Trial reportRheumatology (Oxford, England)2026
Efficacy and safety of probiotic supplementation in PsA-a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Rheumatology (Oxford, England), 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of a multispecies probiotic in patients with PsA in moderate disease activity.
methodsIn this single-centre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (RCT), 66 PsA patients with moderate disease activity (Psoriatic Arthritis Disease Activity Score [PASDAS] > 3.2 to <5.4) on stable immunomodulatory therapy were randomized 1:1 to receive either a multispecies (Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium) probiotic or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary outcome was treatment response at week 12, defined as achieving low disease activity or remission (PASDAS ≤3.2) without treatment change. Secondary outcomes included gut permeability markers, immune cell and microbiome composition. Analyses were conducted per a modified intention-to-treat (only complete cases for primary outcome), with sensitivity analyses using multiple imputation, per-protocol datasets and qPCR-based detection of the probiotic strains in stool (adherence).
resultsFifty-six participants were included in the main analysis. Thirteen (43%) participants in the probiotic group and 17 (65%) in the placebo group achieved the primary outcome (P = 0.167). The corresponding odds ratio was 0.4 (95% CI 0.13-1.18). Patient-reported pain and global assessment were the main PASDAS components improving over time, with no between-group differences. No differences were observed in secondary clinical outcomes, gut permeability markers (zonulin, calprotectin, alpha-1-antitrypsin), immune cell profiles or stool microbiome composition between the groups at week 12. No serious adverse events related to the study product were reported.
conclusionIn this first RCT investigating probiotic supplementation in PsA, probiotic treatment did not show superiority over placebo in achieving treatment response, or altering gut microbiome, or permeability.
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.