MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414520005 · doi:10.3389/fcimb.2025.1627406

Efficacy of gut microbiota-targeted therapies in Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

2025· review· en· W4414520005 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiang Gu, Jihong Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGut microbiota and health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialMEDLINEClinical trialSystematic reviewObservational study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of gut microbiota (GM)-targeted therapies in treating Parkinson's disease (PD). Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and WOS from database inception to June 2025. The eligible RCTs employed GM-targeted therapies, including antibiotics, probiotics, synbiotics, or fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), as adjunct treatments for PD. Data were pooled using a random-effects model, and the effect sizes were expressed as standardized mean differences (SMDs). In addition, the quality of evidence for all outcomes was assessed using the GRADE framework. Results: This study demonstrated that GM-targeted therapies significantly improved PD outcomes, including Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS) III (SMD: -0.34, 95%CI: -0.57 to -0.11, P = 0.004), bowel movements (BMs) (SMD: 1.27, 95%CI: 0.35 to 2.2), use of laxatives (SMD: -0.33, 95% CI: -0.65 to -0.02), malondialdehyde (MDA) (SMD: -0.69, 95%CI: -1.23 to -0.15) indicators. However, there were no significant improvements in MDS-UPDRS I (SMD: -0.64, 95%CI: -1.42 to 0.13), MDS-UPDRS II (SMD: -0.28, 95%CI: -0.70 to 0.14), MDS-UPDRS IV (SMD: -0.08, 95% CI: -0.82 to 0.66), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) (SMD: -0.01, 95% CI: -0.30 to 0.29), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) (SMD: 0.04, 95%CI: -0.53 to 0.60), non-motor symptom scale (NMSS) (SMD: -0.11, 95%CI: -0.94 to 0.72), Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39) (SMD: -0.19, 95%CI: -0.58 to 0.20), total antioxidant capacity (TAC) (SMD: 0.29, 95%CI: -0.04 to 0.62), glutathione (GSH) (SMD: 0.51, 95%CI: -0.02 to 1.03), and Geriatric Depression Scale-15 (GDS-15) (SMD: -0.37, 95%CI: -0.87 to 0.12). Conclusion: GM-targeted therapies may improve motor symptom scores (as measured by MDS-UPDRS III), alleviate constipation, and reduce blood malondialdehyde levels in PD patients. However, they did not significantly impact the scores for cognitive function, PD neuropsychiatric, behavioral, and emotional symptoms, and activities of daily living in this analysis. Given the inherent limitations of the included studies (such as small sample sizes and heterogeneity), future large-scale and rigorously designed RCTs are needed to validate these preliminary findings. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42024606415.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0300.042
Bibliometrics0.0090.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cellular and Infection MicrobiologySame topicGut microbiota and healthFrench-language works237,207