Inhibitory Effect of Lactic Acid Bacteria on Uropathogenic Escherichia coli-Induced Urinary Tract Infections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study evaluated the in vitro and in vivo antimicrobial activity of selected lactic acid bacteria (LAB) against UPEC for prevention and amelioration of UTIs. We screened LAB strains with antimicrobial effects on UPEC using a well-diffusion assay, bacterial adherence to the uroepithelium cell line SV-HUC-1 (BCRC 60358), and a co-culture inhibition assay. The results showed that the 7 LAB strains (Lactobacillus paracasei, L. salivarius, two Pediococcus pentosaceus strains, two L. plantarum strains, and L. crispatus) and the fermented probiotic products produced by these multi-LAB strains exhibited potent zones of inhibition against UPEC. Moreover, the LAB strains and probiotic products adhered strongly to the uroepithelium SV-HUC-1 cell line. The growth of UPEC strains was also markedly inhibited after co-culture with the LAB strains and probiotic products in human urine. In addition, the enhanced levels of IL-6, IL-8 and lactic acid dehydrogenase were significantly decreased by treatments with the LAB strains and probiotic products in UPEC-induced SV-HUC-1 cells. Furthermore, oral administration of probiotic products reduced the number of viable UPEC in the urine of UPEC-challenged BALB/c mice. Taken together, this study demonstrates that probiotic supplementation may be useful as an adjuvant therapy for the treatment of bacterial-induced urinary tract infections.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".