ReviewMolecular biology reports2025
Analyzing potential of next-generation probiotics in cancer management.
Review in Molecular biology reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microbiome-Shaped Metastatic Niches in Colorectal Cancer: Organ-Specific Patterns, Immune-Metabolic Mechanisms, and Therapeutic Translation.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Microbiome-Modulating Strategies in Anticancer Therapy: A Review of Current Evidence and Recommendations for Further Treatment Improvement.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- Gut microbiota metabolites drive osteosarcoma progression through JUP activation: a multi-omics mendelian randomization study.AMB Express · 2026Article
- The Potential Anticancer Mechanisms of Probiotics: A Comprehensive Review.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- The Role of Next-Generation Probiotics in Colorectal Cancer Pathways: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Potential.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- Probiotic Carriers for Tumor-Targeted Therapy: Applications and Challenges.International journal of nanomedicine · 2026Review
- Characterization of microbiota dysbiosis in papillary thyroid carcinoma and benign thyroid nodules: low abundance of intestinal butyrate-producing bacteria.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- Harnessing gut microbiota for colorectal cancer therapy: from clinical insights to therapeutic innovations.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Review
- Molecular Mechanisms of Probiotic Action Against Gastrointestinal Cancers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Analyzing the gut liver axis: a dual role of the microbiome in the genesis, progression, and treatment of liver cell carcinoma.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review examines the potential of next-generation probiotics (NGPs) in cancer treatment. It examines their modes of action, therapeutic safety, effectiveness, and the barriers to their integration into medical practice. With cancer incidence increasing worldwide, especially in resource-limited countries, NGPs including Faecalibacterium prausnitzii and Butyricicoccus pullicaecorum enhance gut barrier integrity and suppress tumors by producing SCFAs like butyrate, supporting epithelial cells and immune responses while reducing CRC progression without toxicity. Akkermansia muciniphila and Lactococcus lactis MG1363 boost chemotherapy efficacy and immunity via JAK-STAT and Th17 pathways, increasing IFN-γ, IL-6, and TNF-α. Lacocaseibacillus casei and Bacillus amyloliquefaciens promote M1 macrophage polarization and reduce chronic inflammation by modulating NF-κB/STAT3. Lactobacillus crispatus, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum, Bacteroides fragilis, and Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus induce apoptosis and cell cycle arrest via MAPK downregulation, mTOR suppression, and caspase activation. Bifidobacterium longum, Lactobacillus acidophilus, and Streptococcus salivarius aid cancer prevention by binding heterocyclic amines and reducing carcinogenic enzymes. Lacocaseibacillus casei, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum, and Bifidobacterium bifidum mitigate CRC by lowering oxidative stress and lipid peroxidation. In contrast, Limosilactobacillus fermentum and Lactiplantibacillus plantarum enhance vincristine chemotherapy by reducing β-glucosidase activity and chemotherapy toxicity. Against Helicobacter pylori, Lactiplantibacillus plantarum, Lacocaseibacillus casei L26, Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis B94, and Bifidobacterium bifidum CP5 decrease IL-1β, increase IL-10, and inhibit bacterial adhesion, reducing ulcers and inflammation. However, challenges in NGP production include strain selection, survivability, scalability, and regulation. Successful commercialization requires advancements in culturing techniques, genome editing, and harmonized safety guidelines. Therefore, further research is needed to optimize clinical applications and ensure safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40579646What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.