Abstract:Objective To study the effect of Lactobacillus paracasei N1115 on serum lipid and gut microbiota of dyslipidemias. And to explore the health effect of Lactobacillus paracasei N1115 on other aspect. Methods This is a randomized single‐blinded placebo‐controlled human intervention study. It has been approved by Biomedical ethics committee of Peking university, and the file number is IRB00001052‐14069. Dyslipidemias are recruited as subjects, and administered with Lactobacillus paracasei N1115 for 12 weeks. Blood sample and fecal sample was collected. Height, weight, body fat percentage, and bone mineral density was measured. Special questionnaire was designed to collect the information about the socioeconomics, diet, gastrointestinal function and sleep quality. By detecting the serum lipid, gut microbiota, gastrointestinal function, bone mineral density, body fat percentage and sleep quality, we can analyze the effect Lactobacillus paracasei N1115 has on the dyslipidemias' health. Data analysis method includes repeated measures analysis of variance, paired t test and rank correlated Wilcoxon test. Results TC concentration in serum increased 0.09 mmol/L in placebo group, but decreased 0.13 mmol/L in probiotics group through the intervention. Significant difference was found on TC between groups after intervention. LDL‐C concentration in serum increased 0.02 mmol/L in placebo group, but decreased 0.14mmol/L in probiotics group through the intervention. Significant difference was found on LDL‐C between groups after intervention, also on the change between groups with RMANOVA analyzed. FPG decreased 0.41 mmol/L in probiotics group significantly, but didn't in placebo group. Apo‐A1 decreased significantly in both groups, but no significant difference was found between groups. The relative abundance of Alistipes spp. and Fusobacterium spp. decreased significantly, and the relative abundance of Faecalibacterium spp. and Lactobacillus spp. increased significantly in placebo group. The relative abundance of Megamonas spp. Faecalibacterium spp. and Lactobacillus spp. increased significantly, the relative abundance of Bacteroides spp. and Phascolarctobacterium spp. decreased significantly in probiotics group. The Shannon index of gut microbiota decreased significantly from 2.335 to 2.158 in placebo group. The Chao1 index (117.015→131.164), Shannon index (2.293→2.469) of gut microbiota increased significantly, Simpson index (0.214→0.165) decreased significantly in probiotics group. Trunk fat mass decreased significantly in probiotics group (P=0.005), but didn't in placebo group. BMI, body fat percentage, bady fat mass, trunk fat percentage decreased significantly in both groups, but no significant difference was found between groups. Conclusion Lactobacillus paracasei N1115 can decrease LDL‐C level. It can increase the relative abundance of Megamonas spp., decrease that of Bacteroides spp. and Phascolarctobacterium spp. of dyslipidemias. It can significantly increase the abundance and diversity of gut microbiota of dyslipidemias. Support or Funding Information The study was designed by Professor. Yumei Zhang, and carried out by all the authors. The article was mainly written by Shengjie Tan, and assisted by Yingdong Zheng on biostatistics. Basic information and life style Basic information and life style Placebo Probiotics P Sex 0.951 a Male 12 (26.0) 12 (26.0) Female 35 (74.0) 34 (74.0) Age 56.3 ± 5.3 55.9 ± 5.4 0.671 b BMI 25.7 ± 3.5 25.3 ± 3.3 0.584 b Smoke 0.793 a Yes 8 (19.0) 10 (22.7) No 34 (81.0) 34 (77.3) Alcohol use 0.138 a Never 30 (73.2) 23 (52.3) Ever but not now 2 (4.9) 4 (9.1) Now 9 (22.0) 17 (38.6) Chi‐square test; Independent sample T test Change of blood lipid indicator Change of blood lipid indicators before and after intervention (χ̄±SD) Blood lipid indicator Placebo (n=47) Probiotics (n=46) Intervention Effects week 0 week 12 Change P a week 0 week 12 Change P a P b TC (mmol/L) 5.84 ± 0.78 5.93 ± 0.98 0.09 0.409 5.67 ± 0.63 5.55 ± 0.81 −0.13 0.244 0.068 TG (mmol/L) 1.92 ± 0.98 2.11 ± 1.74 0.20 0.312 1.92 ± 1.47 2.23 ± 2.37 0.31 0.171 0.846 HDL‐C (mmol/L) 1.35 ± 0.33 1.38 ± 0.37 0.03 0.240 1.36 ± 0.38 1.36 ±0.40 0.00 0.856 0.906 LDL‐C (mmol/L) 3.78 ± 0.72 3.81 ± 0.81 0.02 0.823 3.58 ± 0.58 3.44 ± 0.76 −0.14 0.155 0.034 Apo‐A1 (g/L) 1.72 ± 0.30 1.64 ± 0.30 −0.08 0.027 1.71 ± 0.39 1.63 ± 0.28 −0.08 0.031 0.854 Apo‐B (g/L) 1.14 ± 0.19 1.14 ± 0.18 0.00 0.979 1.10 ± 0.19 1.06 ± 0.20 −0.04 0.213 0.082 FPG (mmol/L) 5.59 ± 0.98 5.48 ± 2.35 −0.10 0.674 5.64 ± 1.58 5.23 ± 1.95 −0.41 0.001 0.769 TC:HDL‐C 4.53 ± 1.08 4.52 ± 1.14 −0.01 0.930 4.50 ± 1.43 4.40 ± 1.50 −0.11 0.409 0.777 LDL‐C:HDL‐C 2.94 ± 0.84 2.90 ± 0.85 −0.04 0.742 2.84 ± 0.93 2.69 ± 0.83 −0.16 0.099 0.343 AI 3.53 ± 1.08 3.52 ± 1.14 −0.01 0.930 3.50 ± 1.43 3.40 ± 1.50 −0.11 0.409 0.777 Difference between week 0 and week 12 by paired‐sample T test; Repeated measurement data analysis of variance Change of gut microbiota relative abundance at genus level Change of gut microbiota relative abundance at genus level [M(P 25 –P 75 )] Relative abundance week 0 week 12 Placebo Probiotics Placebo Probiotics Alistipes 0.68 (0.32–3.00) 0.92 (0.23–1.18) 0.43 (0.6–1.07) ** 0.74 (0.41–1.38) Bacteroides 27.57 (15.14–41.71) 31.68 (16.89–45.77) 23.10 (13.68–34.75) 17.55 (10.92–27.18) * Bifidobacteriuui 0.45 (0.18–2.16) 1.16 (0.30–1.89) 0.49 (0.23–0.94) 0.49 (0.27–1.30) Dialister 0.08 (0.06–0.57) 0.08 (0.05–0.72) 0.16 (0.06–0.56) 0.17 (0.11–0.94) Escherichia‐Shigella 0.13 (0.08–0.76) 0.20 (0.07–0.35) 0.16 (0.09–0.60) 0.24 (0.12–0.37) Faecalibacterium 9.43 (5.39–16.91) 10.42 (5.91–16.70) 24.58 (14.36–36.47) ** 20.49 (10.94–29.09) ** Fusobacterium 0.10 (0.06–0.79) 0.05 (0.02–0.08) 0.03 (0.01–0.07) ** 0.08 (0.03–0.24) Lachnospira 1.79 (0.81–4.71) 2.95 (1.65–4.59) 1.71 (0.59–4.46) 2.80 (1.63–4.44) Lactobacillus 0.11 (0.02–0.32) 0.13 (0.08–0.22) 0.47 (0.25–0.81) ** 0.56 (0.31–0.81) ** Megamonas 0.10 (0.07–0.33) 0.12 (0.08–0.23) 0.10 (0.07–0.18) 0.24 (0.13–1.95) ** Oscillibacter 0.40 (0.17–1.43) 0.25 (0.12–0.49) 0.33 (0.25–0.79) 0.38 (0.24–0.80) Parabacteroides 0.80 (0.53–1.61) 1.06 (0.58–1.24) 0.94 (0.43–1.54) 0.93 (0.68–1.17) Parasutterella 0.27 (0.11–1.42) 0.78 (0.09–1.82) 0.19 (0.09–0.80) 0.23 (0.11–0.69) Phascolarctobacterim 0.80 (0.22–2.05) 1.64 (0.50–2.27) 0.84 (0.34–1.83) 0.65 (0.17–1.15) * Prevotella 1.47 (1.17–5.19) 1.34 (0.71–2.41) 1.08 (0.71–3.69) 2.54 (1.28–18.25) Pseudobutyrivibrio 1.34 (0.38–2.34) 1.40 (0.78–3.37) 0.92 (0.37–1.91) 1.45 (1.01–2.75) Roseburia 0.53 (0.19–1.13) 0.63 (0.30–0.91) 0.42 (0.18–0.98) 0.51 (0.29–0.80) Ruminococcus 1.17 (0.81–3.87) 2.23 (0.99–3.73) 1.44 (0.81–3.18) 2.02 (1.21–4.10) Subdoligranulum 0.51 (0.18–1.03) 0.66 (0.23–1.56) 0.41 (0.18–0.74) 0.80 (0.26–1.28) Difference between week 0 and week 12 by non‐parameters Wilcoxon symbols test; P <0.05; P <0.01 Change of gut microbiota diversity Change of gut microbiota diversity group week Abundance Index Diversity Index ACE Chaol Shannon Simpson Placebo (n=25) 0 137.208 a 123.729 a 2.335 a 0.196 a 6 142.970 a 129.159 a 2.333 a 0.195 a 12 138.090 a 129.956 a 2.158 b 0.228 a Probiotics(n=20) 0 129.620 a 117.015 b 2.293 b 0.214 a 6 136.046 a 127.988 ab 2.421 ab 0.179 ab 12 137.368 a 131.164 a 2.469 a 0.165 b In same group, different letter (a, b) means the significant difference. ( P< .0.05)

