Persistence of <i>Lactobacillus fermentum</i> RC-14 and <i>Lactobacillus rhamnosus</i> GR-1 but Not <i>L. rhamnosus</i> GG in the Human Vagina as Demonstrated by Randomly Amplified Polymorphic DNA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GR-1 and L. fermentum RC-14 are well-characterized probiotic strains with efficacy in the prevention and treatment of urogenital infections in women. The aim of the present study was to apply a molecular biology-based methodology for the detection of these strains and L. rhamnosus GG (a commercially available intestinal probiotic) in the human vagina in order to assess probiotic persistence at this site. Ten healthy women inserted vaginally a capsule containing either a combination of strains GR-1 and RC-14 or the GG strain for 3 consecutive nights. Vaginal swabs taken before and at various time points after probiotic insertion were analyzed, and the Lactobacillus flora was assessed by randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) analysis. This method generated discrete DNA fingerprints for GR-1, RC-14, and GG and enabled successful detection of these strains in the vagina. Strain GR-1 and/or strain RC-14 was found to persist in the vaginal tract for up to 19 days after vaginal instillation, while L. rhamnosus GG was detectable for up to 5 days postadministration. In conclusion, the fates of probiotic L. rhamnosus and L. fermentum strains were successfully monitored in the human vagina by RAPD analysis. This technique provides molecular biology-based evidence that RC-14 and GR-1, strains selected as urogenital probiotics, persist in the human vagina and may be more suited to vaginal colonization than L. rhamnosus GG. This highlights the importance of proper selection of strains for urogenital probiotic applications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".