Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease

ISSN: (Print) 1651-2235 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/zmeh20

The non-pathogenic Escherichia coli strain Nissle

1917 – features of a versatile probiotic

Ulrich Sonnenborn & Jürgen Schulze

To cite this article: Ulrich Sonnenborn & Jürgen Schulze (2009) The non-pathogenic Escherichia
coli strain Nissle 1917 – features of a versatile probiotic, Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease,
21:3-4, 122-158, DOI: 10.3109/08910600903444267

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.3109/08910600903444267

© Informa UK Ltd

Published online: 26 Dec 2009.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1003

View related articles

Citing articles: 1 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=zmeh20

Download by: [201.75.65.196] Date: 25 December 2017, At: 11:37

 Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease. 2009; 21: 122–158

REVIEW ARTICLE

The non-pathogenic Escherichia coli strain Nissle 1917 – features

of a versatile probiotic

ULRICH SONNENBORN1 & JÜRGEN SCHULZE2∗

1Department of Biological Research and 2Department of Medicine, Ardeypharm GmbH, Herdecke, Germany

Abstract
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

Probiotics are non-pathogenic living microorganisms which, when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit
on the host. Probiotic microorganisms most often are constituents of special foodstuffs, such as fermented milk products or
food supplements. They are also employed as feed additives in livestock breeding and as active components of medical rem-
edies in human and veterinary medicine. In the food industry, probiotics traditionally are lactic acid bacteria (LAB), especially
lactobacilli and lactococci, although bifidobacteria and strepcococci (enterococci) are also used. In livestock breeding and
medicine, besides lactic acid bacteria other non-pathogenic microorganisms with health-promoting characteristics, e.g. certain
strains of yeast (‘Saccharomyces boulardii’) and Escherichia coli (E. coli Nissle 1917), are also applied. This review focuses on
the probiotic E. coli strain Nissle 1917 (EcN), its origin and medical history, microbiology, genetics, biological activities, safety,
and toxicological aspects. Furthermore, clinical trials performed with this special E. coli strain will be summarized. The EcN
strain was detected and isolated by Alfred Nissle in 1917 because of its antagonistic activity against some pathogenic entero-
bacteria. With respect to its metabolic capacities, EcN is a typical E. coli strain. It is a non-pathogenic member of the Escherichia
coli family, because it does does not carry pathogenic adhesion factors and does not produce any enterotoxins or cytotoxins,
it is not invasive, not uropathogenic, and is rapidly killed by non-specific defense factors of blood serum. Besides this, EcN
has some special characteristics that distinguish it from other pathogenic and non-pathogenic E. coli strains and are thought
to be important for its probiotic activities. Thus, EcN carries so-called genomic islands (GEIs), integrated into its chromo-
some. On these GEIs, gene clusters coding for several fitness factors are present, e.g. genes for the production of microcins
which inhibit the growth of other enterobacteria. Another strain-specific feature of EcN is a special lipopolysaccharide (LPS)
in its outer cell membrane, being responsible for the fact that EcN exhibits immunomodulating properties without showing
immunotoxic effects. The immunomodulating properties mainly focus on anti-inflammatory activities that are important for
the clinical efficacy in remission maintenance of ulcerative colitis. Also of importance is the bacterial–epithelial crosstalk
between EcN and the intestinal epithelial cells, leading to a strengthening of the epithelial barrier and the curing of ‘leaky gut’
phenomena. The restoration of a disturbed gut barrier by EcN is thought to be due to the stimulation of epithelial defensin
production as well as to a ‘sealing effect’ on the tight junctions of the enterocytes. EcN has also been shown to induce the
development of the gut immune system in animal models and human newborns. In addition, it has been found that products
of EcN metabolism, probably acetic acid, promote colonic motility that might be helpful for therapeutic application in
chronically constipated patients. Randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have shown EcN to be therapeutically effective
in rather diverse indications, such as ulcerative colitis, chronic constipation, and acute and protracted diarrhea.

Key words: EcN, medical history, microbiology, genetics, biological activities, safety, toxicological aspects, clinical trials

Introduction fulfill a wide array of beneficial tasks for the host,

Microbial ecology of the gut
The intestinal ecosystem has been described as ‘a
precarious alliance among epithelium, immunity
and microbiota’ (1) and, under normal condi-
tions, the commensal microorganisms indeed
including protection from pathogenic microorgan-
isms and modulatory effects on the development
and functions of the gastrointestinal tract and the
gut immune system (2–7). Important functions of
the indigenous intestinal microbiota are given in
Table I.

∗Presentaddress: Alice-Bloch-Str. 7, D-14558 Nuthetal, Germany. E-mail: JuR.Schulze@t-online.de

Correspondence: Dr Ulrich Sonnenborn, Department of Biological Research, Ardeypharm GmbH, Loerfeldstr. 20, D-58313 Herdecke, Germany.
Fax: +49 2330 977697. E-mail: sonnenborn@ardeypharm.de
(Received 2 September 2009; accepted 22 October 2009)
ISSN 0891-060X print/ISSN 1651-2235 online © 2009 Informa UK Ltd. (Informa Healthcare, Taylor & Francis AS)
DOI: 10.3109/08910600903444267

Table I. Important functions of the intestinal microbiota.
Barrier function (‘colonization resistance’)
Modulation of the local immune system (GALT)
Intraluminal metabolism
Support of energy metabolism and stimulation of blood flow of
the colonic mucosa
Stimulation of gut motility
Preparation and maintenance of the specific colonic milieu
Adjustment of bacterial translocation
Support of vitamin supply
GALT, gut-associated lymphoid tissue.
A breakdown of the microecological balance in
the gut may be caused by different exogenous and
endogenous factors and will result in changes of
composition, numbers, and activities of indigenous
microbial communities. This may be followed by
destruction of the physiological barriers of the body,
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 123
pathogens (14–18) has led to the renaissance of a
therapeutic concept from the pre-antibiotic era: the
prevention or treatment of specific diseases with liv-
ing non-pathogenic microorganisms, i.e. probiotics.
In recent years our knowledge concerning the regu-
latory processes within the gut ecosystem in health
and disease has grown enormously (1,3–5,7,13,19).
The knowledge of particular characteristics and
activities of members of the indigenous intestinal
microbiota and their interactions with the host is
fundamental to the application of living microor-
ganisms as health-promoting or therapeutic agents
(12,19–25).
The term ‘probiotics’ – development of definitions
Today, probiotics are defined as non-pathogenic liv-
ing microorganisms which, when administered in

enhanced epithelial irritation, inflammation and per- adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the
meability, and bad consequences for the health of the host. This definition was coined by an expert com-
host organism (1,3,8–13). Intestinal dysfunctions mittee of a joint FAO/WHO meeting on probiotics
and diseases that are associated with or caused by in 2001 (26). The word ‘probiotic’ has been derived
disturbances of the indigenous microbiota are sum- from the Greek language and can roughly be trans-
marized in Table II. lated into ‘for life’. According to Vergin (1954) (27),
For a long period of time, roughly for the second in Germany the term ‘Probiotika’ was originally
half of the last century, the use of antibiotics has coined by the physician and dietician Werner Kollath
generally been recommended in human medicine shortly after the Second World War, meaning ‘food
for changing an unwelcome microbial colonization ingredients with health-promoting characteristics
of distinct sites of the body, i.e. in cases of diseases beyond their nutritional value’. Later and indepen-
caused by infectious microorganisms. However, dently, the term ‘probiotic’ was introduced into the
the increasing recognition of adverse effects and the international literature by Lilly and Stillwell (1965)
development and spread of resistance to a (28), saying that a probiotic is a microbial substance
wide range of antibiotics by a growing number of that is produced by one microorganism and has a
growth-promoting effect on another microorganism,
Table II. Gastrointestinal diseases associated with disturbances of
the intestinal microbiota.
thus being the exact opposite of an antibiotic. How-
ever, this definition did not gain wide acceptance and
Diseases Examples failed to survive. Since that time, the meaning of the
Infectious diseases Cholera, salmonellosis, term ‘probiotic’ has changed considerably. Parker
shigellosis, infections by (1974) (29) was the first to use the word ‘probiotic’
Campylobacter, pathogenic in a sense that is very similar to today’s use. He
E. coli (ETEC, EPEC, adopted the term to describe ‘organisms and sub-
EHEC, etc.)
Functional diseases Irritable bowel syndrome
stances which contribute to intestinal microbial bal-
(IBS), non-ulcer dyspepsia, ance’. This definition associated the use of probiotics
habitual constipation with an effect on gut microecology. Since Parker’s
Inflammatory bowel diseases Ulcerative colitis, Crohn’s definition would also include antibiotics (‘sub-
(IBD) disease, collagenous colitis, stances’), Fuller in 1989 redefined a probiotic as
Whipple’s disease
Diseases associated with Diverticulosis (cave:
‘a live microbial feed supplement which beneficially
morphological or anatomical diverticulitis), strictures, affects the host animal by improving its intestinal
changes blind loops, carcinoma microbial balance’ (30). In 1995, a workshop hosted
Diseases caused by Celiac disease, food allergy by the Lactic Acid Bacteria Industrial Platform
immunological disturbances (LABIP) and sponsored by the European Community
Iatrogenic diseases Diarrhea/functional diseases
after treatment with
issued a consensus definition of the term probiotics,
antibiotics, chemotherapeutic saying ‘oral probiotics are living micro-organisms,
agents or radiation which upon ingestion in certain numbers, exert
ETEC, enterotoxigenic E. coli; EPEC, enteropathogenic E. coli;
health benefits beyond inherent basic nutrition’ (31).
EHEC, enterohemorrhagic E. coli. Accordingly, probiotics may be either consumed as
 124 U. Sonnenborn et al.
food components or applied as non-food prepara-
tions. The latest definition of the FAO/WHO expert
committee (see above) broadened the meaning by
omitting the relation to solely oral administration
and intestinal effects as well as to nutrition. Accord-
ing to this definition, also microbial preparations for
medical use and for extraintestinal, e.g. vaginal,
applications can be termed probiotics, provided that
they contain living microorganisms and confer a
health benefit on the host. For microorganisms with
specific therapeutic properties the term ‘biothera-
peutic agent’ (instead of probiotic) has been pro-
posed by McFarland and colleagues (32,33). This
may be helpful to differentiate between food and feed
probiotics and pharmaceutical probiotics, but has
not gained broader acceptance in the scientific and
medical literature, mainly because this term is close
to the terms ‘biologicals’ or ‘biological agents’, which
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
in livestock breeding and as active components of
medical remedies in human and veterinary medicine
[19,38–42]. Usually, especially in the food industry,
probiotics mostly are lactic acid bacteria (LAB),
such as lactobacilli, lactococci, bifidobacteria, and
streptococci (enterococci) (43). However, other non-
pathogenic microorganisms, e.g. certain yeast strains
(‘Saccharomyces boulardii’) and Escherichia coli strains,
like E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN), are also used, not in
food processing, but rather in human and veterinary
medicine (19,21,33,44–47).
Origin and medical history of E. coli strain
Nissle 1917
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 (EcN) is the active compo-
nent of the pharmaceutical preparation Mutaflor®,
a microbial drug licensed for use in human medicine

include native and recombinant biological prepara-
tions, such as vaccines, immunomodulators, interleu-
kins, growth hormones, specific antibodies, and
others (34–37). The growing scientific and medical
interest in probiotics is reflected by the steadily
increasing number of publications on this topic, as
shown in Figure 1.
Application of probiotics
Probiotic microorganisms are often found as food
ingredients, e.g. in fermented milk products and food
supplements, but are also employed as feed additives
in Germany and some other European countries
today. This drug has been traditionally used since
1917 (48,49) to treat various diseases and dysfunc-
tions of the intestinal tract (19,21,47,50–52).
The Mutaflor® story began in the early years of
the last century when the physician and bacteriolo-
gist Alfred Nissle (Figure 2) of Freiburg, Germany,
screened human intestinal E. coli strains for growth-
inhibiting (antagonistic) activity against Salmonella,
Shigella, and other enteropathogens. Searching for a
novel therapeutic approach to combat virulent enter-
obacteria, Nissle recognized that some fecal E. coli
isolates showed antagonistic action against these

2008 140 1059

159 926
2006 127 775
101 700
2004 60 530
42 438
2002 40 416
22 299
2000 24 206
Year

14 169
1998 7 119
8 60
Search term "probiotic*"
1996 4 31
23 Search term "probiotic*" limited to article type "clinical trials"
1994 1 12
2 16
1992 8
7
1990 6
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Number of publications

Figure 1. The increase in basic scientific and clinical publications on probiotics during the years 1990–2008, indicating the growing interest
of the scientific and the medical community in this topic. The black bars (and the corresponding numbers on top of the bars) represent
the total numbers of scientific and clinical publications in the respective year. The inserted open bars (and the corresponding numbers)
represent the numbers of published clinical trials with probiotics. Source: National Library of Medicine Database MEDLINE; search and
graphics performed by M. Schiemann, Herdecke, Germany.

Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
Figure 2. Photographic portrait of Professor Alfred Nissle MD
(1874–1965), discoverer of the antagonistic action of certain
commensal E. coli strains against enteropathogens. In 1917, Alfred
Nissle isolated the specific E. coli strain, now called E. coli Nissle
1917 (EcN), from the feces of a healthy young man (48,49).
Photograph courtesy of Alfred-Nissle-Gesellschaft, Hagen,
Germany.
pathogens in vitro, while others failed to inhibit their
growth. This led Nissle to the idea that these antag-
onistically active E. coli strains might be useful as
therapeutics in diarrheal diseases. Nissle isolated the
EcN strain in 1917 during the First World War from
the feces of a member of the armed services who took
part in the military campaign on the Balkan peninsula.
In contrast to his companions, this soldier did not
develop infectious diarrhea when staying in the
region of Dobrudja, which was heavily contaminated
with enteropathogens at that time (49). Nissle
assumed that this soldier harbored a ‘strong, antago-
nistically active’ E. coli strain in his gut that had pro-
tected him from infection. This was in fact the case,
and Nissle – after performing laboratory tests and
some self-experiments with this E. coli isolate – intro-
duced the EcN strain into medical practice. From
the beginning, the Mutaflor® preparation contained
(and still contains) the Nissle strain in viable form.
[Note that, today, E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) is depos-
ited as an industrially used strain under ‘patent
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 125
deposit’ rules at the Deutsche Sammlung von Mikro-
organismen und Zellkulturen (German Collection
of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures) (DSMZ, Braun-
schweig) as E. coli DSM 6601.] In the pre-antibiotic
era, it was first used as an anti-infective agent against
infectious diarrhea and its clinical consequences, later
on, non-infectious gastrointestinal disturbances and
diseases, such as chronic constipation or inflammatory
bowel diseases, have also been treated.
Great effort has been made in the past two
decades to elucidate in detail the microbiological
characteristics and the molecular genetic background
of EcN. At the same time its toxicological profile and
its pharmacological and immunological modes of
action, as well as its clinical efficacy for the treatment
of specific intestinal diseases and dysfunctions have
been studied extensively.
Microbiological properties and phenotypic
strain characteristics
General properties
The E. coli strain Nissle 1917 has been thoroughly
analyzed by means of microbiological, biochemical,
and molecular genetic methods (53–56). Its basic
characteristics are shown in Table III. The strain does
not exhibit any virulence factors (see below), but has
gene clusters located on genomic islands (GEIs) on
its chromosome responsible for the synthesis of sev-
eral so-called ‘fitness factors’, which contribute to
the strain’s probiotic nature. Serologically, EcN
belongs to the E. coli O6 group and is of serotype
O6:K5:H1 (54,55). EcN is a typical gram-negative
enterobacterium containing lipopolysaccharide
(LPS) as a structural component of its outer cell
membrane. The O6 surface antigen represents the
outer part of the strain’s LPS and exhibits some
peculiar features.
The molecular structure of the LPS of EcN has
been completely resolved (55). The LPS of EcN dif-
fers in several molecular aspects from all other LPS
types of E. coli (57). For instance, the O6 polysac-
charide side-chain is very short, consisting of only
one single ‘repeating unit’ of the oligosaccharide
building block typical of the O6 antigen, giving the
strain a so-called ‘semi-rough’ phenotypic appear-
ance when grown on solid nutrient media. The rea-
son for this is a point mutation introducing a stop
codon in the gene for the O6 antigen polymerase
(55). Also, modifications previously unknown for
E. coli LPS were found in the oligosaccharide core
segment of the molecule. The specific features of the
LPS of EcN are likely to explain the phenomenon
whereby the strain exhibits immunomodulating prop-
erties without showing immunotoxic effects (55).
 126 U. Sonnenborn et al.
Table III. Basic microbiological and molecular genetic characteristics of E. coli strain Nissle 1917 (EcN, serotype O6:K5:H1).

Presence in EcN
Gene products/
Characteristics biosynthesis results Genes/DNA probes Genotype Phenotype

Adhesion Common type I fim + +

fimbria (F1A)
F1C fimbria foc + +
Curli fimbria csgA + +
S-type fimbria sfa – –
P-type fimbria pap – –
M-type fimbria NA ND –
CFA I/II (colonization cfa I/II ND –
factor antigens I/II)
Toxins α-Hemolysin hly – –
CNF I (cytotoxic cnfI – –
necrotizing factor I)
H-LT (heat-labile etx – –
enterotoxin)
H-ST (heat-stable est – –
enterotoxin)
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

Shiga toxin† stx – –

Iron acquisition Enterobactin ent ND +
(siderophores) Salmochelin iro + +
Aerobactin iuc/aer + +
Yersiniabactin ybt + +
Hemin uptake system chu + +
Citrate uptake system cit + ND
Further characteristics Capsule (K5-type)‡ kps + +
Flagella (H1-type) fla + +
Arginine dihydrolase§ NA ND +
Cellulose biosynthesis bcs + +
Microcin H47 mch + +
Microcin M mcm + +
Colibactin synthesis clb/pks + +
LPS core wa∗ + +
LPS O6 repeating unit wb∗ + +
O6 antigen polymerase, wzy(rfb)|| + +
non-functional
Serum resistance NA ND –
Extrachromosomal pMUT1 (3173 bp)a Muta 5/6 + ND
elements: pMUT2 (5526 bp)a Muta 7/8, + ND
two cryptic, Muta 9/10 + ND
non-transferable
plasmids∗∗

+, present; –, not present; ND, not determined; NA, no specific DNA probe available.
†EHEC, typical enterotoxins.
‡Present in 1% of E. coli isolates.
§Present in 7% of E. coli isolates.
||wzy gene truncated because of integrated stop codon.
∗∗No carriage of antibiotic resistance genes or virulence genes.
aData extracted from G. Blum-Oehler et al. (53).

As indicated by its serotype (O6:K5:H1), EcN is
able to form an extracellular capsule of the K5 sero-
type. This kind of capsule is present in only about
1% of E. coli isolates. The gene loci on the chromo-
somal DNA responsible for the synthesis of the K5
capsule have been detected by using a gene probe
specific for the K5 capsule gene cluster (58). In many
extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli (ExPEC) strains the
existence of a capsule protects the pathogen from
attacks by non-specific defense components of blood
serum (e.g. complement), thus making the bacterium
serum-resistant (59). Serum resistance lengthens the
time of survival in the bloodstream and increases the
virulence of a pathogen (59). Interestingly, this is not
the case with EcN (55). Despite its capability to form
a capsule, in the classic serum resistance test (60) the

EcN strain is nevertheless serum-sensitive and is
rapidly killed in the presence of human serum or
sera of other mammalian species (bovine and porcine
sera).
EcN possesses flagella of serotype H1 and is thus
quite mobile. The possession of flagella enables the
microbe to actively move within the viscous intestinal
mucus layer, e.g. in the direction of the intestinal
mucosa, which serves as an oxygen source, useful for
aerobic catabolism of substrates by E. coli. Besides
their function as driving apparatus, the flagella are
important in bacterial crosstalk with the epithelium
(see below) and have also been described as bacterial
sensors for humidity (61,62).
EcN possesses three different types of fimbriae:
F1A and F1C fimbriae (54,63,64), as well as so-called
‘curli’ fimbriae (56,65,66), which mediate adhesion
to intestinal epithelial cells in cell culture experiments
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 127
EcN was detected by Nissle in 1917 because of
its growth-inhibiting (antagonistic) activities against
enteropathogenic microorganisms. The antagonistic
actions of EcN are due, at least in part, to the forma-
tion of microcins against which the producer strain
itself is immune. One of these microcins (microcin
H47) had already been described before for another
E. coli strain (76–78), whereas the second microcin
was unknown so far. The latter has been termed
‘microcin M’ (M from Mutaflor) by Klaus Hantke
and colleagues (79).
In addition to the production of microcins, EcN
belongs to that phylogenetic subgroup of E. coli
bacteria (group B2) that contains strains able to
synthesize peptide/polyketide hybrids (80,81). These
substances belong to a heterogeneous group of mol-
ecules with antimicrobial and antitumor activities. To
date it is not known whether the peptide/polyketide

or to the mucus layer of the intestinal wall in vivo (see hybrides of EcN contribute to the antagonistic action
below), facilitating colonization of the gut. against other bacteria.

Fitness factors Metabolic properties

Pathogenic bacteria are able to produce so-called EcN has been characterized biochemically by analysis
virulence factors, which enhance the infectious of its strain-specific metabolic capacities and fermen-
capacity of the respective strains. Virulence factors tation properties, using commercially available identi-
are often encoded by genes representing special fication kits for Enterobacteriaceae in which a range of
DNA sequences located on the bacterial chromo- biochemical tests are carried out simultaneously.
some, probably obtained by horizontal gene transfer
in the evolution of the pathogen (67). These DNA Table IV. Taxonomically important enzymes present in and
biochemical reactions performed by E. coli strain Nissle 1917
sequences are called pathogenicity islands (PAIs) (EcN); comparison with the corresponding characteristics typical
(68). Non-pathogenic (avirulent) commensal bacte- of the enterobacterial species Escherichia coli in general.
ria may also produce specific factors that enable
E. coli in general
them to compete with other strains in the ecological
system of the gut and to effectively communicate Activity/enzyme EcN (+/–/v) (% positive)
with the host organism. These factors are designated Oxidase – – 0
fitness factors, which are also often encoded by spe- Dextrose metabolism + + 100
cial DNA sequences (genomic islands, GEIs) on the Voges–Proskauer reaction – – 0
bacterial chromosome (69,70). Different fitness fac- β-Galactosidase (ONPG test) + + 95
tors have been detected in the EcN strain in recent H2S production – – 1
Lysine decarboxylase + + 87
years.
Arginine dihydrolase + – 7
Siderophores are iron-chelating substances Ornithine decarboxylase + + 72
needed for bacterial iron uptake. EcN produces an Urease – – 0
unexpectedly wide array of siderophores: aerobactin, Citrate metabolism – – 1
enterobactin, salmochelin, and yersiniabactin, as well Malonate metabolism – – 0
Tryptophan deaminase – – 0
as a hemin- and a citrate-dependent iron acquisition
Indole production + + 98
system. Besides the siderophore ferric iron uptake Lactose metabolism + + 91
systems, EcN also possesses an elemental ferrous Saccharose metabolism – v 44
iron uptake system (EfeU) (71). Regarding the Arabinose metabolism + + 99
siderophores aerobactin and yersiniabactin as well as Raffinose metabolism – – 27
the hemin and the citrate system of EcN, the chro- Rhamnose metabolism + + 87
Sorbitol metabolism + + 94
mosomal DNA of the strain has been checked for the Inositol metabolism – – 2
existence of the corresponding genes by using spe- Ribitol metabolism – – 2
cific DNA probes (72–75). Positive signals for all +, positive reaction; –, negative reaction; v, variable.Tests performed
four iron acquisition systems could be obtained on with commercially available test kits: MHK/ID/GNI system
its genomic DNA. (Biotest) and API 20E system (BioMérieux).
 128 U. Sonnenborn et al.
As far as its metabolic capacities are concerned, EcN
is a typical E. coli strain, with the exception that it is
capable of metabolizing arginine (Table IV). This prop-
erty is seen in just about 7% of all E. coli isolates.
Gas chromatographic analysis of spent culture
supernatants (82) has revealed that EcN produces
short-chain fatty acids as end products of carbohy-
drate metabolism under aerobic and anaerobic
growth conditions as well. These are mainly acetic
acid and formic acid, as well as minor amounts
of propionic and butyric acid (G. Sollorz and
U. Sonnenborn, unpublished results).
Molecular genetic properties
Genome structure
The genome structure of E. coli Nissle 1917 has been
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
potential integration sites for DNA sequences (GEIs)
obtained by horizontal gene transfer during evolu-
tion; (2) DNA sequence analysis of the detected
genomic islands; and (3) comparison of the EcN
genome with those of other E. coli strains by DNA–
DNA hybridization (56). PCR-based screening of
324 pathogenic and non-pathogenic E. coli strains of
different origin revealed distinct chromosomal regions
occurring in non-pathogenic E. coli and in intestinal
and extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli as well. In EcN,
five large genomic islands and some smaller genomic
islets have been detected so far, carrying gene clusters
for different known fitness factors of this special
E. coli strain (Figure 3). These insertions into the
chromosome are thought to originate from horizontal
gene transfer (56). In a dissertation by Schmidt, addi-
tional DNA sequences were found on the chromo-
some of the Nissle strain that also might have been

elucidated by three different approaches: (1) DNA acquired by horizontal gene transfer during the
sequence analysis of the gene loci for tRNA genes as evolution of EcN (83). Comparison of the genome
fim

leuX leuV
pheU aspV
glyY thrW
thrT
argU
proM csg
wa* glnX
bcs
selC lysQ

proK serW

mch/mcm, foc, iro

chu
Chromosome of serT
wrbA
E. coli Nissle 1917 serX
5.1 Mb
leuU
metY tyrV
iuc

GEI IEcN
, sa

pheV
leuZ (97 kb)
t , ih

glyU serU
metV asnT
a, s

argQ asnW valW

ap,

ileY asnU
kps

ssrA alaX
asnV
lysV argW proL
GEI IIEcN
(103 kb) GEI IVEcN
ybt

(30 kb)
sat w b*

GEI IIIEcN clb/pks

(38 kb)
GEI VEcN
(55 kb)

