1.
Comparative analysis of the efficacies of probiotic supplementation and glucose-lowering drugs for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Liang, T, Xie, X, Wu, L, Li, L, Yang, L, Gao, H, Deng, Z, Zhang, X, Chen, X, Zhang, J, et al
Frontiers in nutrition. 2022;9:825897
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a serious medical condition often requiring antidiabetic drug management. Although commonly used antidiabetic drugs effectively control glucose levels, their tolerability profiles differ, causing various side effects. Probiotics can be used as single or multi strains to reduce glycaemic and lipid indicators and avoid the negative effects of antidiabetic medications. The study included twenty-five randomised controlled trials, of which fourteen studies assessed the effectiveness of probiotics (single probiotics, multi-strain probiotics, and probiotics with co-supplements), and eleven studies included different antidiabetic drugs such as Thiazolidinedione (TZD), Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA), Dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors (DPP-4i), and Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i). This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the effectiveness of probiotic and antidiabetic drugs on glycaemia, lipid profile and blood pressure in T2D patients. Probiotics were less effective than specific antidiabetic drugs in reducing fasting blood sugar levels (FBS), HbA1c levels, and triglycerides. Different probiotic formulations were effective in reducing the HOMA-IR index, total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), and systolic and diastolic pressure (SBP and DBP). A subgroup analysis showed a greater reduction in FBS, HbA1c, TC, TG, and SBP in obese and elderly participants, those who participated for a longer duration, and those from Eastern origins. Considering the high heterogeneity in baseline study characteristics among the studies included in this systematic review and meta-analysis, further studies are required to evaluate the effects of probiotics and antidiabetic drugs. However, healthcare professionals can use the study to understand the effect of probiotics and antidiabetic drugs in reducing glycaemic, lipid and hypertension profiles.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- Glucose-lowering drugs, except for DPP-4i, reduced FBS and HbA1c more than probiotics; and SGLT-2i induced the greatest decrease in HbA1c
- A BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 showed a significant decrease in FBS and the HOMA-IR index compared with those with lower BMI
- Weight loss induced by glucose-lowering drugs and probiotic supplementation plays an important role in glycaemic control in obese patients with type 2 diabetes.
Evidence Category:
-
X
A: Meta-analyses, position-stands, randomized-controlled trials (RCTs)
-
B: Systematic reviews including RCTs of limited number
-
C: Non-randomized trials, observational studies, narrative reviews
-
D: Case-reports, evidence-based clinical findings
-
E: Opinion piece, other
Summary Review:
Introduction
This meta-analysis compared the effects of probiotics and glucose-lowering drugs thiazolidinedione [TZD], glucagon-like pep-tide-1 receptor agonists [GLP-1 RA], dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors, and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors [SGLT-2i]) on various outcome measures in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).
Methods
A search was performed on PubMed, Web of science, Embase, and Cochrane Library between January 2015 - April 2021.
Results
25 randomised controlled trials (RCT) were included (2843 participants). 14 RCTs (842 participants) involved the administration of single probiotics, multi-strain probiotics, and probiotics with co-supplements, and 11 RCTs (2001 participants) involved TZD, GLP-1 RA, SGLT-2i, and DPP-4i. Participants in 7 of the studies had T2D, aged ≤ 55 years old. 8 RCTs included participants with a mean BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, and 11 RCTs participants had a mean BMI < 30 kg/m2.
Effects of probiotics:
- Fasting Blood Sugar (FBS): A reduction (−1.42, −0.32 mg/dL, p=0.000)
- Glycated hemaglobin (HbA1c): No reduction (p = 0.000)
- Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR): A decrease (−0.64, −0.31; p = 0.780), regardless of probiotic strain or with a co-supplement
- Insulin: Not significant (p = 0.000). Subgroup analysis: no reduction
- Total Cholesterol (TC): No difference (p = 0.941). Subgroup analysis: reduction from multi-species probiotics (−0.36, −0.01 mg/dL, p = 0.871)
- Triglycerides: Difference (−0.25 mg/dL, p = 0.958)
- LDL-C: No changes (p = 0.189)
- HDL-C: No increase (p = 0.014)
- Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP): A decrease (−6.44, −0.08 mmHg, p = 0.044)
- Diastolic Blood Pressure (DBP): A reduction (−4.53, −0.80 mmHg, p = 0.206).
