ВЛИЯНИЕ ПРОБИОТИКОВ НА ПРОЯВЛЕНИЕ СИМПТОМОВ

21
579.61:616.5-002.2:616.858-008.6
1
CBRB
.1,
2
.,
.,
.3,
.1,
.4
1
.
.
.
,
2
,
3
.
4
,
,
» - http://www.famous-scientists.ru
CBRB
(
),
)
(
,
,
).
Staphylococcus aureus
,
,
-
L. sbsp. lactis
.
B. subtilis 604
194
)
(
,
.
.
:
,
,
,
,
,
-
.
(
–
,
.1 ),
,
,-
-
,
(SSSS
[1].
)
:
(
[2].
,
,
–
,
[3].
,
,
CBRB-Rb(8.17)1Iem ( CBRB [4-6]),
-
16
:
,
,
-
. 1 ).
CBRB
Staphylococcus aureus.
,
COK
CBRB.
CBRB
,
( ),
,
3, 2009
-
.
22
-
,
,
,
.
.
,
-
,
,
S. ureus.
Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG,
Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis
Propionibacterium freudenreichii subsp. shermanii
39-44%
(
CBRB-Rb(8,17)1Iem (
CBRB)
18±0.5
.
. 1),
S. aureus.
-
-
1.
,
).
,
,
-
24% [7, 8].
L. lactis,
-
,
,
S. aureus (S6 and
243).
12
Lactococcus
[9].
sp. HY 449
,
)
,
[7].
Bacillus subtilis
-
.
.
,
,
B. subtilis,
( )
.
-
BS)
,
37
24
.
5
.
13±0.7
. LL (
20-
.
1-2
[8]
L. lactis,
1 –
)
194
.
;2–
: 0- , 1-
(
,
: 1-
BS
3 –
2
; 2-
(
LL
; 3-
-
,
,
1.2)
LL
1.0)
)
(
-
3-
(0.2
(0.0.
[10-12].
604
-
, , D, F;
.
CBRB
(n=22,
BS
,
107
)
(n=22,
,
); 4 –
:
(
: 0-
, 1,
. 1 ), 2, 3( . 1 );
,
,
:
,
-
3, 2009
23
(0-
, 1-
,
); 5 –
, 2-
,
.
, .
37
48
-
.
(
10
.
-
)
-
10 %-
.
37
24 .
-
;
,
-
0,2
t1.
.
(
)
(
)
0- 2
0
, n=22
1
BS
0
0.0, n=14
0.2, n=13
1.0, n=12
1.2, n=12
16,
n=22
3- 4
,
LL
BS
0
BS
0 16
LL
-
16
c. 1.
-
;
CBRB.
-
-
,
.
(
.2 ,
30, p<0.05).
-
B. subtilis
.
,
16, p<0.05).
BS
-
B. subtilis
,
(
. 1).
16, p<0.05).
BS
(
,
BS (
,
-
30-
.
-
.2 ,
,
(
3, 2009
. 2 ).
-
24
B. subtilis (
,
,
.
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
p<0.05
p<0.05
0
5
,
10
15
20
25
).
.
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
30
p<0.0
5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
2
700
,
600
26.5
26
500
25.5
400
25
300
24.5
24
200
23.5
100
23
0
0
5
10
15
c. 2.
0 16
–
20
25
30
,
22.5
B. subtilis (
- .
)-
;
;
-
;
-
.
BS
LL
,
(
. 2 ).
-
.
,
19/22=86%
, 21/22= 95%
.
,
-
BS,
(
,
-
2
)
16-
:
,
LL
.
.
,
-
BS
,
,
.
-
.
,
3, 2009
25
30
(
.
<0.001).
(
,
. 3 ,
LL
).
BS,
,
LL
. 3 , <0.05).
BS
-
,
LL.
BS
(
BS
LL
1,4
23
.
20
1,2
,
.
,
0,7
0,5
. 3 ).
-
0,8
0,6
,
1
20
23
30
30
0,8
0,4
0,6
0,3
0,4
0,2
0,2
0,1
0
0
LL
,
700
BS
20
2
LL
BS+LL
23
30
,
27.0
BS
20
23
BS+LL
30
600
26.0
500
400
25.0
300
24.0
200
23.0
100
LL
BS
LL
BS+LL
c. 3.
B. subtilis (BS)
20 –
, 23 –
30 –
BS
BS+LL
L. lactis (LL)
.
–
;
–
;
–
,
;
–
-
:
,
BS.
-
BS
LL (
.3 ,
30, <0.05).
-
,
3, 2009
26
,
.
,
CBRB
,
BS
LL
.3 ).
,
,
,
-
BS,
.
.
LL
BS (
. 3 ).
.
-
BS
LL
.
-
,
(n=2),
(10 10
2.
2
).
.
