Dataset Information

Probiotics in the prevention of eczema: a randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To evaluate a multistrain, high-dose probiotic in the prevention of eczema.

Design

A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial.

Settings

Antenatal clinics, research clinic, children at home.

Patients

Pregnant women and their infants.

Interventions

Women from 36?weeks gestation and their infants to age 6?months received daily either the probiotic (Lactobacillus salivarius CUL61, Lactobacillus paracasei CUL08, Bifidobacterium animalis subspecies lactis CUL34 and Bifidobacterium bifidum CUL20; total of 10(10) organisms/day) or matching placebo.

Main outcome measure

Diagnosed eczema at age 2?years. Infants were followed up by questionnaire. Clinical examination and skin prick tests to common allergens were done at 6?months and 2?years.

Results

The cumulative frequency of diagnosed eczema at 2?years was similar in the probiotic (73/214, 34.1%) and placebo arms (72/222, 32.4%; OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.6). Among the secondary outcomes, the cumulative frequency of skin prick sensitivity at 2?years was reduced in the probiotic (18/171; 10.5%) compared with the placebo arm (32/173; 18.5%; OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.98). The statistically significant differences between the arms were mainly in sensitisation to cow's milk and hen's egg proteins at 6?months. Atopic eczema occurred in 9/171 (5.3%) children in the probiotic arm and 21/173 (12.1%) in the placebo arm (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.91).

Conclusions

The study did not provide evidence that the probiotic either prevented eczema during the study or reduced its severity. However, the probiotic seemed to prevent atopic sensitisation to common food allergens and so reduce the incidence of atopic eczema in early childhood.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN26287422.

SUBMITTER: Allen SJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4215350 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Probiotics in the prevention of eczema: a randomised controlled trial.

Allen Stephen J SJ Jordan Sue S Storey Melanie M Thornton Catherine A CA Gravenor Michael B MB Garaiova Iveta I Plummer Susan F SF Wang Duolao D Morgan Gareth G

Archives of disease in childhood 20140619 11

<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate a multistrain, high-dose probiotic in the prevention of eczema.<h4>Design</h4>A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial.<h4>Settings</h4>Antenatal clinics, research clinic, children at home.<h4>Patients</h4>Pregnant women and their infants.<h4>Interventions</h4>Women from 36 weeks gestation and their infants to age 6 months received daily either the probiotic (Lactobacillus salivarius CUL61, Lactobacillus paracasei CUL08, Bifidobacterium a ...[more]

