SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Gut Microbiota: A Novel Therapeutic Target for Parkinson's Disease.

Front Immunol · 2022-06-24

DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2022.937555PMID: 35812394

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; review-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Parkinson's disease (PD) is the second most common neurodegenerative disease characterized by motor dysfunction. Growing evidence has demonstrated that gut dysbiosis is involved in the occurrence, development and progression of PD. Numerous clinical trials have identified the characteristics of the changed gut microbiota profiles, and preclinical studies in PD animal models have indicated that gut dysbiosis can influence the progression and onset of PD via increasing intestinal permeability, aggravating neuroinflammation, aggregating abnormal levels of α-synuclein fibrils, increasing oxidative stress, and decreasing neurotransmitter production. The gut microbiota can be considered promising diagnostic and therapeutic targets for PD, which can be regulated by probiotics, psychobiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics, postbiotics, fecal microbiota transplantation, diet modifications, and Chinese medicine. This review summarizes the recent studies in PD-associated gut microbiota profiles and functions, the potential roles, and mechanisms of gut microbiota in PD, and gut microbiota-targeted interventions for PD. Deciphering the underlying roles and mechanisms of the PD-associated gut microbiota will help interpret the pathogenesis of PD from new perspectives and elucidate novel therapeutic strategies for PD.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.