Intake of <i>Lactobacillus reuteri</i> Improves Incretin and Insulin Secretion in Glucose-Tolerant Humans: A Proof of Concept
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Ingestion of probiotics can modify gut microbiota and alter insulin resistance and diabetes development in rodents. We hypothesized that daily intake of Lactobacillus reuteri increases insulin sensitivity by changing cytokine release and insulin secretion via modulation of the release of glucagon-like peptides (GLP)-1 and -2. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A prospective, double-blind, randomized trial was performed in 21 glucose-tolerant humans (11 lean: age 49 ± 7 years, BMI 23.6 ± 1.7 kg/m(2); 10 obese: age 51 ± 7 years, BMI 35.5 ± 4.9 kg/m(2)). Participants ingested 10(10) b.i.d. L. reuteri SD5865 or placebo over 4 weeks. Oral glucose tolerance and isoglycemic glucose infusion tests were used to assess incretin effect and GLP-1 and GLP-2 secretion, and euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamps with [6,6-(2)H2]glucose were used to measure peripheral insulin sensitivity and endogenous glucose production. Muscle and hepatic lipid contents were assessed by (1)H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and immune status, cytokines, and endotoxin were measured with specific assays. RESULTS: In glucose-tolerant volunteers, daily administration of L. reuteri SD5865 increased glucose-stimulated GLP-1 and GLP-2 release by 76% (P < 0.01) and 43% (P < 0.01), respectively, compared with placebo, along with 49% higher insulin (P < 0.05) and 55% higher C-peptide secretion (P < 0.05). However, the intervention did not alter peripheral and hepatic insulin sensitivity, body mass, ectopic fat content, or circulating cytokines. CONCLUSIONS: Enrichment of gut microbiota with L. reuteri increases insulin secretion, possibly due to augmented incretin release, but does not directly affect insulin sensitivity or body fat distribution. This suggests that oral ingestion of one specific strain may serve as a novel therapeutic approach to improve glucose-dependent insulin release.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".