PMID: 24947281

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundSkin barrier dysfunction precedes eczema development. We tested whether daily use of emollient in the first year could prevent eczema in high-risk children.MethodsWe did a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial in 12 hospitals and four primary care sites across the UK. Families were approached via antenatal or postnatal services for recruitment of term infants (at least 37 weeks' gestation) at high risk of developing eczema (ie, at least one first-degree relative with parent-reported eczema, allergic rhinitis, or asthma, diagnosed by a doctor). Term newborns with a family history of atopic disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to application of emollient daily (either Diprobase cream or DoubleBase gel) for the first year plus standard skin-care advice (emollient group) or standard skin-care advice only (control group). The randomisation schedule was created using computer-generated code (stratified by recruiting centre and number of first-degree relatives with atopic disease) and participants were assigned to groups using an internet-based randomisation system. The primary outcome was eczema at age 2 years (defined by UK working party criteria) with analysis as randomised regardless of adherence to allocation for participants with outcome data collected, and adjusting for stratification variables. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN21528841. Data collection for long-term follow-up is ongoing, but the trial is closed to recruitment.Findings1394 newborns were randomly assigned to study groups between Nov 19, 2014, and Nov 18, 2016; 693 were assigned to the emollient group and 701 to the control group. Adherence in the emollient group was 88% (466 of 532) at 3 months, 82% (427 of 519) at 6 months, and 74% (375 of 506) at 12 months in those with complete questionnaire data. At age 2 years, eczema was present in 139 (23%) of 598 infants with outcome data collected in the emollient group and 150 (25%) of 612 infants in the control group (adjusted relative risk 0·95 [95% CI 0·78 to 1·16], p=0·61; adjusted risk difference -1·2% [-5·9 to 3·6]). Other eczema definitions supported the results of the primary analysis. Mean number of skin infections per child in year 1 was 0·23 (SD 0·68) in the emollient group versus 0·15 (0·46) in the control group; adjusted incidence rate ratio 1·55 (95% CI 1·15 to 2·09).InterpretationWe found no evidence that daily emollient during the first year of life prevents eczema in high-risk children and some evidence to suggest an increased risk of skin infections. Our study shows that families with eczema, asthma, or allergic rhinitis should not use daily emollients to try and prevent eczema in their newborn.FundingNational Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Bacterial vaginosis increases the risk of spontaneous preterm delivery at less than 34 weeks of gestation. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the early administration of selected lactobacilli strains (probiotics) to pregnant women with asymptomatic bacterial vaginosis/intermediate-degree infections to prevent spontaneous premature delivery and associated neonatal morbidity. METHODS/DESIGN:Asymptomatic pregnant women at less than 20 weeks of gestation, with no indication of elective preterm delivery, with a vaginal pH ? 4.5 and Nugent score > 3 were randomly assigned to the placebo or intervention group (oral administration of selected lactobacilli up to the 24th to 26th week of gestation). The randomisation was stratified for the history of premature delivery (HPD) and blocked. The allocation was concealed, and the participating health professionals and patients were blinded. The primary outcome was preterm delivery (<34 to <32 weeks), and the secondary outcomes were associated neonatal complications. RESULTS:In total, 4,204 pregnant women were screened; 320 and 324 individuals were respectively randomly assigned to the placebo and intervention groups, and 62% finished the trial. None of the randomised patients were lost to follow-up. For the non-HPD stratum, the intent-to-treat relative risks of spontaneous premature birth at < 34 and < 37 weeks' gestation were 0.33 (0.03, 3.16) and 0.49 (0.17, 1.44), respectively, and they were non-significant (ns) with p = 0.31 and 0.14. The corresponding actual treatment figures were zero and 0.32 (0.09, 1.19), which were ns with p = 0.12 and 0.06. The intent-to-treat relative risk of spontaneous premature birth at < 37 weeks of gestation for the trial as a whole, including HPD and non-HPD participants, was 0.69 (0.26, 1.78), p = 0.30 (ns). The neonatal complications under evaluation occurred in only one infant (< 34 weeks; placebo group) who presented with respiratory distress syndrome and suspected early neonatal sepsis. The recorded adverse events were minor and relatively non-specific. CONCLUSIONS:The efficacy of the tested probiotics to prevent preterm delivery among women without a history of preterm delivery was not determined because the study sample was insufficient to estimate statistically significant intent-to-treat effects; additional studies are needed to evaluate this intervention among these women. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Trial registration at NIH register: NCT00303082. Sources of funding: the Brazilian Health Ministry and the State of Rio de Janeiro Research Foundation.