Figure 3. Functional genomic map of E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) (56,80). Five large genetic islands (GEI I to GEI V) and some smaller
genetic islets coding for different so-called ‘fitness factors’ are inserted at distinct sites (mainly next to tRNA-encoding sequences) into
the chromosome of the EcN strain. The bars on the chromosome circle mark the positions of tRNA genes (in gray: tRNA genes with
sequence contexts identical to those of the completely sequenced non-pathogenic E. coli K-12 strain MG1655; in black: tRNA genes with
sequence contexts identical to the completely sequenced uropathogenic E. coli O6 strain CFT073). The following genes and gene clusters
of the EcN strain have been identified and sequenced: fim encoding F1A fimbriae (‘common type-1 fimbriae’); csg encoding curli fimbriae;
mch/mcm encoding microcin H47 and microcin M synthesis; foc encoding F1C fimbriae; iro/ybt/iuc encoding the siderophores salmochelin,
yersiniabactin, and aerobactin; clb/pks (colibactin gene cluster) encoding non-ribosomal peptide synthetases, polyketide synthases and
accessory proteins; sat encoding Sat protease; iha encoding Iha adhesion; sap encoding Sap-like autotransporter; kps encoding capsule
synthesis; chu encoding hemin iron uptake system; bcs encoding cellulose biosynthesis; wa*/wb* encoding LPS biosynthesis.

structure of EcN with those of the E. coli K-12 strain
MG1655 and the uropathogenic E. coli (UPEC) O6
strains 536 and CFT073 revealed similarities in gene
structure and organization between the different
E. coli strains, especially between the isolates of sero-
type O6. With respect to the genome size of the EcN
strain, with 5.1 Mb its genome is larger than that of
E. coli K-12 strain MG1655 (4.7 Mb) and UPEC
strain 536 (5.0 Mb), but a bit smaller than that of
UPEC strain CFT073 (5.23 Mb).
The lack of gene clusters coding for classical
pathogenicity traits of ExPEC, e.g. α-hemolysin,
P-fimbriae, S-fimbriae, combined with the existence
of genes coding for fitness factors (e.g. iron acquisi-
tion systems, microcins) and the genetically fixed
synthesis of a semi-rough LPS may together be of
importance for the probiotic nature of EcN (84).
First results of the annotation of DNA sequences
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
obtained after shotgun sequencing of the whole EcN
genome have been published, focusing on genes rep-
resenting the metabolic capacities of the Nissle strain
(85) and on the search for genes coding for suspected
pathogenicity or fitness traits (83).
Plasmid characterization
EcN possesses two small cryptic plasmids, termed
pMUT1 and pMUT2 (53). Both plasmids, with
427 bp
361 bp
313 bp
200 bp
108 107 106 105 104 103 102 [cfu/ml]
Marker EcN
(100 bp ladder)
Figure 4. Strain-specific multiplex PCR for identification of E. coli
Nissle 1917 (EcN). PCR and agarose gel electrophoresis were
performed as described (53). The PCR yields three distinct DNA
products of Mr 313, 361, and 427 bp length. Using this test
system, the detection limit of EcN is between 102 and 103 bacterial
cells/ml. Photograph: K. Eiteljörge, Herdecke.
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 129
molecular masses of Mr  2.1 and 3.7 Md (mega-
daltons), respectively, are genetically stable and are
not transferable to other E. coli strains. The smaller
plasmid (pMUT1) consists of 3173 bp (base pairs),
the larger one (pMUT2) consists of 5526 bp. The
circular DNAs of these two strain-specific plasmids
have been completely sequenced (53). Strain-
specific DNA sequences from both plasmids, which
have not been found so far in other E. coli strains,
can be used in a multiplex PCR method developed
to specifically identify the EcN strain (53) (Figure
4). The function of these cryptic plasmids in EcN
is not known as yet, since plasmid-free clones of
EcN do not show morphological, cultural, or met-
abolic differences compared to the original strain
carrying pMUT1 and pMUT2. There is, however,
some evidence that cryptic plasmids per se may
protect the carrier bacterium from attacks by
mobile genetic elements such as bacteriophages,
thus having an influence on the genetic stability of
the strain (86).
Modes of action
Antagonistic activities against other
microorganisms
E. coli Nissle 1917 has been tested for its antagonis-
tic activities (antimicrobial effects) against other
microorganisms, in particular against microbial
pathogens, both in vitro and in vivo. In vitro, antago-
nistic effects of EcN have been determined by means
of co-cultivation with different enteropathogenic,
uropathogenic, and other E. coli strains, as well as
with individual strains of the species Proteus vulgaris,
Salmonella enteritidis, Shigella dysenteriae, Yersinia
enterocolitica, Vibrio cholerae, and Candida albicans
(87,88). Co-cultivation experiments with EcN and
the respective test strain have been performed either
in suitable liquid media, where the number of viable
bacteria of each strain has been determined after
aerobic growth at 37°C, or on solid media by means
of an agar diffusion test (similar to the classic test for
antibiotic sensitivity), where EcN produced an inhi-
bition zone against the test strain (in vitro tests
according to Halbert (89) and Mayr-Harting et al.
(90), Figure 5). Co-cultivation of EcN with Shiga
toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) in liquid cultures
resulted in a dose-dependent decrease of Shiga toxin
levels (87).
The antagonistic action of EcN was also confirmed
in vivo by means of co-association of EcN with other
microorganisms (pathogenic and non-pathogenic
E. coli, Salmonella typhimurium, Candida albicans,
Lactobacillus johnsonii) in germ-free or gnotobiotic
animals (rats, mice, piglets) (91–94) (Figure 6).
 130 U. Sonnenborn et al.
Germ-free animals have been inoculated per os either
with EcN and the particular pathogenic strain simulta-
neously, or the test strain has been administered first
and EcN several days later. The excrements of the ani-
mals have been regularly analyzed microbiologically,
whereby the viable cell counts of the administered bac-
teria have been determined. In gnotobiotic animal
models, a decrease or even complete eradication of the
pathogenic test strains from the intestines has been
achieved by oral administration of EcN, and symptoms
of disease occurring due to inoculation with the patho-
genic microorganisms disappeared (92–94). In conven-
tional streptomycin-treated CD-1 mice, precolonization
of the intestine with EcN limited the growth of E. coli
EDL933, an O157:H7 Shiga toxin-producing entero-
hemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) strain, when the latter was
subsequently administered (95). By contrast, the E. coli
K-12 laboratory strain did not inhibit growth of the
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

Figure 5. Determination of antagonistic activity of E. coli Nissle EHEC strain.

1917 (EcN) against another E. coli strain (DSM 423) in vitro. The inhibitory effects of EcN on facultative and
A suspension of E. coli DSM 423 was homogeneously spread obligate pathogens have also been demonstrated in
across the surface of an agar plate (PAG minimal medium). humans by preventive oral administration of the
Small cylinders of agar were punched out using a punching tool
strain to neonates (colonization prophylaxis) (96,97).
and the resulting cavities were filled with 10, 20 or 50 μl of an
overnight culture of EcN (2  109 cfu/ml). Tests were performed The stools of the neonates were analyzed microbio-
in duplicate. The picture was taken after 24 h of aerobic logically to confirm colonization with EcN. In addi-
incubation at 37°C. Antagonistic activity becomes visible by the tion, the effect of colonization with this E. coli strain
development of inhibition zones (halos) around the cavities on the spectrum of other aerobic gut bacteria has
containing the EcN suspension. Photograph: U. Sonnenborn,
been determined. All newborns that received EcN
Herdecke.

Successive diassociation
Viable cell counts (cfu log10/g faecal mass, wet wt)

11
10

9
8
E. coli strain 542/88
7
E. coli strain Nissle 1917
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
2 4 6 8 10 12 18 Days

Figure 6. Antagonistic action of E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) against enteropathogenic E. coli 542/88 in vivo in gnotobiotic piglets (94). Four
7-day-old germ-free piglets were infected orally with 108 cfu of E. coli 542/88 (arrow). The enteropathogenic E. coli strain quickly colonized
the gut (dotted black line) and reached stable bacterial counts (about 1010 cfu/g contents). Shortly after infection the animals showed
signs of diarrheal illness. At day 6 of the experiment, when the piglets were visibly ill, they received an EcN suspension p.o. (2  108 cfu)
(double arrow). Although the pathogenic E. coli strain had already settled in the gut, EcN also colonized the intestine fairly well (straight
black curve). Six days later, the pathogen was completely expelled from the gut, whereas EcN continuously showed a high population
level, and the piglets recovered.
 E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 131
100
Colonized infants (+ EcN) *
90
Placebo infants (– EcN)
80
Infants with pathogens (%) 70 *
*
60

50
40

30

20

10

0
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 5 Day 21 Month 6 Study
period

Figure 7. Antagonistic activity of E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) in humans, as shown by the effect of preventive administration of EcN on the
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

colonization of the newborn’s gut with true and potential microbial pathogens (96). Using a double-blind study design, 54 full-term
newborns were randomly assigned to two treatment groups and received orally either 1 ml of an EcN suspension (108 cfu, black bars) or
1 ml of a placebo suspension (open bars) once a day for the first 5 days of life. During the hospital stay (on days 1, 2, 3, and 5) and
thereafter (on day 21 and during the 6th month), colonization of the gut with true and potential microbial pathogens was determined in
fecal samples and is presented as the percentage of children carrying pathogenic and potentially pathogenic microorganisms. Regarding
the colonization with pathogens, differences between the EcN group and the placebo group were recognized first on day 2 and were
significant on day 3 (15% vs 57%, p  0.003), day 5 (15% vs 62%, p  0.001), and after 6 months (28% vs 85%, p  0.002). On day
21, the difference amounted to 33% vs 47%, but this was not significant. ∗Significantly different colonization between EcN and placebo
groups.

were colonized by the administered strain, most of
them showing long-term colonization for several
months. The establishment of unwanted microor-
ganisms, i.e. facultative and obligate pathogens, in
the children’s gut was significantly reduced by inten-
tional colonization with EcN (Figure 7, see also next
section).
In patients with ulcerative colitis in remission,
mucosal biopsies have been obtained during sig-
moidoscopies, both before and after a 6-week oral
treatment with EcN. The samples were analyzed for
their content of mucosa-associated aerobic and
anaerobic intestinal bacteria using classic micro-
biological cultural methods and quantitative PCR.
Treatment with EcN resulted in a significant
decrease of bacterial counts of aerobic and anaero-
bic mucosa-associated bacteria in a majority of the
patients (98).
As stated above, the antagonistic actions of EcN
are mainly due to the formation of microcins (micro-
cin H47, microcin M). The genetic organization of
the two chromosomally localized gene clusters
responsible for synthesis, transport, and secretion of
both microcins discovered to date in EcN as well as
for the immunity of the strain against these antimi-
crobial substances, has been examined in detail (79).
The DNA sequences of the microcin genes have
been determined (79) (Figure 8). Like colicin V, both
microcins of EcN are secreted with the help of a
protein export machinery of the RND type contain-
ing the membrane protein TolC.
Inhibition of the invasion of epithelial cells by
enteroinvasive bacteria
In cell culture experiments using the human embry-
onic intestinal cell line INT407, EcN inhibits the
invasion of epithelial cells by different pathogenic
invasive bacteria, such as Salmonella, Shigella, entero-
invasive E. coli, Listeria, Yersinia, and Legionella strains
(99,100), as well as adherent-invasive E. coli
strains from patients with Crohn’s disease (101).
Interestingly, this inhibitory effect is not due to the
production of microcins, since the isogenic, microcin-
negative EcN mutant H5445 in this test system
exhibits nearly the same inhibitory efficacy as the
original strain (Figure 9). In addition, it has been
shown that no physical contact is necessary for
the anti-invasive effect, neither between EcN and
the epithelial cells nor between EcN and the inva-
sive bacterial pathogens. Moreover, the anti-invasive
activity of EcN is not plasmid-coded and is not
dependent on the presence of adhesins (F1A fim-
briae, F1C fimbriae), since isogenic, Fim- and Foc-
negative deletion mutants of EcN have been shown
to be as effective as the original strain. With the help
of a so-called ‘transwell’ filter system introduced into
the cell culture, by which EcN can be separated from
 132 U. Sonnenborn et al.
73 aa
39 69 75 aa 516 aa 150 aa 424 aa 698 aa 92 aa 228 aa

I I

mchX Open reading mcmI

mchI frame mcmD mcmA mcmB mcmC mcmP
mchB (mchC ?)

