distension and improve bowel movement frequency/consistency in some IBS patients and (ii) with some probiotics, improved symptoms have led to improvement in quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Specified probiotics can provide benefit in IBS and antibiotic-associated diarrhoea; relatively few studies in other indications suggested benefits warranting further research. This study provides practical guidance on which probiotic to select for a specific problem.

Probiotics for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea and Clostridium difficile infection among hospitalized patients: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD) and Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) are associated with high morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Probiotics may mitigate the existing disease burden. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of co-administration of probiotics with antibiotics in preventing these adverse outcomes in adult inpatients.

METHODS

Systematic searches of MEDLINE (1946 to May 2012), Embase (1980 to May 2012), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were undertaken on May 31, 2012, to identify relevant publications. We searched for randomized controlled trials, published in English, of adult inpatients who were receiving antibiotics and who were randomly assigned to co-administration of probiotics or usual care, with or without the use of placebo. Studies were included if they reported on AAD or CDI (or both) as outcomes. Data for predetermined criteria evaluating study characteristics, methods, and risk of bias were extracted. Trials were given a global rating of good, fair, or poor by at least 2 reviewers. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model, and pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Sixteen trials met the criteria for inclusion in this review. Four studies were of good quality, 5 were of fair quality, and 7 were of poor quality. Pooled analyses revealed significant reductions in the risks of AAD (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.79) and CDI (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.61) among patients randomly assigned to co-administration of probiotics. The number needed to treat for benefit was 11 (95% CI 8 to 20) for AAD and 14 (95% CI 9 to 50) for CDI. With subgroup analysis, significant reductions in rates of both AAD and CDI were retained in the subgroups of good-quality trials, the trials assessing a primarily Lactobacillus-based probiotic formulation, and the trials for which the follow-up period was less than 4 weeks.

INTERPRETATION

Probiotics used concurrently with antibiotics reduce the risk of AAD and CDI.

Prospective, Randomized, Open-Label Trial Comparing the Safety, Efficacy, and Tolerability of an Acne Treatment Regimen with and without a Probiotic Supplement and Minocycline in Subjects with Mild to Moderate Acne

Background:

Systemic antibiotics are an effective treatment for acne vulgaris. However, intolerable side effects may invariably occur.

Objective:

To determine whether probiotics reduce the side effects imparted by systemic antibiotics while working synergistically with the latter in treating inflammatory acne.

Methods:

Forty-five 18- to 35-year-old females were randomly assigned to one of three arms in this prospective, open-label study. Group A received probiotic supplementation, whereas group B received only minocycline. Group C was treated with both probiotic and minocycline. Clinical and subjective assessments were completed at baseline and during the 2-, 4-, 8-, and 12-week follow-up visits.

Results:

All patients demonstrated a significant improvement in total lesion count 4 weeks after treatment initiation ( p < .001), with continued improvement seen with each subsequent follow-up visit ( p < .01). At the 8- and 12-week follow-up visits, group C had a significant decrease in total lesion count versus groups A ( p < .001) and B ( p < .01). Two patients (13%) from group B failed to complete the study secondary to vaginal candidiasis.

Conclusion:

Probiotics may be considered a therapeutic option or adjunct for acne vulgaris by providing a synergistic antiinflammatory effect with systemic antibiotics while also reducing potential adverse events secondary to chronic antibiotic use.

Comparative study of the protective capacity against Salmonella infection between probiotic and nonprobiotic Lactobacilli

AIMS

To investigate the immunoprotective ability of three Lactobacilli strains against Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium in a mouse model. To identify the probiotic properties involved in the protection against infection caused by this pathogen.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The immunomodulatory effect of three different lactobacilli strains: Lactobacillus (Lact.) casei CRL 431 (probiotic bacterium), Lact. delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus CRL 423 (Lact. bulgaricus) and Lact.acidophilus CRL 730 was compared using a mouse model of Salmonella infection. Lactobacillus casei continuous administration improved animal survival, diminished pathogen spreading outside the intestine, attenuated the intestinal inflammation, modulated cytokine profile previous and postinfection and increased the expression and secretion of IgA in the gut. Additionally, the administration of this lactobacilli increased peritoneal, Peyer's patches and spleen macrophages' phagocytic activity in healthy mice and monocyte chemotactic protein (MCP-1) released by intestinal epithelial cells in an in vitro assay. Although Lact. acidophilus increased the number of IgA-secreting cells previous and postinfection, and Lact. bulgaricus increased MCP-1 released by intestinal epithelial cells and the phagocytic activity of macrophages, these effects alone were not enough to confer protection against Salmonella Typhimurium infection in mouse.

