肠道微生物组靶向疗法作为炎症性肠病的辅助治疗:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。

IF 3.7 3区 医学 Q2 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Tao Zhang, Xiaoang Li, Jun Li, Feng Sun, Liping Duan
{"title":"肠道微生物组靶向疗法作为炎症性肠病的辅助治疗:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Tao Zhang, Xiaoang Li, Jun Li, Feng Sun, Liping Duan","doi":"10.1111/jgh.16795","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>Gut microbiome-targeted therapies (MTTs), including prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics, and fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), have been widely used in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), but the best MTTs has not yet been confirmed. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to examine this in ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of MTTs as adjuvant therapies for IBD until December 10, 2023. Data were pooled using a random effects model, with efficacy reported as pooled relative risks with 95% CIs, and interventions ranked according to means of surfaces under cumulative ranking values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Firstly, we compared the efficacy of MTTs in IBD patients. Only FMT and probiotics were superior to placebo in all outcomes, but FMT ranked best in improving clinical response rate and clinical and endoscopic remission rate, and probiotics ranked second in reducing clinical relapse rate showed significant efficacy, while prebiotics ranked first showed nonsignificant efficacy. Subsequently, we conducted NMA for specific MTT formulations in UC and CD separately, which revealed that FMT, especially combined FMT via colonoscopy and enema, showed significant efficacy and was superior in improving clinical response and remission rate of active UC patients. As for endoscopic remission and clinical relapse, multistrain probiotics based on specific genera of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium showed significant efficacy and ranked best in UC. In CD, we found that no MTTs were significantly better than placebo, but synbiotics comprising Bifidobacterium and fructo-oligosaccharide/inulin mix and Saccharomyces ranked best in improving clinical remission and reducing clinical relapse, respectively. Moreover, FMT was safe in both UC and CD.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FMT and multistrain probiotics showed superior efficacy in UC. However, the efficacy of MTTs varies among different IBD subtypes and disease stages; thus, the personalized treatment strategies of MTTs are necessary.</p>","PeriodicalId":15877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gut microbiome-targeted therapies as adjuvant treatments in inflammatory bowel diseases: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Tao Zhang, Xiaoang Li, Jun Li, Feng Sun, Liping Duan\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jgh.16795\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>Gut microbiome-targeted therapies (MTTs), including prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics, and fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), have been widely used in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), but the best MTTs has not yet been confirmed. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to examine this in ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of MTTs as adjuvant therapies for IBD until December 10, 2023. Data were pooled using a random effects model, with efficacy reported as pooled relative risks with 95% CIs, and interventions ranked according to means of surfaces under cumulative ranking values.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Firstly, we compared the efficacy of MTTs in IBD patients. Only FMT and probiotics were superior to placebo in all outcomes, but FMT ranked best in improving clinical response rate and clinical and endoscopic remission rate, and probiotics ranked second in reducing clinical relapse rate showed significant efficacy, while prebiotics ranked first showed nonsignificant efficacy. Subsequently, we conducted NMA for specific MTT formulations in UC and CD separately, which revealed that FMT, especially combined FMT via colonoscopy and enema, showed significant efficacy and was superior in improving clinical response and remission rate of active UC patients. As for endoscopic remission and clinical relapse, multistrain probiotics based on specific genera of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium showed significant efficacy and ranked best in UC. In CD, we found that no MTTs were significantly better than placebo, but synbiotics comprising Bifidobacterium and fructo-oligosaccharide/inulin mix and Saccharomyces ranked best in improving clinical remission and reducing clinical relapse, respectively. Moreover, FMT was safe in both UC and CD.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FMT and multistrain probiotics showed superior efficacy in UC. However, the efficacy of MTTs varies among different IBD subtypes and disease stages; thus, the personalized treatment strategies of MTTs are necessary.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15877,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.16795\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.16795","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:肠道微生物组靶向疗法(MTT),包括益生菌、益生菌、合成益生菌和粪便微生物群移植(FMT),已广泛应用于炎症性肠病(IBD),但最佳的MTT尚未得到证实。我们进行了一项网络荟萃分析(NMA),以研究溃疡性结肠炎(UC)和克罗恩病(CD):我们搜索了截至 2023 年 12 月 10 日有关 MTT 作为 IBD 辅助疗法的有效性和安全性的随机对照试验 (RCT)。采用随机效应模型对数据进行汇总,疗效以汇总相对风险和95% CIs的形式报告,干预措施则根据累积排名值下的表面平均值进行排序:38项研究符合纳入标准。首先,我们比较了 MTTs 对 IBD 患者的疗效。在所有结果中,只有FMT和益生菌优于安慰剂,但FMT在提高临床反应率和临床及内镜缓解率方面排名第一,益生菌在降低临床复发率方面排名第二,显示出显著疗效,而益生元排名第一,显示出非显著疗效。随后,我们分别对 UC 和 CD 的特定 MTT 制剂进行了 NMA,结果显示,FMT,尤其是通过结肠镜和灌肠的联合 FMT,在改善活动性 UC 患者的临床反应和缓解率方面具有显著疗效和优势。在内镜缓解和临床复发方面,基于特定乳杆菌属和双歧杆菌属的多菌株益生菌对 UC 有显著疗效,且疗效最好。在 CD 中,我们发现 MTTs 均未明显优于安慰剂,但由双歧杆菌和果寡糖/胰岛素混合物以及酵母菌组成的合成益生菌在改善临床缓解和减少临床复发方面分别名列前茅。此外,FMT 对 UC 和 CD 都是安全的:结论:FMT 和多菌株益生菌对 UC 有较好的疗效。结论:FMT 和多菌株益生菌对 UC 有较好的疗效,但 MTT 的疗效在不同 IBD 亚型和疾病分期之间存在差异;因此,有必要制定 MTT 的个性化治疗策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Gut microbiome-targeted therapies as adjuvant treatments in inflammatory bowel diseases: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background and aim: Gut microbiome-targeted therapies (MTTs), including prebiotics, probiotics, synbiotics, and fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT), have been widely used in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD), but the best MTTs has not yet been confirmed. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) to examine this in ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD).

