ArticleNutrients2026
A Matcha Tea Formulation Containing
Article in Nutrients, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesMatcha tea is widely recognized for its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties; however, its health-promoting benefits depend on the gastrointestinal bioaccessibility of its phytochemicals. This study evaluated the impact of combining matcha tea with the probiotic yeast
methodsFormulations of matcha tea alone (M), matcha tea combined with the probiotic yeast (M + P), and the probiotic alone (P) were subjected to in vitro gastrointestinal digestion. Probiotic survival, total antioxidant capacity, and polyphenol profiles were analyzed. The biological effects of the digested fractions were tested on inflamed Caco-2 cell monolayers to assess epithelial barrier integrity and gene expression profiles.
resultsThe digested M + P formulation exhibited a significantly higher polyphenol content compared to M alone, including a 322% increase in gallic acid alongside a 40.5% reduction in caffeine content. Both M and M + P digests protected the intestinal barrier against inflammatory damage, preventing the decline in TEER values. However, only the M + P formulation successfully mitigated the compensatory upregulation of the Claudin-1 gene, while significantly downregulating the pro-inflammatory transcription factor NF-κB and the mitochondrial antioxidant SOD2. Furthermore,
conclusionsEnriching matcha tea with the probiotic yeast
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.