Gut microbiota manipulation with prebiotics in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a randomized controlled trial protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence for the role of the gut microbiome in the pathogenesis of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is emerging. Strategies to manipulate the gut microbiota towards a healthier community structure are actively being investigated. Based on their ability to favorably modulate the gut microbiota, prebiotics may provide an inexpensive yet effective dietary treatment for NAFLD. Additionally, prebiotics have established benefits for glucose control and potentially weight control, both advantageous in managing fatty liver disease. Our objective is to evaluate the effects of prebiotic supplementation, adjunct to those achieved with diet-induced weight loss, on heptic injury and liver fat, the gut microbiota, inflammation, glucose tolerance, and satiety in patients with NAFLD. METHODS/DESIGN: In a double blind, placebo controlled, parallel group study, adults (BMI ≥25) with confirmed NAFLD will be randomized to either a 16 g/d prebiotic supplemented group or isocaloric placebo group for 24 weeks (n = 30/group). All participants will receive individualized dietary counseling sessions with a registered dietitian to achieve 10 % weight loss. Primary outcome measures include change in hepatic injury (fibrosis and inflammation) and liver fat. Secondary outcomes include change in body composition, appetite and dietary adherence, glycemic and insulinemic responses and inflammatory cytokines. Mechanisms related to prebiotic-induced changes in gut microbiota (shot-gun sequencing) and their metabolic by-products (volatile organic compounds) and de novo lipogenesis (using deuterium incorporation) will also be investigated. DISCUSSION: There are currently no medications or surgical procedures approved for the treatment of NAFLD and weight loss via lifestyle modification remains the cornerstone of current care recommendations. Given that prebiotics target multiple metabolic impairments associated with NAFLD, investigating their ability to modulate the gut microbiota and hepatic health in patients with NAFLD is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02568605) Registered 30 September 2015.
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 | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.006 |
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".