SynthesisImmunity, inflammation and disease2026
Preclinical Evaluation of Bacterial Lysates in Murine Disease Models: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Immunity, inflammation and disease, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBacterial lysates are biologically active preparations obtained by thermal, mechanical, or chemical inactivation of whole bacterial cells, preserving their immunomodulatory properties.
methodsThis systematic review evaluates preclinical studies published between 2010 and 2025 that investigated bacterial lysates in murine disease models, according to the PRISMA 2020 guideline. A total of 34 original studies met the inclusion criteria. The included studies cover a wide spectrum of pathologies, with respiratory infections and allergic/asthmatic diseases representing the most extensively investigated areas, followed by recurrent urinary tract infections, inflammatory bowel disease, acute lung injury/fibrosis, neuroinflammation, and cancer. Lysates ranged from monobacterial preparations to complex polybacterial formulations (particularly OM-85), administered orally, intranasally, or systematically.
resultsKey mechanisms include activation of TLRs and NOD receptors, modulation of the NLRP3 inflammasome, T-cell polarization, macrophage remodeling, and induction of trained immunity. Beneficial effects were consistently reported, including reduced allergic inflammation, protection against recurrent infections, barrier restoration, and potentiation of anticancer immunotherapy.
conclusionsThe most robust and translationally advanced evidence remains that obtained in respiratory infection models, the original clinical indication of bacterial lysates. Clinical translation is still limited by preparation heterogeneity, lack of standardization, differences between murine and human immunity, and predominance of preventive study designs. Methodological standardization and rigurous bridging studies are needed to realize the therapeutic potential of bacterial lysates.
trial registrationPROSPERO (ID: CRD420261282071).
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.