Effects of glucose-lowering drugs:
- FBS: A decrease (−4.22 mg/dL, −1.24 mg/dL, p = 0.000)
- HbA1c: A decrease (−2.51%, −0.52%, p = 0.000) with TZD, GLP-1 RA, SGLT-2i, and DPP- 4i; a reduction with SGLT-2i (p = 0.003)
- TC: No difference (p = 0.000). Subgroup: no decrease with single species probiotics and probiotics with co-supplements, TZD, GLP-1 RA, and DPP-4i)
- TG: No difference (p = 0.000)
- . HDL-C: No increase (p = 0.000). Subgroup: a decrease with TZDs (−2.37, −0.72 mg/dL). No difference with probiotic strains, or probiotics with co-supplements, GLP-1 RA, and DPP-4i
- LDL-C: No changes (p = 0.000), Subgroups: no difference with probiotic strains, probiotics with co-supplements, TZD, GLP-1 RA, and DPP-4i).
Limitations
Limited number of studies for TZD and SGLT-2i, making results potentially unreliable.
Conclusions
Multi species probiotics are worth considering as an adjunct to glucose-lowering drugs, and for improving lipid profiles and hypertension.
Clinical practice applications:
- Probiotic supplementation reduced the HOMA-IR index
- Multi-species probiotics were associated with reduction in TC and TG levels
- DPP-4i only decreased TG levels
- TZD was associated with decrease in HDL-C, whereas probiotic supplementation was associated with higher decrease in SBP and DBP and that GLP-1 RA increases the risk of hypoglycaemia.
Considerations for future research:
- Semaglutide was associated with an increased risk for hypoglycaemia compared with a placebo, indicating that the safety of semaglutide needs further study
- Dietary and physical activity should be considered in future studies
- Heterogeneity in some indicators may be due to differences in study baseline characteristics,Larger trials needed to support the results of this meta-analysis.
Abstract
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of probiotics and glucose-lowering drugs (thiazolidinedione [TZD], glucagon-like pep-tide-1 receptor agonists [GLP-1 RA], dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitors, and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors [SGLT-2i]) in patients with type 2 diabetes from randomized con-trolled trials (RCTs). The PubMed, Web of science, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched on the treatment effects of probiotics and glucose-lowering drugs on glycemia, lipids, and blood pressure metabolism published between Jan 2015 and April 2021. We performed meta-analyses using the random-effects model. We included 25 RCTs (2,843 participants). Overall, GLP-1RA, SGLT-2i, and TZD significantly reduce fasting blood sugar (FBS) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), whereas GLP-1 RA increased the risk of hypoglycaemia. Multispecies probiotics decrease FBS, total cholesterol (TC), and systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP, DBP). Moreover, subgroup analyses indicated that participants aged >55 years, BMI ≥30 kg/m2, longer duration of intervention, and subjects from Eastern countries, showed significantly higher reduction in FBS and HbA1c, TC, TG and SBP. This meta-analysis revealed that including multiple probiotic rather than glucose-lowering drugs might be more beneficial regarding T2D prevention who suffering from simultaneously hyperglycemia, hypercholesterolemia, and hypertension.
2.
Igg Food Antibody Guided Elimination-Rotation Diet Was More Effective than FODMAP Diet and Control Diet in the Treatment of Women with Mixed IBS-Results from an Open Label Study.
