Evidence mapPaperPMID 39792908Full record

Trial reportPloS one2025

The efficacy of Lacticaseibacillus paracasei MSMC39-1 and Bifidobacterium animalis TA-1 probiotics in modulating gut microbiota and reducing the risk of the characteristics of metabolic syndrome: A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study.

Wongsakorn Luangphiphat, Pinidphon Prombutara, Praewpannarai Jamjuree, Chantanapa Chantarangkul, Porntipha Vitheejongjaroen, Chantaluck Muennarong, Krittapat Fukfon, Manasvin Onwan, Malai Taweechotipatr

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. ProbioticBrain sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Wongsakorn LuangphiphatPrincess Srisavangavadhana College of Medicine, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand.
Pinidphon PrombutaraOmics Sciences and Bioinformatics Center, Faculty of Science, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0019-6800
Praewpannarai JamjureeCenter of Excellence in Probiotics, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Chantanapa ChantarangkulCenter of Excellence in Probiotics, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Porntipha VitheejongjaroenCenter of Excellence in Probiotics, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Chantaluck MuennarongCenter of Excellence in Probiotics, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Krittapat FukfonBoromarajonani College of Nursing Phayao, Faculty of Nursing, Praboromarajchanok Institute, Phayao, Thailand.
Manasvin OnwanDepartment of Preventive and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Srinakharinwirot University, Ongkharak, Nakhon Nayok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9994-1112
Malai TaweechotipatrCenter of Excellence in Probiotics, Srinakharinwirot University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6066-8841

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern treatment, a healthy diet, and physical activity routines lower the risk factors for metabolic syndrome; however, this condition is associated with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality worldwide. This investigation involved a randomized controlled trial, double-blind, parallel study. Fifty-eight participants with risk factors of metabolic syndrome according to the inclusion criteria were randomized into two groups and given probiotics (Lacticaseibacillus paracasei MSMC39-1 and Bifidobacterium animalis TA-1) (n = 31) or a placebo (n = 27). The participants had a mean age of 42.29 ± 7.39 and 43.89 ± 7.54 years in the probiotics and placebo groups, respectively. Stool samples, anthropometric data, and blood chemistries were taken at baseline and at 12 weeks. The primary outcome was achieved by the probiotics group as their low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol level dramatically lowered compared to the placebo group (the difference was 39.97 ± 26.83 mg/dl, p-value <0.001). Moreover, significant reductions in body weight, body mass index, waist circumference, systolic blood pressure, and total cholesterol were observed in the volunteers treated with probiotics compared to the placebo. In the gut microbiome analysis, the results showed statistically significant differences in the beta diversity in the post-intervention probiotics group. Blautia, Roseburia, Collinsella, and Ruminococcus were among the gut microbiomes that were more prevalent in the post-intervention probiotics group. In addition, this group exhibited increases in the predicted functional changes in ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters, as well as ribonucleic acid transport, the biosynthesis of unsaturated fatty acids, glycerophospholipid metabolism, and pyruvate metabolism. In conclusion, this research demonstrated that the probiotics L. paracasei MSMC39-1 and B. animalis TA-1 have the efficacy to lower risk factors associated with metabolic syndrome.

Indexed as

Bifidobacterium animalisGastrointestinal MicrobiomeLacticaseibacillus paracaseiMetabolic SyndromeProbioticsAdultDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID39792908
PMCPMC11723615

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.