Methods: We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of MTTs as adjuvant therapies for IBD until December 10, 2023. Data were pooled using a random effects model, with efficacy reported as pooled relative risks with 95% CIs, and interventions ranked according to means of surfaces under cumulative ranking values.

Results: Thirty-eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Firstly, we compared the efficacy of MTTs in IBD patients. Only FMT and probiotics were superior to placebo in all outcomes, but FMT ranked best in improving clinical response rate and clinical and endoscopic remission rate, and probiotics ranked second in reducing clinical relapse rate showed significant efficacy, while prebiotics ranked first showed nonsignificant efficacy. Subsequently, we conducted NMA for specific MTT formulations in UC and CD separately, which revealed that FMT, especially combined FMT via colonoscopy and enema, showed significant efficacy and was superior in improving clinical response and remission rate of active UC patients. As for endoscopic remission and clinical relapse, multistrain probiotics based on specific genera of Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium showed significant efficacy and ranked best in UC. In CD, we found that no MTTs were significantly better than placebo, but synbiotics comprising Bifidobacterium and fructo-oligosaccharide/inulin mix and Saccharomyces ranked best in improving clinical remission and reducing clinical relapse, respectively. Moreover, FMT was safe in both UC and CD.

Conclusions: FMT and multistrain probiotics showed superior efficacy in UC. However, the efficacy of MTTs varies among different IBD subtypes and disease stages; thus, the personalized treatment strategies of MTTs are necessary.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
326
审稿时长
2.3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology is produced 12 times per year and publishes peer-reviewed original papers, reviews and editorials concerned with clinical practice and research in the fields of hepatology, gastroenterology and endoscopy. Papers cover the medical, radiological, pathological, biochemical, physiological and historical aspects of the subject areas. All submitted papers are reviewed by at least two referees expert in the field of the submitted paper.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信