Project description:IntroductionVentilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is the most common healthcare-associated infection in critically ill patients. Prior studies suggest that probiotics may reduce VAP and other infections in critically ill patients; however, most previous randomised trials were small, single centre studies. The Probiotics: Prevention of Severe Pneumonia and Endotracheal Colonization Trial (PROSPECT) aims to determine the impact of the probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG on VAP and other clinically important outcomes in critically ill adults.MethodsPROSPECT is a multicentre, concealed, randomised, stratified, blinded, controlled trial in patients ≥18 years old, anticipated to be mechanically ventilated ≥72 hours, in intensive care units (ICUs) in Canada, the USA and Saudi Arabia. Patients receive either 1×1010 colony forming units of L. rhamnosus GG twice daily or an identical appearing placebo. Those at increased risk of probiotic infection are excluded. The primary outcome is VAP. Secondary outcomes are other ICU-acquired infections including Clostridioides difficile infection, diarrhoea (including antibiotic-associated diarrhoea), antimicrobial use, ICU and hospital length of stay and mortality. The planned sample size of 2650 patients is based on an estimated 15% VAP rate and will provide 80% power to detect a 25% relative risk reduction.Ethics and disseminationThis protocol and statistical analysis plan outlines the methodology, primary and secondary analyses, sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses. PROSPECT is approved by Health Canada (#9427-M1133-45C), the research ethics boards of all participating hospitals and Public Health Ontario. Results will be disseminated via academic channels (peer reviewed journal publications, professional healthcare fora including international conferences) and conventional and social media. The results of PROSPECT will inform practice guidelines worldwide.Trialregistration numberNCT02462590; Pre-results.

Project description:Secondary skin infection is common during eczema exacerbations and many children are treated with antibiotics when this is suspected, although there is little high-quality evidence to justify this practice.To determine the clinical effectiveness of oral and topical antibiotics, in addition to standard treatment with emollients and topical corticosteroids, in children with clinically infected eczema.Multicentre randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.General practices and dermatology clinics in England, Wales and Scotland.Children (aged 3 months to < 8 years) with a diagnosis of eczema (according to U.K. Working Party definition) and clinical suspicion of infection.(1) Oral flucloxacillin and topical placebo; (2) topical fusidic acid (Fucidin(®), Leo Laboratories Limited) and oral placebo; and (3) oral and topical placebos, all for 1 week.Patient-Orientated Eczema Measure (POEM) at 2 weeks (assessing subjective severity in the week following treatment).We randomised 113 children (36 to oral antibiotic, 37 to topical antibiotic and 40 to placebo), which was fewer than our revised target sample size of 282. A total of 103 (92.0%) children had one or more clinical features suggestive of infection and 78 (69.6%) children had Staphylococcus aureus cultured from a skin swab. Oral and topical antibiotics resulted in a 1.52 [95% confidence interval (CI) -1.35 to 4.40] and 1.49 (95% CI -1.55 to 4.53) increase (worse subjective severity) in POEM score at 2 weeks, relative to placebo and controlling for baseline POEM score. Eczema Area and Severity Index (objective severity) scores were also higher (worse) in the intervention groups, at 0.20 (95% CI -0.12 to 0.52) and 0.42 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.75) for oral and topical antibiotics, respectively, at 2 weeks. Analyses of impact on the family, quality of life, daily symptom scores, and longer-term outcomes were all consistent with the finding of no or limited difference and a trend towards worse outcomes in the intervention groups. Sensitivity analyses, including adjusting for compliance and imputation for missing data, were consistent with the main findings.Our data suggest that oral and topical antibiotics have no effect, or a harmful effect, on subjective eczema severity in children with clinically infected eczema in the community. The CIs around our estimates exclude a meaningful beneficial effect (published minimal clinically important difference for POEM is 3.4). Although most patients in this trial had features suggestive of infection and S. aureus on their skin, participants primarily had mild-moderate eczema and those with signs of more severe infection were often excluded. Clinicians should consider avoiding oral and topical antibiotic use in children with suspected infected eczema in the community who do not have signs of 'severe infection'. Further research should seek to understand how best to encourage the use of topical steroids and limit use of antibiotics in those with eczema flares without signs of severe infection, as well as developing tools to better phenotype eczema flares, in order to better define a population that may benefit from antibiotic treatment.European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials (EudraCT) number 2011-003591-37 and Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN96705420.The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Dataset Information

Probiotics in the prevention of eczema: a randomised controlled trial.

Objective

Design

Settings

Patients

Interventions

Main outcome measure

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Publications

Probiotics in the prevention of eczema: a randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets