Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32994487›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2020

Safety and functional enrichment of gut microbiome in healthy subjects consuming a multi-strain fermented milk product: a randomised controlled trial.

Anne-Sophie Alvarez, Julien Tap, Isabelle Chambaud, Stéphanie Cools-Portier, Laurent Quinquis, Pierre Bourlioux, Philippe Marteau, Eric Guillemard, Juergen Schrezenmeir, Muriel Derrien

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Screening Probiotics for Anti-Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Probiotic Yeasts andFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Anne-Sophie Alvarez *Danone Nutricia Research, Palaiseau, France.
Julien Tap *Danone Nutricia Research, Palaiseau, France.
Isabelle ChambaudDanone Nutricia Research, Palaiseau, France.
Stéphanie Cools-PortierDanone Nutricia Research, Palaiseau, France.
Laurent QuinquisDanone Nutricia Research, Palaiseau, France.
Pierre BourliouxFaculty of Pharmacy - Paris-Sud University, Chatenay-Malabry, France.
Philippe MarteauAPHP, Sorbonne Université - INSERM-ERL 1157 - UMR7203, Hôpital Tenon, Paris, France.
Eric GuillemardDanone Nutricia Research, Palaiseau, France.
Juergen SchrezenmeirClinical Research Center Kiel, Kiel Innovation and Technology Center, Schauenburgerstr., Kiel, Germany.
Muriel DerrienDanone Nutricia Research, Palaiseau, France. muriel.derrien@danone.com.
Danone (France) · FRClinical Research Center Kiel · DEInserm · FRUniversité Paris-Sud · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many clinical studies have evaluated the effect of probiotics, but only a few have assessed their dose effects on gut microbiota and host. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, controlled intervention clinical trial to assess the safety (primary endpoint) of and gut microbiota response (secondary endpoint) to the daily ingestion for 4 weeks of two doses (1 or 3 bottles/day) of a fermented milk product (Test) in 96 healthy adults. The Test product is a multi-strain fermented milk product, combining yogurt strains and probiotic candidate strains Lactobacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei CNCM I-1518 and CNCM I-3689 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus CNCM I-3690. We assessed the safety of the Test product on the following parameters: adverse events, vital signs, hematological and metabolic profile, hepatic, kidney or thyroid function, inflammatory markers, bowel habits and digestive symptoms. We explored the longitudinal gut microbiota response to product consumption and dose, by 16S rRNA gene sequencing and functional contribution by shotgun metagenomics. Safety results did not show any significant difference between the Test and Control products whatever the parameters assessed, at the two doses ingested daily over a 4-week-period. Probiotic candidate strains were detected only during consumption period, and at a significantly higher level for the three strains in subjects who consumed 3 products bottles/day. The global structure of the gut microbiota as assessed by alpha and beta-diversity, was not altered by consumption of the product for four weeks. A zero-inflated beta regression model with random effects (ZIBR) identified a few bacterial genera with differential responses to test product consumption dose compared to control. Shotgun metagenomics analysis revealed a functional contribution to the gut microbiome of probiotic candidates.

Indexed as

AdultBacteriaCultured Milk ProductsDNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalDouble-Blind MethodFemaleGastrointestinal MicrobiomeHealthy VolunteersHumansLacticaseibacillus paracaseiLacticaseibacillus rhamnosusLactobacillusMaleMiddle AgedPhylogenyDNA, BacterialDNA, RibosomalRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID32994487
PMCPMC7524715
OpenAlexW3090666421

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.