ArticleScientific reports2026
Integrated safety and microbiota profiling of fulvic acid formulations across in vitro and in vivo models.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A naturalized gut microbiome interacts with dietary fibers to protect against colonic inflammation.Gut microbes · 2026Article
- Phytochemical Profiles and Antimicrobial Activity ofMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Fulvic acid, a naturally occurring organic compound derived from humic substances, has recently emerged as a multifunctional bioactive agent with potential biological relevance. Here, we evaluated the in vitro bioactivity of various fulvic acid-containing formulations, focusing on cytocompatibility, genotoxicity, anti-inflammatory effects, regenerative potential, and probiotic-stimulating potential microbiome-related activity. Two fossil-based fulvic acid formulations (MLG-50 and alkaline MLG-A50) were assessed in eukaryotic cell models (L929 fibroblasts, LoVo epithelial cells, HepG2 hepatocytes) as well as in vitro and in vivo microbial systems. Both formulations demonstrated high cytocompatibility across a broad concentration range, with genotoxicity levels significantly lower than those induced by reference dietary compounds and no relevant nuclear abnormalities detected. Cell proliferation assays revealed enhanced intestinal epithelial cell growth at sub-toxic concentrations. Wound healing assays indicated a pro-regenerative effect of MLG-A50 in LoVo cells, as reflected by an increased wound closure rate compared with the control. Anti-inflammatory activity was evidenced by the suppression of NF-κB activation in LPS-stimulated monocytes via LPS neutralization and receptor-level inhibition, accompanied by reduced TNF and IL-6 secretion without impairment of IL-10 production. In vitro and in vivo microbiome profiling revealed stimulation of beneficial bacterial taxa, including Lactobacillus and Clostridia spp., alongside reduced growth of pathogenic strains. In vivo supplementation with MLG-50 and MLG-A50 further increased microbial diversity and abundance of health-associated taxa. Overall, fulvic acid-based formulations exhibited a favorable safety profile and measurable bioactivity in cellular and microbiome models. These results support further investigation of fulvic acid as a multifunctional bioactive component, particularly in the context of immunonutrition, microbiome modulation, and regenerative-supportive strategies, while acknowledging the need for future mechanistic and translational studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.