Early treatment may prevent or delay the onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in individuals who are at high risk. Lifestyle interventions and the hypoglycemic drug metformin have been shown to reduce T2DM incidence. The effectiveness of such interventions may be enhanced by targeting environmental factors such as the intestinal microbiota, which has been proven to predict the response to lifestyle interventions and play a part in mediating the glucose-lowering effects of metformin. Shifts in the intestinal microbiota “towards a more balanced state” may promote glucose homeostasis by regulating short-chain fatty acids’ production. This study aimed to investigate the safety and effect of a multi-strain probiotic on glycemic, inflammatory, and permeability markers in adults with prediabetes and early T2DM and to assess whether the probiotic can enhance metformin’s effect on glycaemia. A randomised controlled pilot study was conducted in 60 adults with a BMI ≥ 25 kg/m² and with prediabetes or T2DM (within the previous 12 months). The participants were randomised to a multi-strain probiotic (L. plantarum, L. bulgaricus, L. gasseri, B. breve, B. animalis sbsp. lactis, B. bifidum, S. thermophilus, and S. boulardii) or placebo for 12 weeks. Analyses of the primary outcome (fasting plasma glucose) and secondary outcomes, including, but not limited to, circulating lipopolysaccharide, zonulin, and short chain fatty acids and a metagenomic analysis of the fecal microbiome were performed at baseline and 12 weeks post-intervention. The results showed no significant differences in the primary and secondary outcome measures between the probiotic and placebo group. An analysis of a subgroup of participants taking metformin showed a decrease in fasting plasma glucose, HbA1c, insulin resistance, and zonulin; an increase in plasma butyrate concentrations; and an enrichment of microbial butyrate-producing pathways in the probiotic group but not in the placebo group. Probiotics may act as an adjunctive to metformin by increasing the production of butyrate, which may consequently enhance glucose management.

Traditionally recognized as mental illnesses, eating disorders are increasingly appreciated to be biologically-driven. There is a growing body of literature that implicates a role of the gut microbiota in the etiology and progression of these conditions. Gut bacteria may act on the gut–brain axis to alter appetite control and brain function as part of the genesis of eating disorders. As the illnesses progress, extreme feeding patterns and psychological stress potentially feed back to the gut ecosystem that can further compromise physiological, cognitive, and social functioning. Given the established causality between dysbiosis and metabolic diseases, an altered gut microbial profile is likely to play a role in the co-morbidities of eating disorders with altered immune function, short-chain fatty acid production, and the gut barrier being the key mechanistic links. Understanding the role of the gut ecosystem in the pathophysiology of eating disorders will provide critical insights into improving current treatments and developing novel microbiome-based interventions that will benefit patients with eating disorders.

Shifts in the gastrointestinal microbiome have been shown to contribute to the progression of metabolic diseases including prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Research suggests that in-vivo modulation of the gut microbiome by specific probiotic microorganisms may improve insulin sensitivity and blood sugar management, preventing or delaying the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, further research is needed to understand the effect of probiotics as a therapy for the treatment of metabolic diseases. An evidence-based multi-species probiotic was developed to encourage a shift in the gastrointestinal bacterial cohort from a disease-prone to a balanced state with the aim of improving metabolic markers associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Sixty adults with a body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes mellitus (diagnosed within the previous 12 months) will be enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study. Participants will be randomized to a multi-species probiotic or placebo for 12 weeks. Both groups will receive lifestyle and nutritional advice. The primary outcome measure is the change between groups in fasting plasma glucose levels from baseline to 12 weeks. Secondary outcome measures include, but are not limited to, the change in lipid profile, systemic inflammation, gut permeability, and faecal microbial and metabolomic profiles. Blood and stool samples are collected at baseline and 12 weeks after treatment. Intentional manipulation of gastrointestinal microbial profiles may be useful for preventing and controlling type 2 diabetes mellitus and its associated metabolic complications. Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12613001378718 . Registered on 16 December 2013.

Background: Data sharing improves the value, synthesis, and integrity of research, but rates are low. Data sharing might be improved if data sharing policies were prominent and actionable at every stage of research. We aimed to systematically describe the epidemiology of data sharing policies across the health research lifecycle.Methods: This was a cross‐sectional analysis of the data sharing policies of the largest health research funders, all national ethics committees, all clinical trial registries, the highest‐impact medical journals, and all medical research data repositories. Stakeholders' official websites, online reports, and other records were reviewed up to May 2022. The strength and characteristics of their data sharing policies were assessed, including their policies on data sharing intention statements (a.k.a. data accessibility statements) and on data sharing specifically for coronavirus disease studies. Data were manually extracted in duplicate, and policies were descriptively analysed by their stakeholder and characteristics.Results: Nine hundred and thirty‐five eligible stakeholders were identified: 110 funders, 124 ethics committees, 18 trial registries, 273 journals, and 410 data repositories. Data sharing was required by 41% (45/110) of funders, no ethics committees or trial registries, 19% (52/273) of journals and 6% (24/410) of data repositories. Among funder types, a higher proportion of private (63%, 35/55) and philanthropic (67%, 4/6) funders required data sharing than public funders (12%, 6/49).Conclusion: Data sharing requirements, and even recommendations, were insufficient across health research. Where data sharing was required or recommended, there was limited guidance on implementation. We describe multiple pathways to improve the implementation of data sharing. Public funders and ethics committees are two stakeholders with particularly important untapped opportunities.