Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

  • Author or Editor: Trudy M. Wassenaar x
  • All content x
Clear All Modify Search

A century ago, Alfred Nissle discovered that intentional intake of particular strains of Escherichia coli could treat patients suffering from infectious diseases. Since then, one of these strains became the most frequently used probiotic E. coli in research and was applied to a variety of human conditions. Here, properties of that E. coli Nissle 1917 strain are compared with other commercially available E. coli probiotic strains, with emphasis on their human applications. A literature search formed the basis of a summary of research findings reported for the probiotics Mutaflor, Symbioflor 2, and Colinfant. The closest relatives of the strains in these products are presented, and their genetic content, including the presence of virulence, genes is discussed. A similarity to pathogenic strains causing urinary tract infections is noticeable. Historic trends in research of probiotics treatment for particular human conditions are identified. The future of probiotic E. coli may lay in what Alfred Nissle originally discovered: to treat gastrointestinal infections, which nowadays are often caused by antibiotic-resistant pathogens.

Open access

The fever-inducing effect of lipopolysaccharides (LPS) is well known, and human blood is extremely responsive to this pyrogen. Recently, the safety of LPS-containing food supplements and probiotic drugs as immune-stimulants has been questioned, although these products are orally taken and do not reach the bloodstream undigested. The concerns are understandable, as endotoxaemia is a pathological condition, but the oral uptake of probiotic products containing LPS or Gram-negative bacteria does not pose a health risk, based on the available scientific evidence, as is reviewed here. The available methods developed to detect LPS and other pyrogens are mostly used for quality control of parentally applied therapeuticals. Their outcome varies considerably when applied to food supplements, as demonstrated in a simple comparative experiment. Products containing different Escherichia coli strains can result in vastly different results on their LPS content, depending on the method of testing. This is an inherent complication to pyrogen testing, which hampers the communication that the LPS content of food supplements is not a safety concern.

Open access
European Journal of Microbiology and Immunology
Authors: Trudy M. Wassenaar, Anke Zschüttig, Claudia Beimfohr, Thomas Geske, Christian Auerbach, Helen Cook, Kurt Zimmermann, and Florian Gunzer

The probiotic product Symbioflor2 (DSM 17252) is a bacterial concentrate of six different Escherichia coli genotypes, whose complete genome sequences are compared here, between each other as well as to other E. coli genomes. The genome sequences of Symbioflor2 E. coli components contained a number of virulence-associated genes. Their presence seems to be in conflict with a recorded history of safe use, and with the observed low frequency of adverse effects over a period of more than 6 years. The genome sequences were used to identify unique sequences for each component, for which strain-specific hybridization probes were designed. A colonization study was conducted whereby five volunteers were exposed to an exceptionally high single dose. The results showed that the probiotic E. coli could be detected for 3 months or longer in their stools, and this was in particular the case for those components containing higher numbers of virulence-associated genes. Adverse effects from this long-term colonization were absent. Thus, the presence of the identified virulence genes does not result in a pathogenic phenotype in the genetic background of these probiotic E. coli.

Open access

Probiotic Escherichia coli strain Nissle 1917 (EcN) has a long history of safe use. However, the recently discovered presence of a pks locus in its genome presumably producing colibactin has questioned its safety, as colibactin has been implicated in genotoxicity. Here, we assess the genotoxic potential of EcN. Metabolic products were tested in vitro by the Ames test, a mutagenicity assay developed to detect point mutation-inducing activity. Live EcN were tested by an adapted Ames test. Neither the standard nor the adapted Ames test resulted in increased numbers of revertant colonies, indicating that EcN metabolites or viable cells lacked mutagenic activity. The in vivo Mammalian Alkaline Comet Assay (the gold standard for detecting DNA-strand breaks) was used to determine potentially induced DNA-strand breaks in cells of the gastro-intestinal tract of rats orally administered with viable EcN. Bacteria were given at 109–1011 colony forming units (CFU) per animal by oral gavage on 2 consecutive days and daily for a period of 28 days to 5 rats per group. No significant differences compared to negative controls were found. These results demonstrate that EcN does not induce DNA-strand breaks and does not have any detectable genotoxic potential in the test animals.

Open access