Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-3689 reduces vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus persistence and promotes Bacteroidetes resilience in the gut following antibiotic challenge

Crouzet, Laureen; Derrien, Muriel; Cherbuy, Claire; Plancade, Sandra; Foulon, Mélanie; Chalin, Benjamin; Vlieg, Johan E. T. van Hylckama; Grompone, Gianfranco; Rigottier-Gois, Lionel; Serror, Pascale

doi:10.1038/s41598-018-23437-9

Cited by 32 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 79 publications

(86 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, analysis of the fecal microbiome at the order level, at which we were able to assign all sequences measured, revealed that some distinct taxa were increased in relative abundance following exposure to the antibiotics. Thus, the relative abundance of Enterobacteriales reached a maximum at the end of the antibiotic treatment period in both protocol 1 and 2 and dwindled quickly thereafter, which is in keeping with the outcome of other experimental studies [47][48][49][50]. A similar Fig.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Synergistic and antagonistic interactions between antibiotics and synbiotics in modifying the murine fecal microbiome

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Pro-and synbiotics have been reported to ameliorate the adverse (dysbiotic) effects of antibiotics on the gut microbial architecture, but little is known how synbiotics and antibiotics interact with each other in shaping the gut microbiota. To explore this mutual interaction we examined, first, the effect of a multi-strain synbiotic on antibiotic-induced dysbiosis and, second, the dysbiotic effect of antibiotics followed by prolonged synbiotic exposure. Methods The synbiotic containing nine bacterial strains was administered to male mice via the drinking water, while the antibiotic mix containing bacitracin, meropenem, neomycin, and vancomycin was administered via oral gavage. Two experimental protocols were used. In protocol 1, mice were administered placebo or synbiotic for 3 weeks prior to and during an 11-day vehicle or antibiotic treatment. In protocol 2 the synbiotic was administered for a prolonged period of time, starting 3 weeks prior and continuing for 12 weeks after an 11-day vehicle or antibiotic treatment. Subsequently, the fecal microbiome was analyzed by 16S rRNA sequencing using oligonucleotide primers 16s_515_S3_fwd: GAT TGC CAG CAG CCG CGG TAA and 16s_806_S2_rev: GGA CTA CCA GGG TAT CTA AT followed by sequencing using the Ion Torrent One. The final sequence files were analyzed by QIIME 1.8 workflow scripts. Results Antibiotic treatment markedly decreased the bacterial richness and diversity of the fecal microbiota. Synbiotic administration for 3 weeks prior to and during an 11-day antibiotic treatment preserved the Lactobacillales and expanded the Verrucomicrobiales and Bifidobacteriales order, but did not prevent the depletion of Bacteroidales and the short-term proliferation of Enterobacteriales. When the synbiotic administration was continued for 12 weeks after the end of antibiotic treatment, the rise of Verrucomicrobiales was maintained, whereas the preservation of Lactobacillales and boost of Bifidobacteriales was lost. The abundance of Clostridiales was enhanced by long-term synbiotic treatment after short-term exposure to antibiotics, while the antibiotic-depleted Bacteroidales underwent a delayed recovery. Conclusions There are complex synergistic and antagonistic interactions of synbiotics and antibiotics in influencing distinct bacterial orders of the fecal microbiota. The impact of a short-term antibiotic exposure is profoundly different when analyzed after synbiotic pretreatment or following prolonged synbiotic administration in the post-antibiotic period.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Synergistic and antagonistic interactions between antibiotics and synbiotics in modifying the murine fecal microbiome

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The gut microbiota in patients suffering from hematological malignancies is less frequently colonized with VRE in the presence of Barnesiella (Ubeda et al, 2013). Treatment with Barnesiella or Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-3689 reduced VRE colonization in a mouse model (Figure 1) (Tannock et al, 2000;Crouzet et al, 2018). In clinics, one case report showed VRE decolonization after a fecal graft for the treatment of C. difficile colitis (Stripling et al, 2015).…”

Section: Probiotic Eradication Of Antibiotic Resistancementioning

confidence: 99%

How Probiotics Affect the Microbiota

Wieërs

Belkhir

Enaud

et al. 2020

Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol.