,
,
,
lg
2
lg
0
3.48
0
0
LL
BS
BS+LL
0
1.44
1
1
,
,
[13, 14]
LL,
,
-
,
.
[15],
S. ureus
.
,
(
3.48 lg
,
80%
)
(
2).
-
ureus
.
-
20%
S.
S. ureus
,
.
CBRB
LL.
-
.
,
BS,
CBRB
-
,
,
.
,
lg
-
,
LL,
2
,
1.44
,
,
(p<0.05).
,
.
,
-
,
3, 2009
27
,
,
,
-
,
.
B. subtilis
L.
-
lactis
.
,
-
:
1.
,
.
2.
BS
,
LL
.
3.
-
,
.
4.
BS
LL
S. aureus
.
:
1. Van den Broek P.J. //Ned Tijdschr
Geneeskd. 2003. 147. (22).1045-1048.
2. Mockenhaupt M., Idzko M., Grosber
M., Schopf E., Norgauer J. // J Invest
Dermatol. 2005. 124. (4). 700-703.
3. Patel G.K., Finlay A.Y. // Am J Clin
Dermatol. 2003. 4 (3). 165-175.
4. Moiseeva E.V., Farber S.M., Lomova L.V., Nikonenko B.V., Klepikov N.N.
// Lab Animals (Balt Lab Anim Sci). 1991.
(1). 24-27.
5. The Mouse Tumour Biology Database. 1999. http://www.informatics.jax.org/
external/festing/mouse/docs/CBRB.shtml
6. Moiseeva E. 2005. Original approaches to test anti-breast cancer drugs in a
novel set of mouse models. Pathobiology,
Utrecht University, The Netherlands 191 pp,
http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/
dissertations/2005-1130-200033/index.htm
7. Oh S., Kim S.H., Ko Y., Sim J.H.,
Kim K.S., Lee S.H., Park S., Kim Y.J. // Food
Chem Toxicol. 2006. 44 (8). 1184-1190.
8. Vesterlund S., Karp M., Salminen
S., Ouwehand A.C. / /Microbiology. 2006.
152 (6). 1819-1826.
9. Hurst A., Kruse H. // Antimicrobial
agents and chemotherapy. 1972. 1 (3). 277279.
10. Spinosa MR., Braccini T., Ricca
E., De Felice M., Morelli L., Pozzi G.,
Oggioni M.// Res Microbiol. 2000. 151 (5).
361-368.
11. Sorokulova I.B., Pinchuk I.V.,
Denayrolles M., Osipova I.G., Huang J.M.,
Cutting S.M., Urdaci M.C. // Dig Dis Sci.
2008. 53 (4). 954-963.
12. Tompkins T.A., Hagen K.E.,
Wallace T.D., Fillion-Forte V. // Can J
Microbiol. 2008. 54 (5). 391-400.
13. Won Y.S., Kwon H.J., Oh G.T.,
Kim B.H., Lee C.H., Park Y.H., Hyun B.H.,
Choi Y.K. // Microbiol Immunol. 2002. 46
(9). 629-632.
14. Akimoto T., Kawasumi K., Amao
H., Nakama K., Takeuchi Y .// Jikken
Dobutsu. 1994. 43 (1). 85-93.
15. Masenga J., Garbe C., Wagner J.,
Orfanos C.E. // Int J Dermatol. 1990. 29 (8).
579-582.
3, 2009
28
EFFECT OF PROBIOTICS ON SYMPTOMS OF CHRONIC DERMATITIS AND
PARKINSON’S DESEASE IN AGING CBRB MOUSE FEMALES
Moiseeva E.V.1, Nefedova N.V.2, Semushina S.G.1, Kessler Yu.V.1, Stoyanova L.G.3,
Litvin A.A.4
1
Shemiakin-Ovchinnikov Insitute of Bioorganic chemistry, RAS, Moscow, Russia
2
Moscow State University of applied biotechnology, Moscow, Russia
3
Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia
4
National Research Company, Moscow, Russia
Aging CBRB mouse females in conventional conditions mimic both localized (impetigo)
and generalized (staphylococcal scaled-skin syndrome, SSSS) forms of chronic dermatitis in
humans. Later in lifespan mice develop symptoms of human Parkinson’s disease (PD), namely,
rigidity, dyskinesia, and tremor. Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci
were recognized to cause dermatitis both in rodents and humans. Probiotic cultures were found
to inhibit growth of staphylococci. Using this biomodel, we detected synergistic therapeutic effect of B. subtilis 604 spores (BS) and L. sbsp. lactis 194 culture (LL) on symptoms of dermatitis during four weeks while BS alone showed weak efficacy, and LL alone was hardly efficient. Tested probiotics diminished amount of staphylococci in blood and on the skin of treated
mice, but did not influence signs of PD.
Key words: mouse model, dermatitis, impetigo, staphylococcal scaled-skin syndrome,
probiotic, Parkinson’s disease.
3, 2009