Evidence Hub

Randomized trial assessing impact of probiotic supplementation on gut microbiome and clinical outcome from targeted therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma

N. Dizman, J. Hsu, P. Bergerot, J. Gillece, M. Folkerts, Laurens Reining, J. Trent, S. Highlander et al.

Cancer Medicine, 2020

20 participants · 72 citations

Abstract

Studies suggest a link between the gut microbiome and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) outcomes, including evidence that mRCC patients possess a lower abundance of Bifidobacterium spp. compared to healthy adults. We sought to assess if a Bifidobacterium‐containing yogurt product could modulate the gut microbiome and clinical outcome from vascular endothelial growth factor‐tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGF‐TKIs). mRCC patients initiating VEGF‐TKIs, regardless of the line of therapy, were randomized to probiotic‐supplemented (two 4 oz. servings of the probiotic yogurt product daily) or probiotic‐restricted arms. Stool samples were collected prior to therapy and at weeks 2, 3, 4, and 12. Microbiome composition was assessed using whole‐metagenome sequencing. A total of 20 patients were randomized. Bifidobacterium animalis, the active ingredient of the probiotic supplement, reached detectable levels in all patients in the probiotic‐supplemented arm versus two patients in the probiotic‐restricted arm. Clinical benefit rate was similar in probiotic‐supplemented versus probiotic‐restricted arms (70% vs. 80%, p = 0.606). Linear discriminant analysis (LDA) effect size analysis of MetaPhIAn2 abundance data predicted 25 enriched species demonstrating an LDA score >3 in either clinical benefit or no clinical benefit. In patients with clinical benefit (vs. no clinical benefit), Barnesiella intestinihominis and Akkermansia muciniphila were significantly more abundant (p = 7.4 × 10−6…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 20 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free