344

205

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Probiotics have been used to treat a variety of diseases for decades; however, what is the rationale for their application? Such a treatment was first proposed in the early nineteenth century based on observations of decreased bifidobacterial populations in children suffering from diarrhea, suggesting that oral intake of bifidobacteria could replete this subpopulation of the microbiota and improve health. Since then, studies have shown modifications in the gut or skin microbiota in the course of a variety of diseases and suggested positive effects of certain probiotics. Most studies failed to report any impact on the microbiota. The impact of probiotics as well as of bacteria colonizing food does not reside in their ability to graft in the microbiota but rather in sharing genes and metabolites, supporting challenged microbiota, and directly influencing epithelial and immune cells. Such observations argue that probiotics could be associated with conventional drugs for insulin resistance, infectious diseases, inflammatory diseases, and psychiatric disorders and could also interfere with drug metabolism. Nevertheless, in the context of a plethora of probiotic strains and associations produced in conditions that do not allow direct comparisons, it remains difficult to know whether a patient would benefit from taking a particular probiotic. In other words, although several mechanisms are observed when studying a single probiotic strain, not all individual strains are expected to share the same effects. To clarify the role of probiotics in the clinic, we explored the relation between probiotics and the gut and skin microbiota.

show abstract

“…A product containing yogurt and three probiotic candidate strains, Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-3689, Lactobacillus rhamnosus CNCM I-3690 and Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-1518, combined in a fermented milk matrix, was designed. Several preclinical studies have suggested that these three strains could modulate the gut barrier and/or the gut microbiota [15][16][17][18][19] . L. paracasei CNCM I-3689 decreased the translocation and dissemination of Listeria monocytogenes 15 , induced the clearance of vancomycin-resistant enterococci 16 and promoted the resilience of some members of the microbiota following exposure to an antibiotic challenge in mice 16 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety and functional enrichment of gut microbiome in healthy subjects consuming a multi-strain fermented milk product: a randomised controlled trial

Alvarez¹,

Tap²,

Chambaud³

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many clinical studies have evaluated the effect of probiotics, but only a few have assessed their dose effects on gut microbiota and host. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, controlled intervention clinical trial to assess the safety (primary endpoint) of and gut microbiota response (secondary endpoint) to the daily ingestion for 4 weeks of two doses (1 or 3 bottles/day) of a fermented milk product (Test) in 96 healthy adults. The Test product is a multi-strain fermented milk product, combining yogurt strains and probiotic candidate strains Lactobacillus paracasei subsp. paracasei CNCM I-1518 and CNCM I-3689 and Lactobacillus rhamnosus CNCM I-3690. We assessed the safety of the Test product on the following parameters: adverse events, vital signs, hematological and metabolic profile, hepatic, kidney or thyroid function, inflammatory markers, bowel habits and digestive symptoms. We explored the longitudinal gut microbiota response to product consumption and dose, by 16S rRNA gene sequencing and functional contribution by shotgun metagenomics. Safety results did not show any significant difference between the Test and Control products whatever the parameters assessed, at the two doses ingested daily over a 4-week-period. Probiotic candidate strains were detected only during consumption period, and at a significantly higher level for the three strains in subjects who consumed 3 products bottles/day. The global structure of the gut microbiota as assessed by alpha and beta-diversity, was not altered by consumption of the product for four weeks. A zero-inflated beta regression model with random effects (ZIBR) identified a few bacterial genera with differential responses to test product consumption dose compared to control. Shotgun metagenomics analysis revealed a functional contribution to the gut microbiome of probiotic candidates.

show abstract

Lactobacillus paracasei CNCM I-3689 reduces vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus persistence and promotes Bacteroidetes resilience in the gut following antibiotic challenge

Cited by 32 publications

References 79 publications

Synergistic and antagonistic interactions between antibiotics and synbiotics in modifying the murine fecal microbiome

Synergistic and antagonistic interactions between antibiotics and synbiotics in modifying the murine fecal microbiome

How Probiotics Affect the Microbiota

Safety and functional enrichment of gut microbiome in healthy subjects consuming a multi-strain fermented milk product: a randomised controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About