Cited by 217Probiotics and Fermented FoodsImmune responses and vaccinationsMicrobial Metabolites in Food Biotechnology

Evaluation of the immune benefits of two probiotic strains Bifidobacterium animalis ssp. lactis, BB-12® and Lactobacillus paracasei ssp. paracasei, L. casei 431® in an influenza vaccination model: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Open access
Rizzardini, Giuliano, Eskesen, Dorte, Calder, Philip C., Capetti, Amedeo, Jespersen, Lillian, Clerici, Mario·2012·British Journal Of Nutrition

Abstract

The present study investigated the ability of Bifidobacterium animalis ssp. lactis (BB-12®) and Lactobacillus paracasei ssp. paracasei (L. casei 431®) to modulate the immune system using a vaccination model in healthy subjects. A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted in 211 subjects (56 % females, mean age 33·2 (sd 13·1) years). Subjects consumed a minimum of 10⁹ colony-forming units of BB-12® (capsule) or L. casei 431® (dairy drink) or a matching placebo once daily for 6 weeks. After 2 weeks, a seasonal influenza vaccination was given. Plasma and saliva samples were collected at baseline and after 6 weeks for the analysis of antibodies, cytokines and innate immune parameters. Changes from baseline in vaccine-specific plasma IgG, IgG1 and IgG3 were significantly greater in both probiotic groups v. the corresponding placebo group (L. casei 431®, P = 0·01 for IgG; P < 0·001 for remaining comparisons). The number of subjects obtaining a substantial increase in specific IgG (defined as ≥ 2-fold above baseline) was significantly greater in both probiotic groups v. placebo (BB-12®, P < 0·001 for IgG, IgG1 and IgG3; L. casei 431®, P < 0·001 for IgG1 and IgG3). Significantly greater mean fold increases for vaccine-specific secretory IgA in saliva were observed in both probiotic groups v. placebo (BB-12®, P = 0·017; L. casei 431®, P = 0·035). Similar results were observed for total antibody concentrations. No differences were found for plasma cytokines or innate immune parameters. Data herein show that supplementation with BB-12® or L. casei 431® may be an effective means to improve immune function by augmenting systemic and mucosal immune responses to challenge.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s000711451100420x

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There has been interest in utilizing probiotics to enhance response to vaccinations, based on substantial pre-clinical evidence identifying their immune-modulating properties.

    “Along these lines there has been interest in utilizing probiotics (live microorganisms having beneficial effects on human hosts) to enhance response to vaccinations, based on substantial pre-clinical evidence identifying their immune-modulating properties (Rizzardini et al., 2012).”

    From Viral Infections, the Microbiome, and Probiotics (2021) · cites this paper as Rizzardini et al., 2012

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rizzardini, G., Eskesen, D., Calder, P. C., Capetti, A., Jespersen, L., & Clerici, M.
Affiliations
  • Luigi Sacco Hospital (IT)
  • Chr. Hansen (Denmark) (DK)
  • Southampton General Hospital (GB)
  • University of Milan (IT)
Corresponding author
Jespersen, Lillian
Venue
British Journal Of Nutrition
Published
2011-09-07
Volume
107
Issue
6
Pages
876-884
ISSN
  • 0007-1145 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2662
OpenAlex
W2168275695
Cited by
217
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 7
FWCI
14.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal Of Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • INFM-OAR (INFN Catania) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immune responses and vaccinations
  • Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Microbial Metabolites in Food Biotechnology
Keywords
probiotics, Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BB-12, seasonal influenza vaccination, IgG subclasses, secretory IgA, mucosal immunity, systemic immunity, cytokines, innate immunity, immunomodulation
MeSH terms
Adult, Antibody Specificity, Bifidobacterium, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Immunoglobulin G, Influenza, Human, Influenza Vaccines, Italy, Lactobacillus, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Compliance, Patient Dropouts, Saliva, Incidence, Probiotics, Young Adult, Immunity, Humoral

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review