Fecal microbiota transplantation: current challenges and future landscapes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY Given the importance of gut microbial homeostasis in maintaining health, there has been considerable interest in developing innovative therapeutic strategies for restoring gut microbiota. One such approach, fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), is the main “whole gut microbiome replacement” strategy and has been integrated into clinical practice guidelines for treating recurrent Clostridioides difficile infection (rCDI). Furthermore, the potential application of FMT in other indications such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), metabolic syndrome, and solid tumor malignancies is an area of intense interest and active research. However, the complex and variable nature of FMT makes it challenging to address its precise functionality and to assess clinical efficacy and safety in different disease contexts. In this review, we outline clinical applications, efficacy, durability, and safety of FMT and provide a comprehensive assessment of its procedural and administration aspects. The clinical applications of FMT in children and cancer immunotherapy are also described. We focus on data from human studies in IBD in contrast with rCDI to delineate the putative mechanisms of this treatment in IBD as a model, including colonization resistance and functional restoration through bacterial engraftment, modulating effects of virome/phageome, gut metabolome and host interactions, and immunoregulatory actions of FMT. Furthermore, we comprehensively review omics technologies, metagenomic approaches, and bioinformatics pipelines to characterize complex microbial communities and discuss their limitations. FMT regulatory challenges, ethical considerations, and pharmacomicrobiomics are also highlighted to shed light on future development of tailored microbiome-based therapeutics.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".