Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, SYRCLE at Central Animal Laboratory, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e48811. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0048811. Epub 2012 Nov 13.
BACKGROUND: In February 2008, the results of the PRObiotics in PAncreatitis TRIAl (PROPATRIA) were published. This study investigated the use of probiotics in patients suffering from severe acute pancreatitis. No differences between the groups were found for any of the primary endpoints. However, mortality in the probiotics group was significantly higher than in the placebo group. This result was unexpected in light of the results of the animal studies referred to in the trial protocol. We used the methods of systematic review and meta-analysis to take a closer look at the relation between the animal studies on probiotics and pancreatitis and the PROPATRIA-trial, focussing on indications for harmful effects and efficacy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Both PubMed and Embase were searched for original articles concerning the effects of probiotics in experimental acute pancreatitis, yielding thirteen studies that met the inclusion criteria. Data on mortality, bacterial translocation and histological damage to the pancreas were extracted, as well as study quality indicators. Meta-analysis of the four animal studies published before PROPATRIA showed that probiotic supplementation did not diminish mortality, reduced the overall histopathological score of the pancreas and reduced bacterial translocation to pancreas and mesenteric lymph nodes. Comparable results were found when all relevant studies published so far were taken into account. CONCLUSIONS: A more thorough analysis of all relevant animal studies carried out before (and after) the publication of the study protocol of the PROPATRIA trial could not have predicted the harmful effects of probiotics found in the PROPATRIA-trial. Moreover, meta-analysis of the preclinical animal studies did show evidence for efficacy. It may be suggested, however, that the most appropriate animal experiments in relation to the design of the human trial have not yet been conducted, which compromises a fair comparison between the results of the animal studies and the PROPATRIA trial.
背景:2008 年 2 月,发表了 PRObiotics in PAncreatitis TRIAl(PROPATRIA)的研究结果。这项研究调查了益生菌在患有重症急性胰腺炎患者中的应用。主要终点的任何组间均未发现差异。然而,益生菌组的死亡率明显高于安慰剂组。鉴于试验方案中提到的动物研究结果,这一结果出人意料。我们使用系统评价和荟萃分析的方法,更仔细地观察了益生菌与胰腺炎的动物研究与 PROPATRIA 试验之间的关系,重点关注有害作用和疗效的适应证。
方法和结果:在 PubMed 和 Embase 上搜索了有关实验性急性胰腺炎中益生菌作用的原始文章,共纳入了 13 项符合纳入标准的研究。提取了死亡率、细菌易位和胰腺组织学损伤的数据,以及研究质量指标。对 PROPATRIA 发表前发表的四项动物研究进行荟萃分析表明,益生菌补充剂不能降低死亡率,降低胰腺的总体组织病理学评分,并减少细菌易位至胰腺和肠系膜淋巴结。当考虑到迄今为止发表的所有相关研究时,也得到了类似的结果。
结论:对 PROPATRIA 试验方案发表前(和之后)进行的所有相关动物研究进行更彻底的分析,不可能预测到在 PROPATRIA 试验中发现的益生菌的有害作用。此外,对临床前动物研究的荟萃分析确实表明了疗效的证据。然而,可能表明与人类试验设计相关的最合适的动物实验尚未进行,这使得动物研究结果与 PROPATRIA 试验之间的公平比较受到影响。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-4-19
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-12-22
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-1-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-10-19
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-2-6
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-4-21
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023-2-17
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2005-7-20
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-3-23
Int J Mol Sci. 2024-1-18
Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2023-10-10
Antibiotics (Basel). 2023-6-28
BMC Complement Med Ther. 2023-5-22
Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. 2021-12
Curr Ther Res Clin Exp. 2009-4
Nature. 2011-9-28
J Gene Med. 2010-7
Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol. 2008-11