Microcin H47 gene cluster: Microcin M gene cluster:

mchB Structural gene of microcin H47 mcmC Structural gene of microcin M

mchC ? Modification (?) mcmD Modification gene

mchX Regulatory gene mcmP Regulatory gene

mchI I Immunity gene mcmI I Immunity gene

mcmB Export genes

mcmA

Figure 8. Structural organization of the chromosomal gene clusters located on GEI I, encoding the components necessary for synthesis,
export, and regulation of microcins H47 and M of E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) (79). The number of amino acids (aa) of the individual gene
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

products of the corresponding genes are given on top of the figure. The microcin M gene cluster (‘M’ from Mutaflor ) was discovered for
the first time in the EcN strain.

both the epithelial cells and the invasive bacteria, it Immunomodulatory and anti-inflammatory
has been demonstrated that the invasion-inhibiting effects
principle is diffusible and is secreted by EcN (99,100).
It might be that this soluble factor inhibits the In vitro and in vivo experiments have demonstrated
manipulation of the host cell cytoskeleton by the EcN to possess remarkable immunomodulatory
pathogenic microorganisms. activities, which address both the innate and the

(a) 45 (b) 45
Co-incubation

E. coli K-12 + S. T. LT2

40 40
of S.Typhimurium (%)
S. Typhimurium LT2

35 35
Invasive activity (%)

Invasive activity

EcN + S. T. C17
E. coli K-12 + S. T. C17

30 30
S. Typhimurium C17

25 25
20 20 EcN + S. T. LT2
E. coli K-12

15 15
10 10
EcN

5 5
0 0

(c) 45
40
of S. Typhimurium (%)

Microcin-negative mutant of
% Invasive activity

35
EcN (H5445) + S. T. C17

Transwell
unit 30
EcN 25
S. Typhimurium
EcN + S. T. C17

20
Intestinal epithelial
cells INT407 15
S. T. C17

10
5
0

Figure 9. Inhibition of Salmonella typhimurium (S.T.) invasion into INT407 intestinal epithelial cells by E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) (99,100).
(a) Cell cultures with INT407 cells were separately incubated with either E. coli K-12 or EcN, or with the S. typhimurium strains C17 or
LT2. While both non-pathogenic E. coli strains were also non-invasive, the Salmonella typhimurium strains showed differently strong invasive
activity. (b) Co-incubation of INT407 cells with E. coli K-12 and S. typhimurium C17, EcN and S. typhimurium C17, E. coli K-12 and
S. typhimurium LT2, and EcN and S. typhimurium LT2. While co-incubation with E. coli K-12 had no effect on the invasive activity of
the S. typhimurium strains, co-incubation with EcN markedly inhibited the invasive activity of both S. typhimurium strains. (c) As shown
by cell culture experiments using a transwell system (left), the anti-invasive activity of EcN is not due to direct interaction between EcN
and S. typhimurium nor to occupation of receptor sites by EcN at the epithelial surface, since the effect was still present after separating
EcN from S. typhimurium and from the intestinal cells as well (right).

adaptive immune system. With respect to adaptive
immunity, EcN affects the humoral as well as the
cellular branch of the immune system. However, in
vivo significant immunomodulating activities are
only reliably detected in gnotobiotic experimental
animals, in human newborns, or in diseased animals
and patients. In healthy human adults and animals,
the immunomodulating activities of EcN are only
very weakly expressed or not detectable at all
(102,103) (R. Gruber, unpublished results).
In vitro experiments. A significant dose-dependent
improvement of secretory performance of mouse
macrophages after direct contact with formalin-killed
cells of EcN has been observed in vitro (104). The
production of interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis
factor (TNF), and oxygen radicals increased signifi-
cantly. Further experiments revealed an augmenta-
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
tion of tumor cell lysis and parasite lysis (leishmaniae)
by macrophages prestimulated with EcN. On the
other hand, the efficiency of phagocytosis of the mac-
rophages was raised only slightly. However, these in
vitro effects could only partially be confirmed in vivo,
following oral administration of EcN to convention-
ally kept mice. In vivo, for instance, no induction of
TNF synthesis has been observed.
Experiments with epithelial cell lines and isolated
lymphocytes have shown EcN to exhibit different
immunomodulating activities, and these strongly
depend on the cell types/cell lines employed and the
parameters and read-out systems used (105–115).
One example is the dose-dependent inhibition of the
TNF-α-induced IL-8 secretion by EcN in HCT-15
intestinal epithelial cells (108,116). The inhibition is
reflected by the reduced expression level of IL-8 mRNA
in the epithelial cells, as shown by real-time PCR.
The inhibition of IL-8 synthesis is caused by secreted
soluble factors that have not been identified so far.
Interestingly, the EcN-mediated inhibition of TNF-
α-induced IL-8 transcription is independent of the
AP-1- and nuclear factor κB (NF-κB)-regulated
gene expression. The latter, however, is important for
the induction of human β-defensin-2 (HBD-2) synthe-
sis in gut epithelial cells (Caco-2 cells) by EcN (114).
In the mouse monocyte/macrophage cell line
J774A.1, addition of EcN resulted in an increase of
IL-12, TNF-α, and IL-10 secretion (105). By con-
trast, IL-18 and TGF-β synthesis were not affected.
Compared with the effects of viable EcN cells, addi-
tion of killed bacterial cells resulted in a much less
pronounced induction of cytokine synthesis. In con-
fluent Caco-2 epithelial cells, contact with EcN
resulted in an up-regulation of gene expression of
monocyte chemoattractant protein-I ligand 2
(MCP-I) and an increase of MCP-I secretion (113).
MCP-I is thought to be involved in the inflammatory
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 133
immune reaction. On the other hand, Otte et al.
(117) found that contact of intestinal epithelial cells
(Colo320 and SW480 cells) with EcN led to inhibi-
tion of the inflammatory response by down-regulation
of TNF-α- or gastrin-induced cyclooxygenase-2
(COX-2) activity. This was followed by reduced secre-
tion of proinflammatory prostaglandin E2 (PGE2).
The immunomodulating action of EcN on periph-
eral as well as on gut mucosal lamina propria T lym-
phocytes has also been studied in vitro (112).
Anti-CD3-stimulated peripheral and lamina propria
T cells have been exposed to heat-inactivated cells of
EcN and to EcN-conditioned medium (spent culture
supernatants), and the effects of these treatments on
lymphocyte cell cycle and on markers of apoptosis
have been examined on the molecular level. EcN-
conditioned medium dose-dependently inhibited cell
cycle progression and T-cell expansion of lympho-
cytes from peripheral blood, but not of lymphocytes
from the gut mucosa. This selective action on T cells
from peripheral blood could also be shown by using
bacterial lipoproteins. In contrast to this, heat-inac-
tivated cells of EcN, its purified LPS, or CpG-DNA
had no effect. In peripheral T cells, addition of EcN-
conditioned medium reduced expression of cyclin
D2, B1, and retinoblastoma protein, which are
involved in T-cell proliferation. Interaction of EcN-
conditioned medium with peripheral T cells signifi-
cantly inhibited the expression of IL-2, TNF-α, and
IFN-γ, whereas the production of IL-10 was enhanced
(Figure 10). The differential effects of EcN on circu-
lating and intestinal T cells is supposed to be an
important aspect of its efficacy in inflammatory
bowel diseases (112,118). By down-regulation of the
expansion of newly recruited T cells into the gut
mucosa, intestinal inflammation will be limited.
Compared with this, activated T cells already resid-
ing in the gut wall are not influenced by EcN and
thus are available for the continuous fight against
pathogenic microorganisms (112). In the T-cell sub-
group of γδ T cells, EcN increased activation, cell
cycling, and cell expansion, but thereafter induced
apoptosis via caspase- and FasL-dependent signaling
pathways (119). These effects of EcN were target-
specific, since they were only seen with γδ T cells, but
not with αβ T cells.
Using human peripheral blood mononuclear
cells, Helwig et al. (107) compared the immuno-
modulating activities of gram-positive Lactobacillus
and Bifidobacterium strains with those of the gram-
negative EcN strain. These experiments revealed that
gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria exerted
partly different, but also partly similar immunomod-
ulatory activities on the blood mononuclear cells
(Figure 11). With respect to some special immune
parameters, different responses were seen also
 134 U. Sonnenborn et al.

*
of different bacteria including EcN resulted in differ-
14
* ent maturation responses of dendritic cells from dif-
12 ferent locations of the body (Peyer’s patches,
mesenteric lymph nodes, and spleen).
Cytokines (ng/ml)

10
* Recently, in vitro experiments with isolated blood
8 *
lymphocytes from healthy and allergic persons (111)
6
* have shown that the EcN strain induced strong anti-
*
4 * allergic responses. These are interesting new findings
2 that may lead to new indications for EcN in the
0
future. The investigations with mononuclear cells
IL-2 TNF-α IFN-γ IL-10 from peripheral blood, obtained from allergic per-
Control with
10%
EcN-conditioned medium
sons, have shown that contact of the lymphocytes
25% with EcN induced a shift from a T-helper-2 (Th2)-
Figure 10. Anti-inflammatory effects of E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) dominated, allergy-specific immune response to a
on human peripheral blood T cells (PBT) in vitro, as shown by Th1-dominated, non-allergic response (111).
cytokine expression profiles induced by EcN-conditioned medium
(EcN-CM) (112). EcN-CM was obtained after 2 h incubation of In vivo experiments. In young gnotobiotic piglets,
EcN bacteria in T-cell medium (RPMI with 10% FCS, 1.5% colonization with EcN resulted in a rapid develop-
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

HEPES) at 37°C and 5% CO2. Thereafter, bacteria were removed ment of the gut-associated immune system. This was
by centrifugation. The resulting supernatant was sterile-filtered reflected by a significant increase in the numbers of
through a filter of 0.22 μm pore size.The sterile-filtered supernatant
(EcN-CM) was added to freshly isolated PBT (105 cells) in
IgA, IgM, and IgG antibody-producing lymphocytes
different concentrations (open bars, controls  no addition of in the lamina propria of intestinal villi and in the
EcN-CM; hatched bars, 10% v/v EcN-CM; black bars, 25% v/v intestinal lymph follicles as well as by an increase in
EcN-CM). T cells were then stimulated by adding anti-CD3-mAb SLA-D+(MHC II+) cells and CD4-positive cells in
and cultured for 3 days in RPMI. Culture supernatants were all mucosal and submucosal tissues, without any
collected and assayed for cytokines. EcN-CM dose-dependently
and significantly inhibited IL-2, TNF-α, and IFN-γ synthesis,
signs of an inflammatory reaction (infiltration of
while IL-10 production was markedly up-regulated. ∗p  0.05 vs granulocytes) (93,120).
CD3 controls. Investigations on human newborns have revealed
that both full-term neonates and premature infants
between the bifidobacteria and the lactobacilli, lead- show a significant rise in the levels of immunoglobu-
ing to the assumption that the immunomodulatory lins (IgA and IgM) in blood serum and of secretory
action of probiotics might be rather strain-specific IgA and IgM in stool filtrates within a few days after
and not genus- or species-specific. Interestingly, in intentional colonization of the gut with EcN (121)
this test system the EcN strain provoked a high out- (Figure 12). On the other hand, there was no influ-
put of the anti-inflammatory signal molecule IL-10. ence on the IgG level in blood serum. Besides these
Fink and Frokiaer (106) could show that interaction immunomodulatory effects on the development of

