Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41981058›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Effects of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus L156.4 and Lactococcus lactis NCDO 2118 strains on reducing alcohol intake and preference in an animal model of high alcohol consumption and preference.

Mariana Siqueira Amormino, Renato Elias Moreira-Júnior, Rafaella Antunes Vasconcelos, Isabela Nascimento Dos Santos, Ana Beatriz Ramos de Moura Gonçalves, Mírian Velten Mendes, Julia de Lima Santos, Fernanda Alvarenga Lima Barroso, Vasco Ariston de Carvalho Azevedo, Tatiani Uceli Maioli and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

Mariana Siqueira AmorminoLaboratório de Genética Animal e Humana, Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Renato Elias Moreira-JúniorLaboratório de Genética Animal e Humana, Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Rafaella Antunes VasconcelosLaboratório de Genética Animal e Humana, Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Isabela Nascimento Dos SantosLaboratório de Genética Animal e Humana, Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Ana Beatriz Ramos de Moura GonçalvesLaboratório de Genética Animal e Humana, Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Mírian Velten MendesLaboratório de Genética Animal e Humana, Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Julia de Lima SantosLaboratório de Genética Animal e Humana, Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Fernanda Alvarenga Lima BarrosoLaboratório de Genética Celular e Molecular, Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Vasco Ariston de Carvalho AzevedoLaboratório de Genética Celular e Molecular, Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Tatiani Uceli MaioliLaboratório de Imunobiologia, Departamento de Bioquímica e Imunologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Ana Maria Caetano FariaLaboratório de Imunobiologia, Departamento de Bioquímica e Imunologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Enio FerreiraLaboratório de Comportamento Celular, Departamento de Patologia, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Ana Lúcia Brunialti-GodardLaboratório de Genética Animal e Humana, Departamento de Genética, Ecologia e Evolução, Instituto de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil. brunialt@ufmg.br.

Funding

CAPES-COFECUB 88881.188660/2025-01Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais APQ-045517-22Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia de Estudos do Espaço APQ-03984-24Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia sobre Substâncias Psicoativas (INCT-SP)/CNPq 406958/2022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) involves a progressive series of neuroadaptations influenced by interactions along the gut-brain axis. Disruption of the intestinal barrier enables bacterial-derived metabolites and inflammatory mediators to translocate into the systemic circulation, amplifying neuroimmune activation within mesocorticolimbic reward circuits. Probiotic strains have emerged as promising adjuvant therapies for AUD due to their ability to regulate the gut microbiota and thereby influence neurotransmission. In this study, we investigated the potential of a probiotic blend containing the strains Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus L156.4 and Lactococcus lactis NCDO 2118 to reduce alcohol intake and preference behaviors in a free-access drinking paradigm (H₂O vs. 10% v/v ethanol). The blend significantly decreased ethanol intake and preference and was accompanied by striatum upregulation of genes related to dopaminergic inhibitory control and downregulation of inflammation-related genes. Serum biochemical parameters remained unchanged and comparable between vehicle- and probiotic-treated groups, supporting the safety of the intervention. Additionally, we observed improved tissue integrity and structural restoration in both the colon and liver. Behavioral assessments using the open field test and marble-burying tests revealed reduced anxiety- and compulsive-like behaviors in the treated groups. These results suggest that this probiotic blend modulates distinct pathways, thereby attenuating alcohol`s rewarding effects and associated compulsive behaviors.

Indexed as

Alcohol DrinkingAlcoholismLacticaseibacillus rhamnosusLactococcus lactisProbioticsAnimalsBehavior, AnimalDisease Models, AnimalEthanolMaleRatsEthanolAlcohol use disorderDut-brain axisLacticaseibacillus rhamnosus L156.4Lactococcus lactis NCDO 2118NeuroinflammationProbioticReward system

Identifiers

PMID41981058
PMCPMC13234130

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.