Yeung Nicolas, Ouwehand Arthur C
Global R&D, IFF Health Sciences, Kantvik, Finland.
Front Microbiol. 2025 Apr 28;16:1579797. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2025.1579797. eCollection 2025.
The ability to detect probiotic consumption during a human clinical trial is crucial to verify and validate placebo and verum groups in analysis. While bacterial plating is still a common method for detecting and counting bacteria, when dealing with complex matrices like fecal samples, and given that most probiotics share genera or even species with commensal bacteria, plate counting is not a precise or accurate enough method. Species-specific quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) has been the most cited method in the literature and when properly validated and optimized remains the high watermark for detecting probiotics from fecal samples. Recent advancements in PCR technology have given rise to a parallel platform, droplet digital PCR (ddPCR). In this work we aimed to detect the components of a multi-strain probiotic product from a human clinical trial and compare both methods. This work dually demonstrates a process for determining multi-strain detection criteria as well as directly comparing the methods through the lens of sensitivity and specificity or the ability to properly discern true positives and true negatives. We described the optimization and validation of three assays for use in our detection panel and observed that, between qRT-PCR and ddPCR. The two methods were found to be quite congruent with ddPCR demonstrating a 10-100 fold lower limit of detection. Moreover, we discovered that most of the sensitivity and specificity had come from a single assay alone ( subsp. Bl-04). This is despite all three assays performing well in optimization and validation. This suggests that more work needs to be done in the validation stage when developing novel probiotic detection assays. Taken together we can recommend ddPCR as a method for detecting probiotics from human clinical trials, but that qRT-PCR still performs well and comparably to ddPCR, when properly optimized and validated. However, when novel assays or those with unknown performance in a given biological matrix are needed, employing a strategy that combines multiple assays in a layered discrimination approach can help mitigate the potential underperformance of any single assay.
在人体临床试验中检测益生菌摄入量的能力对于在分析中验证和确认安慰剂组与试验组至关重要。虽然细菌平板计数仍是检测和计数细菌的常用方法,但在处理像粪便样本这样的复杂基质时,鉴于大多数益生菌与共生细菌共享属甚至种,平板计数并不是一种足够精确或准确的方法。物种特异性定量实时聚合酶链反应(qRT-PCR)是文献中引用最多的方法,经过适当验证和优化后,仍然是从粪便样本中检测益生菌的高标准方法。PCR技术的最新进展催生了一个平行平台——微滴数字PCR(ddPCR)。在这项工作中,我们旨在检测人体临床试验中一种多菌株益生菌产品的成分,并比较这两种方法。这项工作双重展示了确定多菌株检测标准的过程,以及通过灵敏度和特异性视角,即正确辨别真阳性和真阴性的能力,直接比较这两种方法。我们描述了用于我们检测面板的三种检测方法的优化和验证,并观察到,在qRT-PCR和ddPCR之间。发现这两种方法相当一致,ddPCR的检测下限低10 - 100倍。此外,我们发现大多数的灵敏度和特异性仅来自单一检测方法(副干酪乳杆菌亚种Bl-04)。尽管所有三种检测方法在优化和验证中表现良好。这表明在开发新型益生菌检测方法时,在验证阶段需要做更多工作。综上所述,我们可以推荐ddPCR作为从人体临床试验中检测益生菌的方法,但当qRT-PCR经过适当优化和验证后,其表现仍然良好且与ddPCR相当。然而,当需要新型检测方法或在给定生物基质中性能未知的检测方法时,采用一种在分层判别方法中结合多种检测方法的策略可以帮助减轻任何单一检测方法可能出现的性能不佳情况。