* * *
9000
1600 *
TNf-α [pg/ml] area under the curve
IL-10 [pg/ml] area under the curve

8000
1400
7000
1200
6000
1000
5000
800
4000
600 3000
400 2000
200 1000
0 0
Bifidobacteria Lactobacilli EcN Bifidobacteria Lactobacilli EcN

Figure 11. Immunomodulatory activities of gram-positive (bifidobacteria, lactobacilli) and gram-negative (E. coli Nissle 1917, EcN) bacteria
on human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMNCs) in vitro (107). Supernatant concentrations of the cytokines IL-10 and TNF-α
after co-incubation of PBMNCs with cell debris of bacteria from different genera and species are shown. With regard to bifidobacteria
(open bars), results are pooled from the data obtained by testing B. breve, B. infantis, and B. longum. With regard to lactobacilli (hatched
bars), results are pooled from the data obtained by testing L. acidophilus, L. bulgaricus, L. casei, L. plantarum, and L. rhamnosus strain GG
(LGG). Data from experiments with E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) are presented by the black bars. Concentrations of IL-10 and TNF-α are
shown in pg/ml as area under the curve (AUC, mean  SE). ∗Significantly different, p  0.05.
 E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 135

% of reference
70
60
50
FC
Full-term children

IgA
40 colonized with EcN
30 PC n = 22 (FC)
20
10 P
0 Pre-term children,
before 3 5 14 21 Days colonized with EcN
n = 9 (PC)
20
18 FC
16 Pre-term controls
14 n = 7 (P)
12
IgM

10
8
6 PC
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

4
2 P
0
before 3 5 14 21 Days

Figure 12. Effect of intentional colonization of the gut of newborns by E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) on the levels of secretory IgA and IgM
(121). One ml of EcN suspension (108 cfu/ml) was administered p.o. once a day for 5 days, starting from the first day of life. IgA and
IgM levels against EcN antigen were measured in stool filtrates after colonization of full-term and preterm infants with EcN and compared
to the IgA and IgM levels in stool filtrates of non-colonized preterm infants (controls). Antibody levels are expressed as percentage of the
reference sample (mean  SE). In stool filtrates of full-term infants IgA and IgM levels were significantly higher (from day 3 onwards)
than the levels detected before colonization (p  0.05). IgA levels were significantly higher in full-term than in preterm infants on day 5
and day 14 (p  0.01), and IgM levels were higher on all days after colonization (p  0.05 … p  0.01). Preterm colonized infants had
higher fecal IgA and IgM titers than non-colonized preterm infants (controls) on all days after colonization (p  0.05 … p  0.01).

the humoral branch of the immune system, stimula-
tion of cell-mediated immune responses and of non-
specific natural immunity after oral administration of
EcN has also been detected in a controlled clinical
study with preterm infants (122).
In established animal models of inflammatory
bowel diseases (IBD), such as the IL-2 knockout
mouse, EcN shows no proinflammatory effects
(123,124). On the contrary, using different experi-
mental animal models for IBD (T-lymphocyte transfer
model in SCID mice, IL-10 knockout mice, dextran
sodium sulfate (DSS)-induced or trinitrobenzenesul-
fonic acid (TNBS)-induced colitis), anti-inflammatory
effects of EcN have been consistently observed
(118,125–130). In one model of acute intestinal
inflammation, oral administration of EcN to mice
pretreated with 2% DSS led to a decrease of the
proinflammatory cytokines IFN-γ and IL-6, without
showing a significant effect on mucosal inflammation
(129). In another model of acute gut inflammation,
oral application of EcN to mice pretreated with 1.3%
DSS significantly ameliorated body weight loss, dis-
ease activity index, as well as macroscopic and micro-
scopic damage of the intestinal mucosa (127).
Interestingly, administration of heat-killed EcN as well
as of its genomic DNA also showed some anti-inflam-
matory actions in DSS colitis mice (reduced colon
weight, lower histological score), although the effects on
the disease activity index (DAI) were not as marked as
those achieved by viable bacterial cells (127) (Table V).
In IL-10 knockout mice (IL-10–/– mice), an animal
model of chronic intestinal inflammation, per os

Table V. Effects of live and heat-killed E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) and of EcN-DNA on DSS-induced colitis in specific pathogen-free
C57BL/6 mice.

Treatment n DAI (day 7) Colon weight (mg/cm) Histological score

PBS 19 2.35  0.17 51.68  0.20 10.26  0.55

Live EcN 18 1.61  0.18∗ 45.43  1.01† 8.89  0.37†
Heat-killed EcN 16 1.83  0.12 46.40  1.25∗ 8.63  0.43†
EcN-DNA 17 1.94  0.20 45.26  1.16† 8.53  0.32†

DAI, disease activity index; DSS, dextran sodium sulfate; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline. Data are mean  SEM.
∗p  0.05 and †p  0.01, significant difference compared with PBS group (N. Kamada et al. (127)).
 136 U. Sonnenborn et al.
administration of EcN led to a decrease of tissue
lesions and a decrease of the infiltrations of the colonic
mucosa by mononuclear cells and polymorphonuclear
cells, as judged by macroscopic and microscopic
examinations (127). Moreover, EcN treatment sig-
nificantly reduced the number of mice with rectal
prolapse (a characteristic symptom of severe rectal
inflammation), lowered the concentrations of the
inflammatory marker protein serum amyloid A (SAA)
in blood serum, and reduced the expression of
proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines in colonic
Lamina propria mononuclear cells (LPMCs) of colitis
mice (significant for IFN-γ and MIP-2).
In the immunologically mediated chronic colitis
model of T-lymphocyte transfer in SCID mice, oral
application of EcN significantly ameliorated intestinal
inflammation, as judged by histologic examinations,
and reduced secretion of proinflammatory cytokines
IFN-γ, IL-5, and IL-6, without affecting the level of the
anti-inflammatory cytokine IL-10 (129) (Figure 13).

(a) (d) 300000

5 250000

IFN-γ (pg/ml)
Clinical Score

4 200000
3 150000
* *
2 100000
1 50000
0 0
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

PBS-treated T cell transfer mice PBS-treated T cell transfer mice

healthy mice – EcN + EcN healthy mice – EcN + EcN
+ EcN + EcN
(b) (e)
2,5 1800
Histological Score

* 1600
2 *
IL-6 (pg/ml)

1400
1200
1,5 1000
1 800
600
0,5 400
200
0 0
PBS-treated T cell transfer mice PBS-treated T cell transfer mice
healthy mice – EcN + EcN healthy mice – EcN + EcN
+ EcN + EcN

(c) (f)
250 60
* 50
CFU/g MLN

200
IL-5 (pg/ml)

40
150 *
30
100
20
50 10
0 0
T cell transfer mice PBS-treated T cell transfer mice
– EcN + EcN healthy mice – EcN + EcN
+ EcN
Figure 13. Anti-inflammatory action of E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) in immunodeficient C.B.-17 SCID mice with chronic colitis (129).
Chronic colitis was induced by adoptive T-cell transfer, using purified CD4+ CD62L+ splenic T lymphocytes from healthy BALB/c mice,
which were introduced intraperitoneally into recipient SCID mice. After T-cell transfer, mice were divided into two groups. The first group
received 200 μl of EcN suspension (5  1010 cfu/ml) by gastric gavage twice per week from week 1 post-transfer to week 8 at the end of
the experiment ( T-cell transfer mice + EcN, black bars). The second group of SCID mice was treated in the same way and for the same
period of time, but received plain water by gastric gavage instead of EcN ( T-cell transfer mice – EcN, open bars). This second group
served as positive control (colitis mice). Healthy BALB/c mice were treated intraperitoneally with PBS (phosphate-buffered saline) instead
of splenic T cells, and thereafter received EcN by the oral route ( PBS-treated healthy mice + EcN, gray bars). These mice served as
negative controls. (a) Clinical score of CD4+ CD62L+ SCID mice treated or not treated with EcN p.o., in comparison to the score of
the healthy control group injected i.p. with PBS and treated with EcN p.o. ∗p  0.001 vs CD62L. (b) Histological score of the colonic
inflammation in mice following the induction of colitis by transfer of naïve CD4+ CD62L+ T lymphocytes and p.o. administration of EcN,
compared to that of colitis mice not treated with EcN, and to the healthy control group which received an i.p. injection of PBS and was
treated with EcN p.o. ∗p  0.02 vs CD62L. (c) Evidence of bacterial translocation into mesenteric lymph nodes (MLNs). Total concentration
of E. coli-like colonies in MLNs of mice from the transfer model following oral administration of EcN for 8 weeks compared to that of
colitis mice not treated with EcN. EcN was identified by REP-PCR. ∗p  0.0001 vs CD62L. (d, e, f) Proinflammatory cytokine secretion
from MLNs following the induction of colitis in SCID mice by transfer of naïve CD4+ CD62L+ T lymphocytes. Anti-inflammatory effect
of the p.o. administration of EcN, compared to the results obtained in colitis mice not treated with EcN, and to the healthy control group
which received an i.p. injection of PBS and was treated with EcN p.o. Values given are means  SEM (pg/ml). (d) IFN-γ, ∗p  0.03 vs
CD62L; (e) IL-6, ∗p  0.02 vs CD62L; (f) IL-5, ∗p  0.02 vs CD62L.
 E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 137
In both a rat model of TNBS-induced colitis and 7.3
a mouse model of LPS-induced sepsis, orally admin- 7.1
istered EcN exerted local as well as systemic anti- 6.9 * SPLEEN
inflammatory effects (125). TNF-α level was reduced 6.7 *
in the gut of colitic rats, while TNF-α and T-cell

L. monocytogenes
6.5 *
cytokines were reduced in blood plasma and lungs 6.3
*
of sepsis mice, and the IgG release from splenocyte- 6.1 *

derived B cells was down-regulated.

8.1 LIVER
Using Toll-like receptor 2 (TLR-2) and Toll-like

(log10 cfu/organ)
receptor 4 (TLR-4) knockout mice, it has been dem- * *
7.6
onstrated that the inhibition of T-cell proliferation *

and the amelioration of DSS-induced colitis by EcN *

7.1
is mediated via TLR-2- and TLR-4-dependent path- *
6.6
ways (112,118). 8.7
In an experimental allergy study conducted by 8.5
* KIDNEY
Bickert and colleagues (131), it was found that EcN 8.3 *

C. albicans
8.1 *
inhibits the allergen-inducedTh2-dominated immune 7.9 *
response in the airways of C57BL/6 mice that had
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

7.7
been hypersensitized by i.p. and i.v. administration 7.5 *
7.3
of ovalbumin. However, this anti-allergic effect could
only be demonstrated, if EcN was given together Control IFNγ EcN
with the allergen. 106 107 108 109 cfu

