| Literature DB >> 26640504 |
Marie Lefevre1, Silvia M Racedo2, Gabrielle Ripert2, Béatrice Housez3, Murielle Cazaubiel3, Corinne Maudet3, Peter Jüsten1, Philippe Marteau4, Maria C Urdaci2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bacillus probiotics health benefits have been until now quite poorly studied in the elderly population. This study aimed to assess the effects of Bacillus subtilis CU1 consumption on immune stimulation and resistance to common infectious disease (CID) episodes in healthy free-living seniors.Entities:
Keywords: Clinical trial; Common infectious disease; Elderly; Immunostimulation; Probiotics
Year: 2015 PMID: 26640504 PMCID: PMC4669646 DOI: 10.1186/s12979-015-0051-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Immun Ageing ISSN: 1742-4933 Impact factor: 6.400
Fig. 1Flow chart of subjects
Baseline subject characteristics of the whole population (N = 100), by product group
| Probiotic group | Placebo group | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | |||
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |
| Age (years) | 63.3 | 2.8 | 63.0 | 2.4 |
| Body weight (kg) | 60.5 | 22.5 | 57.4 | 21.2 |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | 25.5 | 5.0 | 24.9 | 4.0 |
| Females | ||||
|
| 40 | 39 | ||
| % | 80.0 | 78.0 | ||
| CID during previous winter | 2.7 | 1.0 | 3.2 | 1.2 |
| Vaccination | ||||
| Seasonal | ||||
|
| 8 | 7 | ||
| % | 16.0 | 14.0 | ||
|
| ||||
|
| 4 | 6 | ||
| % | 8.0 | 12.0 | ||
|
| ||||
|
| 0 | 0 | ||
| % | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||
Mean values and standard deviations; numbers and percentages
Effect of probiotic (B. subtilis CU1) and placebo consumption on clinical outcomes of infectious diseases
| Whole population ( | Subset of population ( | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Probiotic group ( | Placebo group ( |
| Probiotic group ( | Placebo group ( |
| |||||
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |||
| Mean number of days with CID | 5.1 | 7.0 | 6.6 | 7.3 | 0.2015a | 4.5 | 7.3 | 7.3 | 8.2 | 0.1101a |
| Mean duration of CID (d) | 5.0 | 4.6 | 5.3 | 4.1 | 0.2361a | 5.8 | 5.6 | 5.7 | 4.1 | 0.2361a |
| Mean intensity of CID | 8.1 | 5.0 | 7.6 | 4.4 | 0.7400a | 9.0 | 6.2 | 8.8 | 5.3 | 0.7400a |
| CID frequency | 1.0 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 0.3290a | 0.8 | 1.0 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 0.1117a |
| Subjects with at least one CID | 0.4106b | 0.1260b | ||||||||
|
| 29 | 33 | 11 | 16 | ||||||
| % | 58 · 0 | 66 · 0 | 50 · 0 | 72 · 7 | ||||||
| Mean number of days with RI | 4.4 | 6.9 | 6.2 | 7.2 | 0.1027a | 3.7 | 6.9 | 6.6 | 7.9 | 0.0818a |
| Mean duration of RI (d) | 5.9 | 5.0 | 5.6 | 4.2 | 0.9043a | 6.8 | 6.3 | 6.1 | 4.3 | 0.9325a |
| Mean intensity of RI | 9.3 | 5.3 | 7.8 | 4.6 | 0.1428a | 11.1 | 6.3 | 9.3 | 5.6 | 0.3473a |
| RI frequency | 0.7 | 0.9 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 0.1181a | 0.6 | 0.7 | 1.1 | 0.9 |
|
| Subjects with at least one RI | 0.1609b | 0.0701b | ||||||||
|
| 24 | 31 | 10 | 16 | ||||||
| % | 48.0 | 62.0 | 45.5 | 72.7 | ||||||
Data are presented for the whole population (N = 100) and the subset of population with biology analysis (N = 44). (Mean values and standard deviations; numbers and percentages)
Statistical differences were evaluated using Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney’s test or Savage’s test according to the asymmetry of data (a), or logistic regression model (b)
Fig. 2Concentrations of secretory IgA in stools. Fecal SIgA concentrations were assessed in subjects from the subset of population (N = 44), at baseline (V1), after 10 days of consumption of study products (V1 + 10 d) and at the end of the study (V3). Values are means, with standard error of means represented by vertical bars. Fecal SIgA concentrations were significantly higher in the probiotic group compared to the placebo group (**P <0.01), and significantly increased in the probiotic group during the study (†† P < 0.01, ††† P < 0.001)
Fig. 3Concentrations of secretory IgA in saliva. Salivary SIgA concentrations were assessed in subjects from the subset of population (N = 44), at the end of the study (V3). Values are means, with standard error of means represented by vertical bars. Salivary SIgA concentration was significantly higher in the probiotic group compared to the placebo group (*P <0.05)
Fig. 4Concentrations of IFN-gamma in blood. IFN-gamma concentrations were assessed in subjects from the subset of population (N = 44), at baseline (V1), after 10 days of consumption of study products (V1+ 10 d) and at the end of the study (V3). Values are means, with standard error of means represented by vertical bars. IFN-gamma concentrations were significantly increased in the probiotic group between V1 and V1 + 10 d (††P <0.01)
Bacterial counts of Bacillus spores in the stools of the subset population (N = 44)
| Whole population ( | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Probiotic group ( | Placebo group ( | |||
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |
| V1 | 2.5.103 | 3.0.103 | 2.5.103 | 5.4.103 |
| V1 + 10 days | 1.9.107 | 1.1.107 | 2.3.103 | 5.1.103 |
| V3 | 7.5.103 | 1.5.104 | 3.0.103 | 4.4.103 |
Mean values and standard deviations
Fig. 5Study design. R indicates randomization of the 100 subjects. Blood samples (B), fecal samples (F) and salivary samples (S) concerned a subset of 44 subjects