Ostrowska, L, Wasiluk, D, Lieners, CFJ, Gałęcka, M, Bartnicka, A, Tveiten, D
Journal of clinical medicine. 2021;10(19)
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
IBS, also known as irritable bowel syndrome, is a debilitating condition characterised by abdominal pain, irregular bowel movements, and changes in the consistency of stool. Symptoms of IBS may appear shortly after eating a meal. Excluding foods high in FODMAP carbohydrates, such as fermentable oligo- and di-saccharides, mono- and disaccharides, and polyols, or following an elimination rotation diet to reduce IgG-dependent food hypersensitivity, which has been shown to improve IBS symptoms previously. The purpose of this open-label study is to investigate the effectiveness of a low-FODMAPS diet and an elimination rotation diet based on IgG as well as a control diet in reducing symptoms of IBS. During the eight-week study, 73 female subjects with a mix of IBS were assigned to either of the three dietary treatments. Compared to the other diet groups, the IgG based elimination rotation diet group showed a significant improvement in the IBS symptoms and comorbid symptoms after the intervention period. In order to determine whether IgG-mediated food hypersensitivity plays a role in IBS and the efficacy of an IgG-dependent elimination rotation diet in the general population, further robust research is required. Healthcare professionals, however, can make use of these results to gain a better understanding of how an IgG based elimination diet tailored to each individual can improve IBS symptoms.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- After implementing the three diets, among patients with IBS-M, a statistically significant reduction of the frequency of the idiopathic abdominal pain, abdominal pain after a meal, abdominal pain during defecation, and sensation of incomplete defecation before and after the diet plans, were only found in Group 2.
- Significantly, only in the Group 2 IgG based elimination-rotation-diet was there a high decrease or complete disappearance of dyspeptic IBS symptoms and co-morbidities together with IBS symptoms.
- This study shows that a personalised dietary approach is more effective in treating IBS than generalised diet recommendations, with elimination diets focused on IgG antibodies providing the best results.
Evidence Category:
-
A: Meta-analyses, position-stands, randomized-controlled trials (RCTs)
-
B: Systematic reviews including RCTs of limited number
-
X
C: Non-randomized trials, observational studies, narrative reviews
-
D: Case-reports, evidence-based clinical findings
-
E: Opinion piece, other
Summary Review:
Science supports the use of a low-FODMAP diet for symptom relief of IBS. However, more recently evidence suggests that IBS is a low-grade inflammatory disease that may result from or lead to IgG-dependent food hyper-sensitivities.
This study compared the effectiveness of three dietary treatment plans in 73 female patients diagnosed with mixed-form IBS based on Rome III criteria and no other gastrointestinal condition over 8 weeks.
The 3 dietary groups were:
- Group 1-low FODMAP diet
- Group 2- IgG based elimination-rotation-diet
- Group 3-control diet (control group)
Diets of G1 and G2 were determined individually by a dietitian, based on low-FODMAP dietary information and results from IgG food sensitivity testing respectively. Group 3 received nutrition advice from a gastroenterologist.
In G1, some of the IBS symptoms significantly improved (mucus in stool, p = 0.031; bloating, p < 0.001). Gurgling sensation and gastric fullness also reach statistical significance in G1.
IBS symptoms as well as co-morbid symptoms significantly improved or disappeared completely in G2 (idiopathic abdominal pain, p < 0.001; abdominal pain after a meal, p < 0.001; abdominal pain during defecation, p = 0.008; sensation of incomplete defecation p = 0.001; difficulty to defecate (constipation) p = 0.002; bloating p = < 0.001; gurgling sensation < 0.001; gastric fullness p = < 0.001. However, blood and mucus in the stool were impossible to test because the symptoms were not reported by any patient during the 2nd examination). (p-values less than 0.05 were considered statistically significant).
In group G3 no statistically significant improvements were seen in any measure.