Figure 14. Augmentation of host defense against systemic bacterial

Infection-preventing effects
In in vivo experiments using conventionally housed
C3H/HeN mice, single oral doses of EcN inhibited
proliferation of subsequently intravenously inocu-
lated Candida albicans and Listeria monocytogenes
infections in a dose-dependent manner (132) (Figure
14). In a placebo-controlled veterinary clinical trial
on 335 newborn calves it was shown that admini-
stration of EcN significantly (p  0.001) reduced
the incidence of neonatal calf diarrhea from 63%
(placebo group) to 12% (EcN group) (133).
Communication with intestinal epithelial cells
In the last few years, it has become obvious that
many probiotic effects of orally administered micro-
bial preparations are due to interactions between the
bacteria, the gut epithelial cells, and the gut immune
system (115,130,134,135). In particular, the com-
munication with the epithelial cell lining seems to be
important, leading to a strengthening of the epithelial
barrier function (115,130,136).
Thus, co-incubation of EcN with human intesti-
nal epithelial cells (polarized T84 cells) resulted in a
significant modulation (up- and down-regulation) of
the activity of about 300 different genes in the epi-
thelial cells, as demonstrated by transcriptome anal-
ysis using the microarray technique with DNA chips
(Affimetrix) (115,137). Moreover, after infection of
T84 cells with an enteropathogenic E. coli strain
(EPEC E2348/69), treatment with EcN eliminated
the negative impact of EPEC infection on the
and fungal infections in mice by oral pretreatment with E. coli
Nissle 1917 (EcN) (132). Four groups of mice were pretreated
once with 106, 107, 108, or 109 viable cells of EcN by oral
administration, before they were challenged 24 h later by
intravenous infection with Listeria monocytogenes (6  103 cfu) or
Candida albicans (5  105 cfu). For each infection model, further
groups of mice served as controls. These were either pretreated
with placebo (negative controls, open bars) or with murine IFN-γ
(positive controls, gray bars). Three days after infection with L.
monocytogenes and 1 day after infection with C. albicans, mice were
sacrificed and the parasite burden of the respective main target
organs was determined. Compared with placebo, the pretreatment
with IFN-γ resulted in a significant decrease of parasite load in
spleen and liver of mice infected with L. monocytogenes, and a
significant decrease of C. albicans counts in the kidneys. Likewise,
pretreatment with EcN via the oral route significantly and dose-
dependently reduced the parasite burden in spleen, liver, and
kidneys. ∗p  0.05 vs negative controls.
epithelial barrier function, i.e. EPEC-induced dis-
ruption of epithelial cell tight junctions (Figure 15).
This action of EcN seems to be mediated via the pro-
tein kinase C signaling pathway in the epithelial cells.
In another cell culture study, it has been observed
that co-incubation of EcN with human epithelial cell
lines T84 and HT-29 resulted in increased IL-8 secre-
tion. Interestingly, the presence of EcN prevented
cell death of the epithelial cells, induced by exposure
to Salmonella dublin (110).
Examinations of cell cultures of human intestinal
epithelial cells (Caco-2 cells, HT-29 cells) have dem-
onstrated EcN to stimulate the synthesis of inducible
antimicrobially acting defensins (HBD-2, HBD-3)
(114,138) (Figure 16). Induction of HBD-2 gene
expression by EcN has been shown to exceed several
 138 U. Sonnenborn et al.

Control without bacteria EPEC 120 min EcN 120 min

A B C

Separate
incubation

EPEC + Medium 60 min EPEC + EcN 60 min EPEC + EcN 120 min

D E F

Co-incubation

Figure 15. Effects of the non-pathogenic E. coli strain Nissle 1917 (EcN) and the enteropathogenic E. coli (EPEC) strain E2348/69 on
the distribution of the tight junction protein zonula occludens-2 (ZO-2) in T84 epithelial cells (115). T84 monolayers were incubated with
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

bacteria for different periods of time and stained for ZO-2 using a fluorescent anti-ZO-2 antibody. (A) Control, T84 epithelial cells without
bacteria. (B) T84 cells incubated with EPEC for 120 min. (C) T84 cells incubated with EcN for 120 min. (D) T84 cells incubated with
EPEC for 60 min, then washed and further incubated with regular medium for another 60 min. (E) T84 cells incubated with EPEC for
60 min, then washed and further incubated with EcN for another 60 min. (F) T84 cells co-incubated with EcN plus EPEC for 120 min.
Bacteria were added in a 1:1 ratio. The EcN strain had no negative influence on the distribution of the tight junction protein ZO-2, but
abolished the negative impact of EPEC on ZO-2 distribution.

times the extent of induction mediated by 40 other (139). The flagellin signal might be transmitted by
E. coli strains tested. By contrast, gene expression of TLR-5, which is present in Caco-2 epithelial cells,
constitutively synthesized HBD-1 defensin was not but other signaling pathways might also be involved
influenced by EcN. Stimulation of HBD-2 synthesis (139). Here, further investigations are required.
by EcN is mediated in the epithelial cell nucleus by In mice with DSS-induced colitis, the interac-
transcription factors NF-κB and AP-1 (114). The tion between EcN and the intestinal mucosa resulted
factor responsible for HBD-2 synthesis induction by in the restoration of the impaired permeability
EcN is the structural flagellum component flagellin barrier (‘leaky gut’) (Figure 17) (130). The contact
Relative transcript level of HBD-2

25 **
0,12 ***
20 * ***
***
Mucosal permeability to Evans Blue

0,10
15
(absorbance 620 nm [abs./cm])

10 0,08

5 0,06
0
830
860

915
861
864

863
867
835
865

862
866

868
870
ed

EC
E. c PEC
-12
EcN

0,04
ulat

UP
oli K
E
stim

E. coli strains PZ #
0,02
non

Figure 16. Stimulation of human β-defensin-2 (HBD-2) gene 0

transcription in Caco-2 intestinal epithelial cells by pathogenic Control DSS DSS + EcN
(EPEC E2348/69, UPEC 536) and non-pathogenic E. coli strains
(E. coli K-12 DSM 498, EcN), and by E. coli strains with unknown Figure 17. Inhibition of ‘leaky gut’ phenomena by oral
pathogenicity (fecal isolates from healthy persons (PZ 860–915) administration of E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) to mice with dextran
and colitis ulcerosa patients (PZ 830, 835) (114,138). Caco-2 sodium sulfate (DSS)-induced colitis (130). Intestinal permeability
cells were stimulated for 4.5 h with 3  108 heat-inactivated to Evans Blue was determined in healthy mice (control, open bar),
bacteria/ml. Transcription of the HBD-2 gene was analyzed by mice with DSS-induced colitis (hatched bar), and mice treated
real-time PCR. HBD-2 gene expression is shown after stimulation with DSS plus EcN (black bar). Compared with healthy control
by the different E. coli strains, including probiotic E. coli Nissle mice, a significant increase in the uptake of Evans Blue by the
1917 (EcN). Data represent the means  SEM normalized to the colonic mucosa of DSS-treated mice was observed. This increase
basal expression of controls (set at 1) from one to six separate was strongly reduced in the group of mice treated with DSS plus
experiments run in triplicate. ∗p  0.0006; ∗∗p  0.0001. EcN to almost normal values. ∗∗∗p  0.001.

of EcN with the intestinal epithelial cells induced
the de novo synthesis and the redistribution of tight
junction proteins, such as zonula occludens
protein-1 (ZO-1), from the cytosol to the cell
membrane. This effect is important for the cohesive-
ness of the epithelial cell layer. Concomitantly,
DSS-induced disturbances of epithelial transport
functions, such as the strongly decreased activity of
the membrane-bound sodium pump, were restored
(130). For bacterial–epithelial interactions, the pres-
ence of the K5 capsule in the EcN strain also seems
to be important (140).
Similar mechanisms of action of EcN are respon-
sible for the recently detected prevention of the
development of gastric mucosal lesions in mice,
induced by acute stress (141). The authors showed
EcN to exhibit anti-inflammatory and blood flow-
stimulating activities. Concomitantly, in the epithe-
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
lial cells an increased synthesis of stress-protective
proteins, such as heat-shock protein 70 (Hsp 70),
could be demonstrated. The stress-induced enhanced
gene expression of mucosal inflammatory mediators
and the activation of transcription factor NF-κB was
down-regulated by EcN.
Calprotectin is a calcium- and zinc-binding pro-
tein, the synthesis of which is stimulated by LPS
(142,143). Calprotectin exerts antimicrobial activ-
ity by binding zinc and inhibiting the adhesion of
bacteria to epithelial cells of the gut mucosa (144).
In 8-day-old germ-free piglets, oral administration of
EcN led to an increase of calprotectin synthesis in
E. coli Nissle 1917
(EcN)
• Production of • Anti
defensins,
cathelicidin,
calprotectin
• Inhibition of
invasion
(Salmonella, EIEC, • Immuno-
AIEC, Shigella,
Yersinia, Listeria,
Candida)
Gut epithelium
Figure 18. Schematic summary of pharmacodynamic activities of probiotic E. coli strain Nissle 1917 (EcN) in the gut lumen (antagonistic
activity), and at the intestinal epithelium and beyond (host cell signaling).
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 139
the small intestine (145). Another non-pathogenic E.
coli strain (E. coli O86) and an enteropathogenic iso-
late (E. coli O55) did not show this effect in the gut.
In contrast to EcN and to E. coli O86, oral adminis-
tration of the enteropathogenic O55 strain provoked
an increase of calprotectin level in blood plasma and,
in addition, a pronounced increase of calprotectin
concentration in bronchoalveolar lavage that was
coincident with the development of septicemia.
All these favorable effects induced by EcN are
thought to be due to communication between
the probiotic and the epithelial cells by so-called
bacterial–epithelial crosstalk (19,146–149), medi-
ated via specific signaling molecules, most of them
being unknown up to now (Figure 18).
Effects on visceral hypersensitivity and constipation
The irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) belongs to
those functional bowel diseases that in about 25%
of patients have developed some time after an
episode of acute infectious diarrhea (150,151).
This post-infectious IBS is characterized by a hyper-
sensitivity of the visceral sensory system of the gut
(so-called visceral hyperalgesia). In an established
rat model of TNBS-induced visceral hyperalgesia,
oral administration of EcN led to a significant
reduction of the visceromotor reflexes (VMR) of the
gut muscles, which were enhanced before as a con-
sequence of the short-term inflammation induced
by TNBS (152).
Direct antagonistic
activity
• Inhibition of growth /
• killing
of pathogenic bacteria
and fungi
• Restorative effect
inflammatory on the epithelial
effects permeability barrier
(inhibition of
IL-5, IL-6, IFN-γ, • Prevention of leaky
TNFα effect gut symptoms in
on IL-8) case of disturbed
barrier function
modulation,
• Improvement of ion
e.g. IL-10 transport activity of
induction epithelial cells disturbed
by intestinal inflammation
 140 U. Sonnenborn et al.
Another functional bowel disease is chronic con-
stipation, where colonic motility is reduced and,
accordingly, intestinal transit slows down. In this
context, it is important that cell-free spent superna-
tants of EcN cultures positively modulated colonic
motility in an in vitro organ bath study with human
colonic circular smooth muscle strips (153). This
effect may be due, at least in part, to EcN’s ability
to produce acetic acid, the main metabolic end prod-
uct of its carbohydrate metabolism.
Antimutagenic activity
Microsatellite instability (MSI) in chronically
inflamed colonic tissue has been suggested to be
associated with the increased risk of ulcerative colitis
patients developing colorectal carcinoma. Substances
with anti-inflammatory activities, such as mesalazine
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
(5-aminosalicylic acid) or EcN, might improve MSI.
Therefore, Goel and co-workers (154) performed an
ex vivo analysis of MSI in 156 biopsies from 39 coli-
tis ulcerosa patients who had been treated with either
mesalazine or EcN in a randomized, double-blind
clinical trial (155). Overall, 20% (31/156) of biopsies
displayed MSI. After 1 year on medication, 6/20
patients showed MSI improvement (change to mic-
rosatellite stability (MSS): 3 on mesalazine and 3 on
EcN). Worsening of MSI (change from MSS to MSI)
was also observed, but only in patients treated with
mesalazine (6/20).
Using standard mutagenicity tests (Ames-test,
Comet-assay) (156,157), it has been shown recently
that EcN also exhibits antimutagenic activity against
some well-known mutagens, such as 4-nitroquinoline
1-oxide (NQO), benzo(a)pyrene, and H2O2 (158).
Figure 19. Biofilm formation by E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) in vitro as demonstrated by laser scanning microscopy. (A) Computer-assisted
height measurement; (B) density measurement. Pictures taken from: J. Schulze, M. Schiemann, U. Sonnenborn. 120 years of E. coli – its
importance in research and medicine. Alfred-Nissle-Gesellschaft, editor. Hagen, p 33, 2006; with kind permission. Scanning micrographs
courtesy of U. Dobrindt and H. Merkert, University of Wuerzburg, Germany.
Colonization capability
Following oral administration of E. coli Nissle 1917,
the strain exhibits good colonization capability in the
gut of gnotobiotic rats (92) and piglets (93). In gen-
eral, oral administration of EcN to different conven-
tionally kept mice and rats resulted in a longer-term
persistence or even a true colonization of the gut.
This has been shown for the original strain and for
recombinant and transformed EcN derivatives as
well (63,95,159,160). In NMRI mice, the good col-
onization capability of EcN is dependent on the pres-
ence of the regulatory protein RfaH, as has been
shown by colonization experiments comparing the
original EcN strain with a RfaH-negative mutant
(161). In this context, RfaH does not seem to be
important for bacterial adhesion to epithelial cells,
but seems to enhance resistance of the EcN strain to
bile acids. In vivo, the higher resistance to bile pro-
vides better chances of survival during transit of EcN
through the gastrointestinal tract (161).
Colonization is thought to be facilitated by the
capability of EcN to produce and secrete cellulose, a
feature important for biofilm formation (162). Interest-
ingly, EcN is able to form biofilms at 37°C (Figure 19).
In this respect the strain is different from other E.
coli strains, which are only able to produce biofilms
at lower temperatures (30°C). It is thought that this
characteristic of EcN might also be important for its
persistence in the gut after oral inoculation (63,162).
Curli fimbriae of E. coli are important factors mediat-
ing the formation of microcolonies, which represent
the first step in biofilm formation (163). Besides curli
fimbriae, EcN expresses F1A and F1C fimbriae
(54,64). The corresponding gene clusters for the

