Effect of 3 Probiotic Strains on Bile Acids and Glucose Metabolism in Healthy Adults: a Randomized, Double‐Blind Placebo‐Controlled Crossover Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Probiotics have been shown to transiently modify the intestinal microbiota by favoring the growth of endogenous bacteria possessing bile salt hydrolase (BSH) activity. The BSH activity promotes deconjugation and excretion of bile acids and shifts metabolism from cholesterol synthesis to bile formation, thereby attenuating systemic cholesterol levels and decreasing risk of cardiovascular diseases. Objective The aim of this study was to determine the effect of 3 different probiotic strains on bile acid and glucose metabolism. Methods In a randomized, double‐blind crossover study, healthy middle‐aged adults (52.6 ± 7.7 years old) with a larger waist circumference (>102 cm and >88 cm for males and females, respectively) received 1 capsule/day of Bacillus subtilis R0179 (2.5 × 10 9 CFU/capsule) (n=39), Lactobacillus plantarum HA 119 (5 × 10 9 CFU/capsule) (n=38), Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis B94 (5 × 10 9 CFU/capsule) (n=37) or placebo for 6 wks. Following a 4‐wk washout period, participants were crossed to the other treatment (i.e. probiotic to placebo or placebo to probiotic). Stool frequency and consistency were recorded on a daily basis. Blood and stool samples were collected at the beginning and end of each intervention to measure bile acids. Serum lipids and markers of glucose metabolism were measured in the blood. Weekly measures included gastrointestinal symptoms (Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS)) and physical activity levels (Internal Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)). Results The change in deconjugated plasma bile acids was greater with consumption of B. subtilis R0179 (691±378nmol/L, p=0.01) and B. animalis subsp. lactis B94 (380±165nmol/L, p=0.04) than with combined placebo data (98±176nmol/L). This change was only observed in obese participants (Body Mass Index ≥ 30). Additionally, there was a trend towards an increase in HDL plasma levels during the L. plantarum HA 119 intervention (3.0±1.3mg/dL, p=0.0774) versus the placebo (−0.3±0.8mg/dL). No significant differences were observed for any probiotics for stool bile acids, other serum lipids, gastrointestinal symptoms and function, blood glucose and insulin, and physical activity levels. Conclusions These data suggest that B. subtilis R0179 and B. animalis subsp. lactis B94 had no effect on glucose metabolism or serum cholesterol but significantly increased deconjugated plasma bile acids. It is possible that de novo bile acid synthesis was inhibited by these probiotics through the Farnesoid X Receptor (FXR) in the ileum. Additional clinical studies should be conducted to confirm these findings and explore the mechanism by which probiotics may simultaneously modulate cholesterol absorption and catabolism to bile acid. Support or Funding Information Lallemand Health Solutions
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".