CONCLUSIONS

Probiotic strain Lact. casei CRL 431 was the one that induced protection against Salmonella, by increasing the intestinal barrier function and by decreasing the local inflammatory response.

SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY

Salmonella spp. constitutes an important agent of foodborne diseases in the world. Not all lactobacilli, even with some immunostimulating properties at gut level, can protect against Salmonella infection. Lactobacillus casei CRL 431, a probiotic bacterium, could be useful as an oral mucosal adjuvant of the immune system to improve gut health, especially in the prevention or amelioration of Salmonella infections. We demonstrated that there is not a unique mechanism by which this protective effect was exerted.

Probiotics for the prevention of antibiotic-associated diarrhea in adult patients: A meta-analysis

AIM: To systematically investigate whether current clinical trails can clarify the association between probiotic administration and adult antibiotic-associated diarrhea (AAD), and to evaluate the efficacy and safety of probiotic administration in preventing AAD in both inpatient and outpatient adults.

METHODS: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, the Cochrane database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) electronic databases were searched for studies published between January 1966 and April 2012. Only prospective, randomized, controlled trials involving patients older than 18 years were included. Furthermore, only the trials which combined antibiotic administration and probiotic therapy for the prevention of AAD were extracted.

RESULTS: The data of the present study showed a significantly decreased risk of adult AAD: relative risk (RR) = 0.45, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.29-0.69, P < 0.001. Similar results were obtained from the subgroup analysis of particular types of probiotics (RR = 0.42, 95%CI: 0.20-0.85, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that adult patients can benefit from probiotics co-administered with antibiotics.

Meta-analysis: probiotics in antibiotic-associated diarrhoea

BACKGROUND

Diarrhoea is a common occurrence in association with antibiotic administration. Earlier studies and meta-analyses have suggested that probiotic administration reduces the incidence of antibiotic-associated diarrhoea (AAD).

AIM

To estimate the reduction in risk of AAD with administration of probiotics in randomised placebo-controlled trials and to identify factors associated with such reduction.

METHODS

Meta-analysis of randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trials including patients treated with antibiotics and administered a probiotic for at least the duration of the antibiotic treatment. The outcome was incidence of diarrhoea irrespective of the presence of Clostridium difficile or the development of pseudomembranous colitis. Meta-analysis and meta-regression methods were used to synthesise data and to assess influence of: mean age, duration of antibiotics, risk of bias and incidence of diarrhoea in the placebo group on outcomes. Subgroup analyses explored effects of different probiotic species, patient populations and treatment indications.

RESULTS

A total of 34 studies were included with 4138 patients. The pooled relative risk (RR) for AAD in the probiotic group vs. placebo was 0.53 (95% CI 0.44-0.63), corresponding to a number needed to treat (NNT) of 8 (95% CI 7-11). The preventive effect of probiotics remained significant when grouped by probiotic species, population age group, relative duration of antibiotics and probiotics, study risk of bias and probiotic administered. The pooled RR for AAD during treatment for Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) was 0.37 (95% CI 0.20-0.69), corresponding to a NNT of 5 (95% CI 4-10).

CONCLUSIONS

This updated meta-analysis confirms earlier results supporting the preventive effects of probiotics in AAD.

A comprehensive post-market review of studies on a probiotic product containing Lactobacillus helveticus R0052 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus R0011

The probiotic preparation Lacidofil® has been commercially available in Europe, Asia and North America since 1995. This product is a combination of two strains, Lactobacillus helveticus R0052 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus R0011. The strains have been evaluated for safety, identity and mechanisms of probiotic action in vitro, in animal models and human clinical trials. The strains adhered to human epithelial cells, helped to maintain the barrier function and blocked the adhesion of a number of pathogens, allowing them to be cleared from the intestine. The strains also elicited an anti-inflammatory response by down-regulating IL-1β, IL-8 and TNF-α. In various stress models, the probiotic combination facilitated better coping and outcomes which may be through the maintenance of barrier function and suppressing inflammation. Overall, pre-clinical studies suggest a potential anti-infectious role for the strains and the combination. Clinical studies, primarily in children, have identified Lacidofil as an effective supplement for various gastrointestinal diseases such as antibiotic-associated diarrhoea and acute gastroenteritis. Recent research has also indicated that Lacidofil may be beneficial for individuals with atopic dermatitis or vaginal dysbacteriosis.