individual fimbriae types of EcN are localized on the
bacterial chromosome. Their existence on the chro-
mosomal DNA has been shown by using specific
DNA probes (164–167). The structural genes coding
for the F1A fimbriae (fimA) and the F1C fimbriae
(focA) have been sequenced and partially differ from
corresponding fimbrial DNA sequences found in
other E. coli strains (53).
The parallel existence of multiple iron acquisition
systems (siderophores) is peculiar to the EcN strain.
They are thought to be ‘fitness factors’, which prob-
ably are necessary for competition with other micro-
organisms in the gut (69,84,168). It might also be
one of the reasons for its ability to colonize or at least
to persist for some time in the intestine (79).
Also in humans, long-term intestinal colonization
by EcN could be achieved following oral administra-
tion of the strain, but only under certain specific
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 141
However, these are special circumstances: in gnoto-
biotic animals and human neonates no interfering
intestinal microbiota is present, which could prevent
colonization by the ‘intruder’ EcN. In adults pre-
treated with antibiotics plus lavage, the endogenous
microbiota is heavily disturbed, facilitating the settle-
ment of the newly introduced probiotic strain.
In contrast to this, in most cases permanent col-
onization of the intestine by EcN cannot be achieved
in healthy adults after oral administration, since the
present microbiota will try to prevent integration of
EcN into the existing microbial consortium. This is
also true for other probiotic strains (171). The indig-
enous intestinal microbiota does not differentiate
between microbial intruders that might be harmful
to the host (pathogens) and other microorganisms
that are useful (probiotics) (19). For the established
microbial consortium in the gut all foreign micro-

conditions (96,97,121,169) (see also Colonization
prophylaxis, below). In clinical trials with newborn
babies who received daily oral doses of 108 cfu of
EcN, starting immediately after birth, for the first 5
days of life, the applied strain could be recovered
from stool samples for a period of several months
(96,97). In adult volunteers, intentional disturbance
of the intestinal microbiota was achieved by treat-
ment with ciprofloxacin and metronidazole, followed
by an orthograde gastrointestinal lavage. Thereafter,
EcN was administered orally for 14 days, and the
strain could be detected in stool samples after the
end of medication for individually different periods
of time (up to 129 days in one volunteer) (169).
Accordingly, in a more recent study, after administra-
tion of the EcN strain for 1 week long-term persis-
tence of EcN in the gut of healthy adults was observed
only in about 50% of the volunteers after 2 weeks
and in less than 10% after 48 weeks (170).
Taken together, the results obtained in gnotobi-
otic and conventional animals, in human newborns,
and in adults treated with antibiotics and intestinal
lavage clearly show that in principle EcN is able
to colonize the gut, even in non-human species.
organisms entering the ecosystem are competitors
for the locally available substrates and ecological
niches.
Toxicological potential and safety aspects
(biosafety)
Investigations on possible adverse or even toxic
effects of probiotics are becoming more and more
important in the relevant literature (172–179). This
holds true for probiotics containing new lactic acid
bacteria that have no traditional use in humans, but
even more for probiotics with strains from bacterial
species that also contain pathogenic variants, such as,
for example, E. coli.
Since the species E. coli includes enteropatho-
genic and extraintestinal pathogenic strains
(54,68,180–184), particular attention has been paid
to the toxicological and biosafety aspects of the Nissle
strain (Table VI). As a general rule for probiotics
from Enterobacteriaceae, selected probiotic candidate
strains should not exhibit pathogenic adhesion fac-
tors and should not be able to form enterotoxins and
cytotoxins or to invade epithelial cells. Moreover,

Table VI. Biosafety aspects of E. coli strain Nissle 1917 (EcN) important for preventive and therapeutic use in human and veterinary
medicine.

Positive biosafety aspects found/considered Negative biosafety aspects tested

Exact species and strain designation: E. coli strain Nissle 1917 No enterotoxin production
Complete serotype determination: serotype O6:K5:H1 No cytotoxin production
Clonal affiliation: a non-pathogenic subclone of the E. coli O6: No pathogenic adhesion factors
K5-lineage No invasiveness
Genetic stability: genetically stable, bad acceptor of foreign plasmid DNA, no No immunotoxicity
stability of artificially introduced foreign plasmid DNA, no transfer of the No blood serum resistance (no risk of sepsis)
strain-specific cryptic plasmids pMUT1 and pMUT2 to other microorganisms No uropathogenicity
Deposit in Official Strain Collection: deposited in the strain collection of No toxicity in germ-free and conventional animals
industrially used strains at the German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell
Cultures (DSMZ) as E. coli DSM 6601
 142 U. Sonnenborn et al.
such strains should not carry virulence factors that
are typical for extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli, such
as serum resistance or hemolysin production, and
should not show uropathogenicity or provoke immu-
notoxic effects (19).
Toxin production
The EcN strain does not produce any of the toxins
associated with pathogenic E. coli strains, such as the
heat-labile enterotoxins (H-LT), heat-stable entero-
toxins (H-ST), cytotoxins (e.g. cytotoxic necrotizing
factor, CNF 1) or shiga-like toxins (SLT I, SLT II)
(Table VI). Toxin production was tested in vitro and
in vivo, using various assay systems (cell culture
methods with Y1 adrenal cells and Vero cells, specific
GM1-ELISA, baby mouse test). Examinations of
general cytotoxic activity and of the presence of SLT
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
I and SLT II were done according to the method of
Karch and Meyer (185). Testing for CNF 1 activity
was performed as described by Blum et al. (54,180).
In contrast to some ExPEC strains, EcN does not
produce any hemolysin (54,109). These findings are
due to the fact that the EcN strain does not possess
any genetic information for the production of
the above-mentioned toxins, as demonstrated by
PCR techniques using specific DNA probes (54,
164,180,185).
Using standard toxicological test methods
(according to EC Guideline L 383 A: B1) for the
determination of acute toxicity in rats and mice, EcN
shows no toxic effects after oral administration of up
to 50 ml/kg body weight of a suspension containing
2  1011 viable bacteria/ml (J. Leuschner, unpub-
lished results). For that reason, an LD50 value could
not be determined. Also, in young germ-free and
colostrum-deprived piglets, colonization with EcN
did not lead to any toxic effects (93). This finding is
particularly remarkable, because these animals rep-
resent an infection model of a completely immuno-
deficient host organism (186).
Invasiveness and translocation
The EcN strain does not have invasive properties. In
vivo testing was done according to the classic method
of Sereny (187) by following the development of
keratoconjunctivitis after inoculation of bacteria into
guinea pig eyes. Contrary to known invasive E.
coli strains, EcN did not lead to keratoconjunctivitis
(G. Böhme, unpublished results). In vitro testing was
performed by using different epithelial cell lines
(99–101,188,189). Here, EcN also did not show any
invasive activity, which can be explained by the fact
that the strain does not carry the genes coding for
the invasion machinery of enteroinvasive E. coli
(EIEC) or Shigella strains (56). In in vitro experi-
ments with HT-29/B6 cells stressed by treatment
with proinflammatory cytokines, EcN did not show
translocation across the colonic monolayers, in con-
trast to a uropathogenic E. coli O4 strain (190).
Serum resistance
A common feature of ExPEC strains producing
sepsis and meningitis is their ability to resist the bac-
tericidal activity of blood serum (59). This charac-
teristic is called serum resistance. The EcN strain
does not show serum resistance when inoculated into
human, bovine or pig serum. This finding can be
explained by the presence of its modified (semi-
rough) O6 surface antigen (55,191). Serum resis-
tance testing was done by employing the classic in
vitro assay of Hughes et al. (60).
Pathogen-specific adhesion factors
Mannose-resistant hemagglutination is a feature that
is common in pathogenic E. coli strains. EcN shows
no mannose-resistant hemagglutination and forms
no CFA I/II fimbriae, which are closely associated
with the enteropathogenicity of certain E. coli strains
(181,192). In the absence of mannose, EcN is capa-
ble of agglutinating erythrocytes, but not in the pres-
ence of mannose. This behavior is typical of E. coli
strains possessing the so-called common type I fim-
briae (F1A-fimbriae) (54,193). The test for the pres-
ence of CFA I or CFA II fimbriae was carried out
by slide agglutination using specific anti-CFA I and
anti-CFA II antisera (181,194,195). Moreover, EcN
does not express P, M or S fimbriae, which are asso-
ciated with the virulence of certain ExPEC strains
(196) and does not possess the respective gene loci
for these adherence factors (56).
Uropathogenicity
The genome of the Nissle strain exhibits high homol-
ogy to that of the UPEC strain CFT073 (56),
although genes for classic uropathogenicity traits are
lacking. This has led some researchers to speculate
whether the EcN strain might have some virulence
in the urogenital system (83). However, EcN shows
none of the uropathogenicity traits typical of UPEC
strains (196,197) (Table VII). Compared with uro-
pathogenic and other tested E. coli strains, it pos-
sesses only a very limited potential for colonization
of the urinary tract, as was demonstrated by using
the transurethrally infected rat model (197). In this
respect, the colonizing ability of EcN is comparable
to that of the avirulent laboratory strain E. coli K-12.
Following transurethral infection of 20 rats with
 E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 143
Table VII. Comparison of E. coli strain Nissle 1917 (EcN) with non-pathogenic and uropathogenic E. coli (UPEC) strains in vitro and in
a rat transurethral infection model.

Bacterial Bacterial
counts per counts per Lethality (number
gram urinary gram kidney of dead animals/
Hemolysin UPEC-specific Serum bladder (log (log cfu  number of infected
E. coli strains tested Serotype (Hly) fimbriae resistance cfu  SD) SD) animals)

EcN O6:K5:H1 – – – 3.65  1.5 2.68  1.89 0/20

SK 60 O18:K–:H17 – – + 5.60  1.9 2.72  1.65 2/20
SK 64 O18:K5:H– + P + 5.80  2.0 5.26  2.57 4/20
536 wild-type O6:K15:H31 + S + 5.74  1.61 3.89  1.28 6/20
536/21 (non- O6:K15:H31 – – – 2.52  1.0 1.15  1.62 1/20
pathogenic deletion
mutant of strain 536)

EcN, E. coli Nissle 1917; SK 60, E. coli isolate from a pharmaceutical product; SK 64, uropathogenic E. coli isolate (UPEC); 536,
uropathogenic E. coli isolate (UPEC); 536/21, non-pathogenic deletion mutant of UPEC strain 536. Transurethral infection was done
according to Marre et al. (197). Bacterial counts in the respective tissues were determined 1 week after infection (data from R. Marre,
unpublished results).
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

