| Literature DB >> 28555037 |
Julio Plaza-Díaz1,2,3, Francisco Javier Ruiz-Ojeda4,5,6, Laura Maria Vilchez-Padial7, Angel Gil8,9,10,11.
Abstract
Probiotics and synbiotics are used to treat chronic diseases, principally due to their role in immune system modulation and the anti-inflammatory response. The present study reviewed the effects of probiotics and synbiotics on intestinal chronic diseases in in vitro, animal, and human studies, particularly in randomized clinical trials. The selected probiotics exhibit in vitro anti-inflammatory properties. Probiotic strains and cell-free supernatants reduced the expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines via action that is principally mediated by toll-like receptors. Probiotic administration improved the clinical symptoms, histological alterations, and mucus production in most of the evaluated animal studies, but some results suggest that caution should be taken when administering these agents in the relapse stages of IBD. In addition, no effects on chronic enteropathies were reported. Probiotic supplementation appears to be potentially well tolerated, effective, and safe in patients with IBD, in both CD and UC. Indeed, probiotics such as Bifidobacterium longum 536 improved the clinical symptoms in patients with mild to moderate active UC. Although it has been proposed that probiotics can provide benefits in certain conditions, the risks and benefits should be carefully assessed before initiating any therapy in patients with IBD. For this reason, further studies are required to understand the precise mechanism by which probiotics and synbiotics affect these diseases.Entities:
Keywords: anti-inflammatory effects; inflammatory bowel diseases; intestinal diseases; probiotics
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28555037 PMCID: PMC5490534 DOI: 10.3390/nu9060555
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Summary of probiotic anti-inflammatory effects in In Vitro studies.
| Reference | Cell Type | Probiotic Strain | Type of Study | Main Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mann et al. 2014, 2013 [ | human DC | In vitro | DC from UC patients samples have an increase of IL-4 production and loss of IL-22 and IFN-γ secretion. | |
| Wu et al., 2016 [ | IPEC-J2 model | In vitro | ||
| Wachi et al., 2014 [ | PIE cells | In vitro | The activation of MAPK and NF-κB pathways induced by | |
| Prisciandaro et al., 2012 [ | IEC-6 | In vitro | Pre-treatment with these probiotics could prevent or inhibit enterocyte apoptosis and loss of intestinal barrier function induced by 5-FU | |
| Bermudez-Brito et al., 2012, 2013, 2014 [ | DC | In vitro | Induction of TLR-9 expression and TGF-β2 secretion. CFS treatment decreased the pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines |
CFS, cell-free supernatant; DC, dendritic cells; FU, fluorouracil; IEC, intestinal epithelial cells; IL, interleukin; IFN, interferon; IPEC, intestinal porcine epithelial cells, MAPK, mitogen-activated protein kinase; NF-κB, nuclear factor κ-B; TGF, transforming growth factor; TNF-α, tumor factor necrosis alpha; TLR, toll-like receptor; UC, ulcerative colitis.
Summary of probiotic anti-inflammatory effects in animal studies.
| Reference | Animal Species | Probiotic Strain/Treatment | Type of Study | Main Outcome | Adverse Event/Adverse Effects |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Abdelouhab et al., 2012 [ | Swiss mice | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | Oral administration of probiotic strains and inulin decreased severity colitis | - | |
| Toumi et al., 2013 [ | Swiss mice | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | Probiotic administration improved clinical symptoms, histological alterations, and mucus production | - | |
| Atkins et al., 2012 [ | Male Sprague–Dawley rats | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | Probiotic administration partially alleviated the DSS effects, with a minor improvement in crypt area | - | |
| Cui et al., 2016 [ | BALB/c mice | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | Administration of | ||
| Wong et al., 2012 [ | BALB/c mice | A mutant of | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | - | |
| Zhang et al., 2016 [ | Male C57 mice | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | - | ||
| Hong et al., 2010 [ | Male ICR mice | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | Increased levels of acetate, butyrate, and glutamine and decreased levels of trimethylamine | - | |
| Garrido-Mesa et al., 2011 [ | C57BL/6J mice | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | - | ||
| Zheng et al., 2016 [ | Female C57BL/6 mice | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | An increased expression of inflammation markers were found in DSS-treated mice with | - | |
| Talero et al., 2015 [ | Female C57BL/6 mice | Capsules with bifidobacteria, lactobacilli, and | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | Probiotic mixture attenuated the disease activity index score and colon inflammation and also inflammation markers | - |
| Dai et al., 2013 [ | Male Wistar rats | Capsules with bifidobacteria, lactobacilli, and | In vivo, DSS-induced colitis | The probiotic mixture have anti-inflammatory properties reducing the disease activity index, MPO activity, inflammation biomarkers, and also increasing of IL-10 expression | - |
| Salim et al., 2013 [ | Adult male 129/SvEv mice | Capsules with bifidobacteria, lactobacilli, and | In vivo, acute intestinal ischemia/reperfusion injury | Levels of active NF-κB were significantly higher in the control group, corroborating with the inflammation of the tissue, which was attenuated by probiotic administration | - |
| Satish Kumar et al., 2015 [ | Wistar female rats | In vivo, TNBS-induced colitis | Treatment with | - | |
| Yang et al., 2013 [ | Sprague-Dawley Rats | Lactobacilli and bifidobacteria | In vivo, TNBS-induced colitis | TLR4 and TNF-α expression were reduced with probiotics | - |
| Eeckhaut et al., 2013 [ | Male Wistar rats | In vivo, TNBS-induced colitis | - | ||
| Schmitz et al., 2015 [ | Dogs | Chronic enteropathies | There was no difference between groups or treatments regarding clinical efficacy, histology scores | - | |
| Sun et al., 2015 [ | BALB/c mice | Intestinal malfunction induced by Lincomycin hydrochloride | - | ||
| Štofilová et al., 2015 [ | Female Sprague Dawley rats | In vivo, | - | ||
| Ogita et al., 2015 [ | DQ8 transgenic mice | In vivo, model of gluten-specific enteropathy | Probiotic administration enhanced total glutathione and glutathione | - | |
| Wu et al., 2015 [ | Female C57BL/6 mice | In vivo, vitamin D receptor knockout mice | Probiotic treatment conferred physiological and histologic protection from colitis | - |
AE, adverse event; DSS, dextran sulfate sodium; IL, interleukin; MPO, myeloperoxidase; NF-κB, nuclear factor kappa-B; NO nitric oxide; TBARS, thiobarbituric acid reactive substances; TNF-α, tumor factor necrosis alpha; TNBS, 2,4,6 trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid; TLR, toll-like receptor.
Summary of probiotic effects on IBD in human studies.
| Reference | Subjects | Probiotic Strains/Treatment | Time | Main Outcome | Adverse Event/Adverse Effects |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tamaki et al., 2016 [ | 56 with mild to moderate UC | 8 weeks | Probiotics administration improved clinical symptoms in the patients with mild to moderately active UC | - | |
| Yoshimatsu et al., 2015 [ | 60 outpatients with UC in remission | 12 months | Probiotic may be effective for maintaining clinical remission in patients with UC | - | |
| Krag et al., 2013 [ | 74 patients with a mild-to-moderate UC | 8 weeks | Probiotic supplementation was safe, well tolerated, palatable, and able to reduce disease index scores in patients with mild-to-moderate UC | - | |
| Petersen et al., 2014 [ | 100 patients with UC | 7 weeks | There is no benefit in the use of | - | |
| Fedorak et al., 2015 [ | 119 patients with CD (within 30 days of ileocolonic resection and re-anastomosis | Capsules with bifidobacteria, lactobacilli, and | 90 days | There were no differences in endoscopic recurrence, but mucosal levels of inflammatory cytokines such as IL-8, IL-1β were lower among patients who received the probiotic | - |
| Hevia et al., 2014 [ | 50 healthy individuals, 37 CD patients and 15 UC patients | 90 days | Levels of IgA antibodies developed against a cell-wall hydrolase from | - | |
| Ahmed et al., 2013 [ | 8 patients with CD and 8 patients with UC | 1 month | There were no differences in colonic microbiota between patients with CD or UC and the spectrum a bacterium was not altered by synbiotics administration | - | |
| Persborn et al., 2013 [ | 16 patients with chronic pouchitis and 13 individuals as a control | 8 weeks | Probiotics restored the mucosal barrier to | - | |
| Groeger et al., 2013 [ | 22 UC patients, 48 patients with chronic fatigue syndrome and 26 psoriasis patients | 6–8 weeks | Probiotics administration reduced the systemic pro-inflammatory biomarkers in both gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal conditions | - | |
| Bourreille et al., 2013 [ | 165 patients with CD | 52 weeks | Probiotics were well tolerated but it did not show any effect. Twenty-one AEs occurred during the treatment, these affected 17 patients, 9 in the | Twenty-one AEs occurred during the treatment, these affected 17 patients, 9 in the |
AE, adverse event; CD, Crohn’s disease; UC, ulcerative colitis.
Figure 1Summary of probiotic anti-inflammatory effects in intestinal chronic diseases in different scientific approaches. DSS, dextran sulfate sodium; IBD, inflammatory bowel disease; MAPK, mitogen-activated protein kinase; NF-κB, nuclear factor kappa-B; SCFA, short-chain fatty acids; TNBS, 2,4,6 trinitrobenzenesulfonic acid; TLR, toll-like receptor; UC, ulcerative colitis.