Double-Blind Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial of a Lactobacillus Probiotic Blend in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Gut microbiota modulate systemic anti-inflammatory and immune responses in the lungs, suggesting a potential to support lung health through probiotic supplementation. We hypothesized that a probiotic blend (Lactobacilli) combined with herbal extracts (resB®) could improve quality of life in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We conducted a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study (NCT05523180) evaluating the safety and impact of resB® on quality of life in volunteers with COPD. Participants took resB® or placebo (two capsules daily) for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in quality of life by Saint George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). Secondary outcomes included safety, serum and sputum biomarkers, and microbiome analysis. resB® was well tolerated with no related adverse events. Participants receiving resB® showed significant improvement in SGRQ symptom scores (P < 0.05), while placebo recipients did not. In the resB® group, serum and sputum levels of matrix metalloproteinase 9, C-reactive protein, and interleukin 6 decreased (P < 0.05), correlating with increased stool Lactobacilli. Additionally, Veillonella abundance increased in both stool and sputum. These findings suggest that resB® improves respiratory symptoms and reduces inflammation in patients with COPD, potentially by modulating gut and lung microbiota. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05523180. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a long-term lung condition that makes breathing difficult and greatly affects quality of life. Current treatments mostly focus on reducing symptoms, but there is a need for safe supportive approaches. The gut and the lungs communicate through what is known as the “gut–lung axis.” Changes in gut bacteria can influence inflammation and immunity in the lungs. Probiotics (beneficial bacteria) and plant-based extracts may help improve this communication and support lung health. In this study, adults with COPD were randomly assigned to receive either a probiotic and herbal blend (resB®) or a placebo for 12 weeks. Participants and researchers did not know which treatment each person received until the study ended. The main outcome was change in quality of life, measured by the Saint George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). We also looked at safety, inflammation in the blood and sputum, and changes in gut and lung bacteria. We found that resB® was safe and well tolerated. People who took resB® showed improvement in COPD-related symptoms compared to those who received placebo. Inflammatory markers in the blood and sputum decreased, and certain beneficial bacteria became more abundant in the gut and lungs. These results suggest that resB® may support people with COPD by improving symptoms and reducing inflammation. More research in larger studies is needed to confirm these findings and better understand how probiotics and plant extracts work through the gut–lung axis.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,007 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,012 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».