Trial reportArchives of osteoporosis2025
Using probiotic supplementation to support bone health in postmenopausal women: a randomized, double-blind, parallel, placebo-controlled, multi-center study.
Trial report in Archives of osteoporosis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gut dysbiosis and vitamin-dependent immune regulation in degenerative musculoskeletal and bone diseases.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Gut Microbiota Regulates Brain-Bone Axis to Influence Osteoporosis Pathogenesis and Treatment.Research (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Review
- Roles of gut metabolites on bone mineralization and remodeling: impact of metabolic dysregulation on the gut-immune-bone axis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studies using rodent models have demonstrated the ability for probiotics to attenuate estrogen-related bone loss, but findings in humans are limited. Postmenopausal women consuming a novel combination of bacteria strains as a probiotic supplement demonstrated no changes in bone health outcomes. PURPOSE: This study determined if a probiotic supplement could attenuate the loss of femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD) and assessed its effect on fracture risk and markers of bone cell activity.
methodsSeventy-two postmenopausal women (40-59 years) were randomized to a daily probiotic supplement or placebo for 48 weeks. Femoral neck BMD was assessed at weeks 0 and 48 using DXA along with fracture risk using the FRAX® assessment tool. Serum procollagen type 1 N-terminal propeptide (P1NP), bone-specific alkaline phosphatase (BALP), cross-linked C-telopeptide of type I collagen (CTx), and osteocalcin (OC) were analyzed at weeks 0, 12, 24, and 48.
resultsThere was no significant time by treatment interaction (p > 0.05) for femoral neck BMD or fracture risk. Independent of treatment, femoral neck BMD decreased (p = 0.034), while risk of hip (p = 0.003) and major osteoporotic fracture (p = 0.044) increased. There was no mean difference in bone marker levels between groups from baseline to endpoint. These findings align with the lack of difference in BMD and fracture risk at the end of study.
conclusionProbiotics did not alter BMD or fracture risk, as supported by bone cellular activity that was similar to the placebo group by the end of study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.