Efficacy of Probiotic Milk Formula on Blood Lipid and Intestinal Function in Mild Hypercholesterolemic Volunteers: A Placebo-control, Randomized Clinical Trial

Meta-analysis of the Effects of Probiotics on Hyperlipidemia

The Protective Effects of Probiotic-Fermented Soymilk on High-Fat Diet-Induced Hyperlipidemia

Probiotics combined with atorvastatin administration in the treatment of hyperlipidemia: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

Effect of Lactobacillus fermentum MCC2760-Based Probiotic Curd on Hypercholesterolemic C57BL6 Mice

Lactobacillus Casei-Fermented Milk Improves Serum and Hepatic Lipid Profiles in Diet-Induced Hypercholesterolaemic Hamsters

Effects of Lactobacillus Paracasei N1115 on Dyslipidaemia: A Randomized Controlled Study

Effect of Probiotics Bacillus coagulans and Lactobacillus plantarum on Lipid Profile and Feces Bacteria of Rats Fed Cholesterol-Enriched Diet

A double-blind placebo-controlled study of the effects of Lactobacillus acidophilus on plasma lipids

The Protective Effects of Probiotic-Fermented Soymilk on High-Fat Diet-Induced Hyperlipidemia and Liver Injury

Effects of Lactobacillus paracasei N1115 on intestinal microbiota and serum lipid of dyslipidemias

Development and properties evaluation of multi-strain probiotic with cholesterol-lowering potential in vitro

Effects of probiotic supplementation on serum trimethylamine-N-oxide level and gut microbiota composition in young males: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial

Lactiplantibacillus plantarum strains KABP011, KABP012 and KABP013 modulate bile acids and cholesterol metabolism in humans

Effects of probiotic bacteria, isoflavones and simvastatin on lipid profile and atherosclerosis in cholesterol-fed rabbits: a randomized double-blind study

Cholesterol-Lowering Ability in Vitro and Hypolipidemic Effect in Vivo of Three Probiotic Strains

Evaluation of the Decreased Cholesterol Potential of Levilactobacillus brevis M-10 Isolated from Spontaneously Fermented Sour Porridge in Mice with High-Cholesterol Levels

Study on Intestinal Survival and Cholesterol Metabolism of Probiotics

Safety assessment of potential probiotic Lactobacillus acidophilus AM13-1 with high cholesterol-lowering capability isolated from human gut

Effect of Lactobacillus rhamnosus hsryfm 1301 Fermented Milk on Lipid Metabolism Disorders in High-Fat-Diet Rats

Lipid-lowering and antioxidant properties of probiotic Bifidobacterium animalis MSMC83 in rats on a high-fat diet