Recent and ongoing developments in microbiome science are enabling new frontiers of research for probiotics and prebiotics. Novel types, mechanisms, and applications currently under study have the potential to change scientific understanding as well as nutritional and healthcare applications of these interventions. The expansion of related fields of microbiome-targeted interventions, and an evolving landscape for implementation across regulatory, policy, prescriber, and consumer spheres, portends an era of significant change. In this review we examine recent, emerging, and anticipated trends in probiotic and prebiotic science, and create a vision for broad areas of developing influence in the field. HighlightsAn expanding range of candidate probiotic species and prebiotic substrates is emerging to address newly elucidated data-driven microbial niches and host targets.Overlapping with, and adjacent to, the probiotic and prebiotic fields, new variants of microbiome-modulating interventions are developing, including synbiotics, postbiotics, microbial consortia, live biotherapeutic products, and genetically modified organisms, with renewed interest in polyphenols, fibres, and fermented foods.

BackgroundDifferent dietary approaches, such as gluten and casein free diets, or the use of probiotics and prebiotics have been suggested in autistic spectrum disorders in order to reduce gastrointestinal (GI) disturbances. GI symptoms are of particular interest in this population due to prevalence and correlation with the severity of behavioural traits. Nowadays, there is lack of strong evidence about the effect of dietary interventions on these problems, particularly prebiotics. Therefore, we assessed the impact of exclusion diets and a 6-week Bimuno® galactooligosaccharide (B-GOS®) prebiotic intervention in 30 autistic children.ResultsThe results showed that children on exclusion diets reported significantly lower scores of abdominal pain and bowel movement, as well as lower abundance of Bifidobacterium spp. and Veillonellaceae family, but higher presence of Faecalibacterium prausnitzii and Bacteroides spp. In addition, significant correlations were found between bacterial populations and faecal amino acids in this group, compared to children following an unrestricted diet. Following B-GOS® intervention, we observed improvements in anti-social behaviour, significant increase of Lachnospiraceae family, and significant changes in faecal and urine metabolites.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first study where the effect of exclusion diets and prebiotics has been evaluated in autism, showing potential beneficial effects. A combined dietary approach resulted in significant changes in gut microbiota composition and metabolism suggesting that multiple interventions might be more relevant for the improvement of these aspects as well as psychological traits.Trial registrationNCT02720900; registered in November 2015.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s40168-018-0523-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) often suffer gastrointestinal problems consistent with imbalances in the gut microbial population. Treatment with antibiotics or pro/prebiotics has been postulated to regulate microbiota and improve gut symptoms, but there is a lack of evidence for such approaches, especially for prebiotics. This study assessed the influence of a prebiotic galactooligosaccharide (B-GOS) on gut microbial ecology and metabolic function using faecal samples from autistic and non-autistic children in an in vitro gut model system. Bacteriology was analysed using flow cytometry combined with fluorescence in situ hybridization and metabolic activity by HPLC and 1H-NMR. Consistent with previous studies, the microbiota of children with ASD contained a higher number of Clostridium spp. and a lower number of bifidobacteria compared with non-autistic children. B-GOS administration significantly increased bifidobacterial populations in each compartment of the models, both with autistic and non-autistic-derived samples, and lactobacilli in the final vessel of non-autistic models. In addition, changes in other bacterial population have been seen in particular for Clostridium, Rosburia, Bacteroides, Atopobium, Faecalibacterium prausnitzii, Sutterella spp. and Veillonellaceae. Furthermore, the addition of B-GOS to the models significantly altered short-chain fatty acid production in both groups, and increased ethanol and lactate in autistic children.

Cabergoline is a potent D2 receptor agonist with a half-life of 65 hours that may provide continuous dopaminergic stimulation administered once daily. In this study, we randomized de novo Parkinson's disease (PD) patients to treatment with increasing doses of cabergoline (0.25 to 4 mg/d) or levodopa (100 to 600 mg/d) up to the optimal or maximum tolerated dose. Decreases of > 30% in motor disability (Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Factor III) versus baseline were considered indicative of clinical improvement. If 30% improvement was not achieved, levodopa/ carbidopa could be added on an open basis. Of the 208 patients entered in the cabergoline group, 175 remained in the study for 1 year at a mean dose of 2.8 mg/d; in the levodopa group, 176 of the 205 patients entered were still on study after 1 year at a mean dose of 468 mg/d. The proportion of patients requiring additional levodopa/carbidopa increased in the cabergoline group from 18% at 6 months to 38% at 1 year versus 10% (p = 0.05) at 6 months and 18% (p < 0.01) at 1 year in the levodopa group. The proportion of patients showing clinical improvement did not differ significantly between the two groups, or between the subgroups on monotherapy, at any endpoint. Irrespective of levodopa/carbidopa addition, 81% of patients in the cabergoline group and 87% of patients in the levodopa group were clinically improved at 1 year (p = 0.189); the corresponding figures for the subgroup on monotherapy were 79% in the cabergoline-treated patients and 86% in the levodopa-treated patients (p = 0.199). The mean difference versus baseline in Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale Factor III scores in patients who remained on monotherapy up to 1 year was 12.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.8, 14.3) in the cabergoline group and 16.4 (95% CI: 14.8, 18.0) in the levodopa group. Adverse events occurred in 76% of patients on cabergoline and in 66% of patients on levodopa. The severity profile for reported events was similar for the two agents. The results of this study indicate that cabergoline treatment for up to 1 year is only marginally less effective than levodopa in the proportion of patients who can be treated in monotherapy. More than 60% of de novo PD patients could be managed on cabergoline alone up to 1 year. In the patients in whom levodopa/carbidopa was needed, the combination therapy provided efficacy similar to that obtained with levodopa alone, with a relevant sparing of levodopa.