ABSTRACT
Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) regulate inflammation, which is associated with their role in preventing neurodegenerative diseases in epidemiological studies. It has sparked interest in their unconventional application for reducing neuroinflammation, opening up new avenues in biomedical research. However, given the pharmacological drawbacks of NSAIDs, the development of formulations with naturally antioxidant/anti-inflammatory dietary fatty acids has been demonstrated to be advantageous for the clinical translation of anti-inflammatory-based therapies. It includes improved blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability and reduced toxicity. It permits us to speculate about the value of linoleic acid (LA)-isomers in preventing and treating neuroinflammatory diseases compared to NSAIDs. Our research delved into the impact of various factors, such as administration route, dosage, timing of intervention, and BBB permeability, on the efficacy of NSAIDs and LA-isomers in preclinical and clinical settings. We conducted a systematic comparison between NSAIDs and LA-isomers regarding their therapeutic effectiveness, BBB compatibility, and side effects. Additionally, we explored their underlying mechanisms in addressing neuroinflammation. Through our analysis, we've identified challenges and drawn conclusions that could propel advancements in treating neurodegenerative diseases and inform the development of future alternative therapeutic strategies.
ABSTRACT
Despite evidence of health benefits from kefir administration, a systematic review with meta-analysis on bioactive compounds associated with these benefits is still absent in the literature. Kefir is fermented milk resulting from the metabolism of a complex microbiota in symbiosis. Recent researches have investigated the bioactive compounds responsible for the preventive and therapeutic effects attributed to kefir. However, differences in functional potential between industrial and artisanal kefir are still controversial. Firstly, we identified differences in the microbial composition among both types of kefir. Available evidence concerning the action of different bioactive compounds from kefir on health, both from in vitro and in vivo studies, was subsequently summarized to draw a primary conclusion of the dose and the intervention time for effect, the producer microorganisms, the precursor in the milk, and the action mechanism. Meta-analysis was performed to investigate the statistically significant differences (P < 0.05) between intervention and control and between both types of kefir for each health effect studied. In summary, the bioactive compounds more commonly reported were exopolysaccharides, including kefiran, bioactive peptides, and organic acids, especially lactic acid. Kefir bioactive compounds presented antimicrobial, anticancer, and immune-modulatory activities corroborated by the meta-analysis. However, clinical evidence is urgently needed to strengthen the practical applicability of these bioactive compounds. The mechanisms of their action were diverse, indicating that they can act by different signaling pathways. Still, industrial and artisanal kefir may differ regarding functional potential-OR of 8.56 (95% CI: 2.27-32.21, P ≤ .001)-according to the observed health effect, which can be associated with differences in the microbial composition between both types of kefir.
