Bifidobacterium breve BBG-001 and intestinal barrier function in preterm babies: Exploratory Studies from the PiPS Trial

Background Uncertainty remains about the role of probiotics to prevent necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) some of which arises from the variety of probiotic interventions used in different trials, many with no prior evidence of potential efficacy. Mechanistic studies of intestinal barrier function embedded in a large probiotic trial could provide evidence about which properties of probiotics might be important for NEC prevention thus facilitating identification of strains with therapeutic potential. Methods Intestinal permeability, stool microbiota, SCFAs and mucosal inflammation were assessed from the second postnatal week in babies enrolled to a randomised controlled trial of B. breve BBG-001 (the PiPS trial). Results were compared by allocation and by stool colonisation with the probiotic. Results Ninety-four preterm babies were recruited across six nested studies. B. breve BBG-001 content was higher by allocation and colonisation; Enterobacteriaceae and acetic acid levels were higher by colonisation. No measure of intestinal barrier function showed differences. The PiPS trial found no evidence of efficacy to reduce NEC. Conclusions That the negative results of the PiPS trial were associated with failure of this probiotic to modify intestinal barrier function supports the possibility that the tests described here have the potential to identify strains to progress to large clinical trials. Impact Uncertainty about the therapeutic role of probiotics to prevent necrotising enterocolitis is in part due to the wide range of bacterial strains with no previous evidence of efficacy used in clinical trials. We hypothesised that mechanistic studies embedded in a probiotic trial would provide evidence about which properties of probiotics might be important for NEC prevention. The finding that the probiotic strain tested, Bifidobacterium breve BBG-001, showed neither effects on intestinal barrier function nor clinical efficacy supports the possibility that these tests have the potential to identify strains to progress to large clinical trials.