Based on the results of this open-label study, it was concluded that personalised dietary interventions were more effective in the treatment of IBS-M patients than generalised diet recommendations. Dietary elimination based on IgG food sensitivity test results had the greatest impact on IBS and related symptoms.This study supports results from other studies showing an IgG-guided diet as an effective strategy in co-morbid conditions such as fatigue, headache/migraine, and skin conditions.
Conflicts of Interest
C.F.J.L., M.G. and A.B. are employees of the Institute of Microecology in Poznan ,where the ImuPro tests were determined. D.T. is the Head of Laboratory and shareholder of Lab1, offering ImuPro tests in Norway.
Clinical practice applications:
- Low FODMAP diets studies (NICE) showed GI improvements for abdominal pain, abdominal cramps, diarrhoea, gas, and bloating, largely because FODMAPs mainly cause an excessive production of gas, leading to discomfort and pain and an increased osmotic effect leading to increased bowel movement and diarrhoea. However 30% of patients still suffered from bloating on the FODMAP diet. Gurgling sensation decreased from 65% to 15%, and gastric fullness decreased from 58% to 11% in the patients on the low FODMAP diet.
- A potential new approach to resolve functional symptoms of gastrointestinal conditions could be to start with an IgG-guided elimination diet, as it was proven to be the more effective diet in this open study, and in cases of persistent symptoms, it could be combined with a low-FODMAP diet.
- Calprotectin is currently one of the best-known diagnostic markers indicating mucosa inflammation and changes in the inflammation intensity. In this study serious intestinal inflammation was diagnosed at the faecal calprotectin concentration of >50 mg/kg of stool. During the first examination, no statistically significant differences were found in calprotectin concentrations between the compared groups of patients, and the values were low, suggesting that the included patients suffered from low-grade inflammation and were suitable for diet alteration as the best choice of treatment.
Limitations:
- The main limitations of this study are the open-labeled nature, the low number of participants and the bias of only including female participants with only the patients in the G2 group tested for IgG food antibodies.
- Foods consumed by the patients before they entered the study were not ascertained.
Considerations for future research:
- Claims that IgG food antibodies only reveal exposure to food and not intolerance should be reinvestigated in larger double-blinded studies.
Abstract
Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a chronic disease with recurrent abdominal pain, disturbed bowel emptying, and changes in stool consistency. We compared the effectiveness of three different dietary treatment plans (G1-FM-low FODMAP diet, G2-IP IgG based elimination-rotation-diet, and as control group, the G3-K control diet recommended by an attending gastroenterologist) in treating patients diagnosed with mixed irritable bowel syndrome. A total of seventy-three female patients diagnosed with a mixed form of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS-M) were enrolled in the study. The diet of each patient in Group 1 (G1-FM) and 2 (G2-IP) was determined individually during a meeting with a dietitian. Patients from Group 3 (G3-K) received nutrition advice from a gastroenterologist. Significant differences in the reduction of IBS symptoms were found between the groups. IBS symptoms as well as comorbid symptoms significantly improved or disappeared completely in the G2-IP group (idiopathic abdominal pain, p < 0.001; abdominal pain after a meal, p < 0.001; abdominal pain during defecation, p = 0.008), while in the G1-FM group, some of the IBS symptoms significantly improved (mucus in stool, p = 0.031; bloating, p < 0.001). In group G3-K no significant improvement was seen. Based on the results of this open-label study, it was concluded that various dietary interventions in the treatment of IBS-M patients do not uniformly affect the course and outcomes of disease management. Rotation diets based on IgG show significantly better results compared to other diets.
3.
Gut microbiome-related effects of berberine and probiotics on type 2 diabetes (the PREMOTE study).
Zhang, Y, Gu, Y, Ren, H, Wang, S, Zhong, H, Zhao, X, Ma, J, Gu, X, Xue, Y, Huang, S, et al
Nature communications. 2020;11(1):5015
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Berberine, which is a naturally occurring alkaloid found in plants, has been traditionally used as a remedy to protect against Type 2 diabetes and other metabolic disorders. It is important to study how berberine affects the human gut microbiome, specifically in regard to its impact on short-chain fatty acid and bile acid metabolism, due to its low oral bioavailability. The PREMOTE study investigated the glycaemic lowering effects of individual and combination of berberine and probiotics in newly diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes patients. This randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial included four hundred and nine Type 2 diabetic patients and randomly assigned them (1:1:1:1 ratio) to receive berberine alone, berberine combined with probiotics, probiotics alone or a placebo for twelve weeks. A combination of berberine plus probiotics and berberine alone significantly improved glycated haemoglobin levels compared to the placebo and probiotics alone treatment. The antidiabetic effects of berberine could be due to the Ruminococcus bromii abundance followed by the berberine treatment and its ability to inhibit deoxycholic acid biotransformation. Further robust studies are required to consider the therapeutic application of berberine and probiotics in a general population due to the limitations of the present study. However, healthcare professionals can use the results of this trial to understand the mechanism behind the anti-diabetic effects of berberine and probiotics.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- The use of berberine, as a specific antimicrobial agent, along with high strength probiotics may be beneficial for managing blood glucose and potentially other metabolic health markers alongside diet and lifestyle modifications
Evidence Category:
-
X
A: Meta-analyses, position-stands, randomized-controlled trials (RCTs)
-
B: Systematic reviews including RCTs of limited number
-
C: Non-randomized trials, observational studies, narrative reviews
-
D: Case-reports, evidence-based clinical findings
-
E: Opinion piece, other
Summary Review:
Introduction
Dysbiosis of the human gut microbiome has been associated with the development of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Research has found that, in part, mechanisms of action for the antidiabetic medications, Metformin and Acarbose, include alterations in the gut microbiome as well as the inhibition of bile acid (BA) metabolism and signalling. Remedies targeting the gut microbiota for treatment of T2D and other metabolic diseases have therefore been investigated.
Berberine (BBR) has been used in Indian Ayurvedic and Traditional Chinese Medicine to treat metabolic conditions for hundreds of years. Probiotics have also been extensively researched for their potential metabolic benefits. This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial aimed to investigate whether BBR and probiotics may be effective in managing T2D.
Methods
A total of 409 participants aged 42-61 years were recruited from 20 medical centres in China. All patients were newly diagnosed (<12 months) with T2D and had no previous antidiabetic medication history. Participants were randomised into 4 groups; Probiotics and BBR, BBR only, probiotics only or a placebo for 12 weeks. Subgroup analysis was also completed for those aged >50 and >54.
Dosage of BBR was 0.6 g prior to a meal, twice daily. 4 g of powdered multi-strain probiotics including 9 strains of lactic acid bacteria were taken at bedtime. All participants were given a 7-day broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment immediately prior to baseline. 391 people completed the trial. The primary outcome measurement was glycaemic haemoglobin (HbA1c). Secondary evaluations of additional metabolic markers included fasting and post-load plasma glucose (FPG, PPG), homeostasis assessment model index for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), total cholesterol (TC), high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c), low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) and serum triglycerides (TG).
Results
Results showed a reduction in glycaemic haemoglobin (HbA1c) for both the BBR plus probiotics group (least squares mean [95% CI] -1.04 [-1-19, -0.89]% ) and the BBR only group (-.99 [-1.16, 0.83]%). The results for these groups were significantly greater than the probiotics alone (-0.53 {-068, -0.37]%) and the placebo groups (0.59 [-0.75, -0.44]%).
Secondary metabolic evaluations for FPG and PPG, TC, LDL -c and TGs also showed similar improvements in the BBR and BBR plus probiotic groups only. Additionally, in the >50 and >54 subgroups BBR and probiotics marginally improved the HOMA-IR.
Metagenomic and metabolomic analysis of the gut microbiome was also undertaken after a one-week pre-treatment with antibiotics immediately prior to the trial and at week 13. These results showed that the blood glucose lowering effects of BBR may be due to decreased deoxycholic acid species (DCA) biotransformation by ruminococcus bromii.
Higher levels of adverse gastrointestinal side effects were reported in the BBR treatment groups, however, the authors reported that this did not affect glycemic control outcomes.
Conclusion
This study found that BBR had an antidiabetic effect through microbial alterations in the human gut microbiome
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Clinical practice applications:
- 600mg of BBR twice daily prior to a meal plus a multi-strain (lactic acid) probiotic of >50 billion colony forming units (CFU) for 12 weeks may be effective in lowering HbA1c in T2D clients diagnosed within the previous 12 months
- Further research is needed for clients with longer term T2D diagnosis
- Insulin resistance may be marginally improved in clients >50
- Practitioners should be aware that in this study, adverse gastrointestinal side effects were more likely to be be experienced with the use of BBR
Considerations for future research:
The authors reported several limitations to this study:
- A population of Chinese people living in China may not be generalisable to other ethnic/racial populations
- The study was over a short duration. Longer studies are needed to confirm the results
- Participants had newly diagnosed T2D and had not received any previous medications. Future studies should include patients with a longer diagnosis time
- Records should be kept of any additional lifestyle changes made by the participants
- Adverse reactions were experienced in the BBR groups, in this study. It was reported that the gut microbiome and anti-diabetic effects were not affected, however, this may be something to be considered in longer trials.
Abstract
Human gut microbiome is a promising target for managing type 2 diabetes (T2D). Measures altering gut microbiota like oral intake of probiotics or berberine (BBR), a bacteriostatic agent, merit metabolic homoeostasis. We hence conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with newly diagnosed T2D patients from 20 centres in China. Four-hundred-nine eligible participants were enroled, randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) and completed a 12-week treatment of either BBR-alone, probiotics+BBR, probiotics-alone, or placebo, after a one-week run-in of gentamycin pretreatment. The changes in glycated haemoglobin, as the primary outcome, in the probiotics+BBR (least-squares mean [95% CI], -1.04[-1.19, -0.89]%) and BBR-alone group (-0.99[-1.16, -0.83]%) were significantly greater than that in the placebo and probiotics-alone groups (-0.59[-0.75, -0.44]%, -0.53[-0.68, -0.37]%, P < 0.001). BBR treatment induced more gastrointestinal side effects. Further metagenomics and metabolomic studies found that the hypoglycaemic effect of BBR is mediated by the inhibition of DCA biotransformation by Ruminococcus bromii. Therefore, our study reports a human microbial related mechanism underlying the antidiabetic effect of BBR on T2D. (Clinicaltrial.gov Identifier: NCT02861261).
4.
Microbiota Transfer Therapy alters gut ecosystem and improves gastrointestinal and autism symptoms: an open-label study.
Kang, DW, Adams, JB, Gregory, AC, Borody, T, Chittick, L, Fasano, A, Khoruts, A, Geis, E, Maldonado, J, McDonough-Means, S, et al
Microbiome. 2017;5(1):10
-
-
-
-
Free full text
Plain language summary
Children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) often suffer gastrointestinal problems, such as constipation or diarrhea, the severity of which often correlate with ASD severity. This open-label clinical trial evaluated the impact of Microbiota Transfer Therapy (MTT) on GI and ASD symptoms of 18 ASD-diagnosed children. Treatment involved 2 weeks of antibiotic treatment and a bowel cleanse, followed by extended fecal microbiota transplant using a high initial dose and lower maintenance doses for 7-8 weeks. Results showed significant improvements in GI symptoms, which persisted 8 weeks after treatment ended. Bacterial diversity also increased. Behavioural ASD symptoms also improved significantly and lasted 8 weeks after treatment finished. This exploratory study suggests a promising approach to alter the gut microbiome in ASD subjects, improving GI and behavioural symptoms of ASD. Further clinical research is required.
Expert Review
Conflicts of interest:
None
Take Home Message:
- Fecal Microbiota Transfer Therapy demonstrates an effective clinical intervention in pediatric patients suffering with autistic spectrum disorder and associated gastrointestinal symptoms.
- Benefits of the therapy in this trail persisted even 2 months after treatment cessation.
- Future research on autistic spectrum disorder should address microbiota-gut-brain axis.
Evidence Category:
-
A: Meta-analyses, position-stands, randomized-controlled trials (RCTs)
-
B: Systematic reviews including RCTs of limited number
-
X
C: Non-randomized trials, observational studies, narrative reviews
-
D: Case-reports, evidence-based clinical findings
-
E: Opinion piece, other
Summary Review:
The article describes an original clinical protocol in which microbiota transfer was used to ameliorate gastrointestinal (GI) and autism symptoms in pediatric patients. Common occurrence of GI pathology in patients affected by autistic spectrum disorder (ASD), poses a clinical challenge, since there is no standardised specific therapy. In light of recent insights on the importance of microbiota-gut-brain axis in health and disease, microbiota emerges as a salient treatment target in the aforementioned population.
Clinical practice applications:
Fecal microbiota transfer therapy (MTT) applied by the protocol described in the article demonstrates a longer-term effective clinical intervention in pediatric patients suffering from ASD and concomitant GI symptoms. Benefits of the therapy persisted even two months after actual treatment cessation, a highly important feature considering ASD.
Considerations for future research:
This modality could complement current treatments used for ASD-related symptomatology, but requires further validation through additional clinical experiments. The procedure also supports the efforts to focus more research on the role of microbiota in ASD pathophysiology. Further basic and clinical investigations on ASD should include addressing microbiota-gut-brain axis whenever possible, if not always.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Autism spectrum disorders (ASD) are complex neurobiological disorders that impair social interactions and communication and lead to restricted, repetitive, and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests, and activities. The causes of these disorders remain poorly understood, but gut microbiota, the 1013 bacteria in the human intestines, have been implicated because children with ASD often suffer gastrointestinal (GI) problems that correlate with ASD severity. Several previous studies have reported abnormal gut bacteria in children with ASD. The gut microbiome-ASD connection has been tested in a mouse model of ASD, where the microbiome was mechanistically linked to abnormal metabolites and behavior. Similarly, a study of children with ASD found that oral non-absorbable antibiotic treatment improved GI and ASD symptoms, albeit temporarily. Here, a small open-label clinical trial evaluated the impact of Microbiota Transfer Therapy (MTT) on gut microbiota composition and GI and ASD symptoms of 18 ASD-diagnosed children. RESULTS MTT involved a 2-week antibiotic treatment, a bowel cleanse, and then an extended fecal microbiota transplant (FMT) using a high initial dose followed by daily and lower maintenance doses for 7-8 weeks. The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale revealed an approximately 80% reduction of GI symptoms at the end of treatment, including significant improvements in symptoms of constipation, diarrhea, indigestion, and abdominal pain. Improvements persisted 8 weeks after treatment. Similarly, clinical assessments showed that behavioral ASD symptoms improved significantly and remained improved 8 weeks after treatment ended. Bacterial and phagedeep sequencing analyses revealed successful partial engraftment of donor microbiota and beneficial changes in the gut environment. Specifically, overall bacterial diversity and the abundance of Bifidobacterium, Prevotella, and Desulfovibrio among other taxa increased following MTT, and these changes persisted after treatment stopped (followed for 8 weeks). CONCLUSIONS This exploratory, extended-duration treatment protocol thus appears to be a promising approach to alter the gut microbiome and virome and improve GI and behavioral symptoms of ASD. Improvements in GI symptoms, ASD symptoms, and the microbiome all persisted for at least 8 weeks after treatment ended, suggesting a long-term impact. TRIAL REGISTRATION This trial was registered on the ClinicalTrials.gov, with the registration number NCT02504554.