5  107 viable cells of EcN, no lethal effects could for many other pathogenicity factors are localized on
be observed in any case, in contrast to tran- high-molecular mass plasmids (183).
surethral infection with uropathogenic E. coli strains
(Table VII). Immunotoxicology
According to its DNA fragment profile, as
revealed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) To determine the immunogenic and immunotoxic
following restriction of its genomic DNA, EcN potential of EcN, the original EcN strain as well as
belongs to a non-uropathogenic O6:K5 clone, if
compared with DNA profiles of serologically related Table VIII. Sensitivity and resistance of E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN)
uropathogenic and non-uropathogenic E. coli strains against different antibiotics∗.
of the O6 lineage (J. Hacker, unpublished results; K.
EcN sensitive to EcN resistant against†
Eiteljörge, unpublished results). Macrorestriction
analyses were done according to the methods of Ott Amikacin Cefsulodin
Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid Clindamycin
et al. (58) and Zingler et al. (166,167).
Ampicillin Erythromycin
Azlocillin Metronidazole
Resistance to antibiotics Cefaclor Penicillin G
Cefazolin Quinupristin/dalfopristin
As an isolate from the pre-antibiotic era, EcN is not Cefoperazone Rifampin
resistant to commonly used antibiotics that are effec- Cefotaxime Teicoplanin
Ceftriaxone Vancomycin
tive against gram-negative enterobacteria (tests Cephalothin
according to NCCLS) (198). Furthermore, the strain Chloramphenicol
does not possess any antibiotic resistance plasmid. Ciprofloxacin
The two small cryptic plasmids characteristic of EcN Doxycycline
(pMUT1 and pMUT2) do not carry any genetic Gentamicin
Imipenem
information for antibiotic resistances (53). Besides Latamoxef
this, EcN – like all other E. coli strains – shows natu- Mezlocillin
ral resistance to antibiotics that are mainly directed Nitrofurantoin
against gram-positive bacteria, such as clindamycin, Norfloxacin
erythromycin, metronidazole, penicillin G, rifampin, Pipemidic acid
Piperacillin
and vancomycin (Table VIII). Rifampicin
Streptomycin
Tetracycline
Presence of large plasmids Ticarcillin
Tobramycin
EcN does not possess plasmids of high-molecular Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole
mass that are known to carry genes coding for anti- ∗The antimicrobial substances appear in alphabetical order.
biotic resistance and/or pathogenicity traits (183). †Like E. coli in general, EcN shows natural resistance against the listed
For example, the genes coding for invasiveness of antibiotics. As an isolate from the pre-antibiotic era, EcN has no
enteroinvasive E. coli (EIEC) and the genes coding acquired resistance, and no antibiotic resistance plasmids are present.
 144 U. Sonnenborn et al.
a recombinant clone of EcN expressing the HA110-
120 peptide of influenza A virus on its cell surface
have been used (160). For this purpose, the bacteria
have been administered orally to different conven-
tionally kept mouse strains (BALB/c, RAG-1–/–,
TCR-HA-transgenic mice, and double transgenic
mice expressing the influenza HA peptide under the
control of the rat insulin promoter [INS-HA 
TCR-HA]), and the immunological effects of EcN
on the respective HA110-120-specific CD4+ T cells
in the gut and in the peripheral lymphatic tissues
have been analyzed. In addition, the original and the
recombinant EcN strain have been tested for coloni-
zation capability and for effects on the gut mucosa
of mice, under normal conditions as well as after
genetically induced diabetes and after DSS-induced
colitis, respectively. Although both strains, the origi-
nal EcN and its recombinant derivative, exhibited
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
could only be induced in germ-free C3H/HeJZtm
mice, not in conventionally housed mutant mice.
In healthy young pigs housed under conventional
conditions, oral application of EcN did not induce
significant changes of immunological parameters in
the gut-associated lymphoid tissue (102,103).
Genetic stability
EcN is genetically stable, both in vitro following
100 sequential cultivation cycles (K. Eiteljörge,
unpublished results), and in vivo following implan-
tation and passage through the intestinal tract of
newborns, which has been shown with EcN re-
isolates obtained from stool samples of 14 children,
24 months after administration of EcN suspension
(K. Eiteljörge, U. Sonnenborn, unpublished results).
Evidence of genetic stability has been provided by

good colonizing ability in the gut, there were no means of standard comparative macrorestriction
effects on migration, clonal expansion, or state of analysis using PFGE of chromosomal DNA frag-
activation of specific CD4+ T cells. This was true for ments obtained from the original strain and from
healthy as well as for diseased mice. In the double re-isolates as well as by means of specific REP-PCR
transgenic mouse strain, which is considered to be a (166,167,201,202).
highly susceptible model for autoimmune diseases EcN is a poor recipient for conjugative foreign
(genetically induced diabetes) (160), oral adminis- DNA. Testing of EcN for the acceptance of foreign
tration of recombinant EcN had no effect on induc- plasmid DNA was done by determination of conju-
tion or breakdown of T-cell tolerance. gation frequencies following standard conjugation
Further experiments on gnotobiotic IL-2–/– mice techniques with various plasmid groups (incompat-
mono-colonized with the EcN strain revealed that ibility groups, Inc) (203). Conjugation frequencies of
EcN did not induce colitis, in contrast to coloniza- EcN were compared with those of the E. coli K-12
tion with the colitogenic E. coli strain mpk (199). laboratory strain, which served as a positive (100%)
However, contrary to the well-known but ‘degen- control (Table IX, G. Böhme, unpublished results).
erated’ E. coli K-12 laboratory strain, EcN is an The fact that EcN does not take up plasmids of the
E. coli strain that is thought to have retained some IncFI and IncFII types (conjugation frequency 0%)
wild-type characteristics (56). Therefore, the sensi- is of special importance, because in pathogenic E. coli
tivity to EcN in mice is dependent on the genetic
background of the animals (severity of immune dys- Table IX. Test of the ability of E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) to serve
function) as well as on the microbial environment as a recipient for foreign plasmid DNA.
(colonized vs germ-free state). This has been shown DNA DNA
in a recent immunotoxicological study in genetically acceptance acceptance
engineered mouse strains (knockout mice) with dif- Inc group (%) Inc group (%)
ferent immunological handicaps. EcN did not exhibit IncB 1 IncK 0
toxicity after a 1-week course of oral administration IncC 10 IncM 0
to germ-free and conventionally kept animals (200). IncD 5 IncN 0
The only exceptions were the double-mutant C3H/ IncFI 0 IncP 5
IncFII 0 IncQ 1
HeJZtm mice, which have defects in the gene cluster IncFIII 0.5 IncT 5
coding TLR-4. TLR-4, which is present on gut epi- IncOF 1 IncU 0.1
thelial cells as well as on different types of lympho- IncH1 0.05 IncW1 0.1
cytes, is responsible for the recognition of the IncH2 0.01 IncW2 0.2
immunologically highly active LPS of gram-negative IncH3 0.01 IncW4 0.1
IncI1 0.5 IncX 0.1
bacteria, such as E. coli. Germ-free mutant mice IncI2 0 IncY 0
experienced enhanced translocation of EcN from the IncJ 0 IncZ 1
gut into the bloodstream, leading to septicemia and
Results of conjugation experiments with plasmids from different
infection of several organs. It is not known whether incompatibility (Inc) groups (G. Böhme, unpublished results).
EcN might show serum resistance in blood serum of Relative values of DNA acceptance (%) are given in comparison
these mice. Interestingly, this infection of gut origin to E. coli K-12 (100%).

strains these Inc groups often contain virulence
plasmids.
EcN cannot be transformed by the tox-phages of
enterohemorrhagic E. coli strains (EHEC), which
otherwise are capable of transfering the slt genes for
the production of shiga-like toxins to other recipient
strains (204). Attempts to introduce the slt genes into
EcN by means of electroporation have also not been
successful (204). Phage-encoded genetic informa-
tion for the production of EHEC-specific shiga-like
toxins (205–207) is not taken up by EcN.
Risk group assessment
EcN has been classified as a risk group I organism
(lowest risk group for microorganisms) by the official
German Central Commission for Biological Safety
(ZKBS, Zentrale Kommission für Biologische
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
Sicherheit), due to the lack of toxicity traits and
its extensive molecular genetic and functional
characterization.
Clinical efficacy and safety of E. coli Nissle
1917 in human medicine
The licensed drug Mutaflor® is available either in
capsule form containing lyophilized powder with
viable E. coli Nissle 1917 (2.5–25  109 cfu/capsule)
or as a bacterial suspension (108 cfu/ml). The cap-
sules are enteric coated in such a way that viable EcN
bacteria are released no earlier than in the terminal
ileum. This galenic formulation is necessary to pro-
tect EcN against gastric acidity and the antimicrobial
action of bile and digestive enzymes in the small
intestine. The suspension contains viable EcN bacte-
ria in an electrolyte solution free of carbohydrates and
nitrogen sources. This preparation has been devel-
oped especially for babies and toddlers, but may also
be used by adults with difficulties in swallowing cap-
sules. With respect to the clinical use of Mutaflor®,
about nine decades of experience exist. The spectrum
of indications for which EcN has been successfully
used is relatively broad, which was demonstrated in
a recently conducted prospective post-marketing sur-
veillance study (51). Controlled clinical trials that are
able to prove efficacy are available for the indications
ulcerative colitis, chronic habitual constipation, and
acute and protracted (prolonged) diarrhea in young
children. This will be discussed in more detail below.
In addition, several pilot studies useful for the gen-
eration of hypotheses have been executed so far and
gave hints for possible effectiveness of this probiotic
for other indications. This concerns IBS (208–210),
collagenous colitis (211), pseudomembraneous colitis
(212,213), proctitis (214), Crohn’s disease (215),
diverticulosis (216), pouchitis (217), halitosis (218),
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 145
liver cirrhosis (219), and interestingly, also in a
dermatological allergic disease (polymorphic light
eruptions, ‘sun allergy’) (220).
Inflammatory bowel diseases
Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) are severe dis-
eases of the gastrointestinal tract connected with
enormous suffering for the respective patients. Ulcer-
ative colitis and Crohn’s disease are the most com-
mon forms of IBD (221–223). While the etiological
factors for the onset of IBD are unknown in most
cases, there is intensive knowledge today with respect
to the pathogenesis of these diseases, supporting the
hypotheses that an over-reactive immune system on
the basis of a genetical predisposition causes inflam-
mation of the intestinal mucosa (ulcerative colitis) or
of the entire gut wall (Crohn’s disease) (12,13,23,221).
This process is triggered, sustained, and intensified
by different environmental factors (224,225). Since
the recognition of the importance of the environmen-
tal factor ‘intestinal microbiota’ for the pathogenesis
of IBD, the application of preparations containing
viable microorganisms (probiotics) to IBD patients
is gaining more and more interest and acceptance in
medical, and especially in gastroenterological prac-
tice (12,21,23,44,47,226–240).
In three randomized controlled clinical trials
(RCTs) EcN has been used for the maintenance of
remission in patients with ulcerative colitis and com-
pared to the gold standard mesalazine. The first study
was a controlled clinical pilot trial with double-
dummy design (241); 103 patients in remission were
enrolled. Fifty-three patients received 6  250 mg
mesalazine per day (control group), while 50 patients
received 2 capsules with EcN per day. The aim of the
study was the maintenance of remission during a
3-month period. This was controlled by following the
development of the clinical disease activity index.
Life-table analysis revealed no difference between
groups with respect to the length of time free of
relapses (103  4 days for the group taking mesala-
zine vs 106  5 days for the group taking EcN).
These results were confirmed by histological exami-
nations and by the personal judgment of the patients
with respect to the intensity of their disease at the
end of the trial.
This first study on the usefulness of a probiotic
in ulcerative colitis was followed by another random-
ized controlled clinical trial, which was conducted for
a 12-month period, including patients with active
ulcerative colitis (242). This trial was based on the
experience that acute relapses in IBD patients could
be initiated and intensified by strongly adherent E.
coli bacteria (243). The question was whether EcN
was able to maintain remission as effectively as
 146 U. Sonnenborn et al.
mesalazine after initial treatment with antibiotics and
corticosteroids. In all, 116 patients with active ulcer-
ative colitis were enrolled and were randomly assigned
to 2 groups in a double-blind, double-dummy fash-
ion to receive either 3  800 mg mesalazine or 2 
2 capsules with EcN. All patients received predniso-
lone to stop the intestinal inflammation and, in addi-
tion, a 1-week course of gentamicin. Those patients
who were not in remission after 12 weeks on pred-
nisolone were excluded from the further trial. Patients
in remission (44 on mesalazine, 39 on EcN) then
received per day either 3  400 mg mesalazine or
1  2 capsules with EcN for the following 12 months.
The efficacy of both forms of therapy was calculated
with respect to the numbers of relapses occurring
during the study period of 1 year. The result was that
no differences could be detected between the two
treatment groups: 73% of the patients receiving
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
thus being suitable for equivalence testing. Patients
were randomly assigned to two study groups and
received either 3  500 mg mesalazine or two cap-
sules with EcN for a period of 1 year. The results of
all patients recruited for the study (intention-to-treat
analysis) as well as the results of those patients fulfill-
ing all criteria of the study protocol (per-protocol
analysis, n  222) revealed that treatment with EcN
was equivalent to treatment with mesalazine. In the
EcN group 36.4% of the patients experienced a
relapse during the course of 1 year; in the mesalazine
group 33.9% relapsed (Figure 21). The one-sided
equivalence test showed a p value of 0.003. This
study proved that EcN represents an effective alter-
native to mesalazine for maintaining remission in
patients with ulcerative colitis.
On the basis of these study results, EcN has been
included as an effective therapeutic agent for the

mesalazine and 76% of the patients receiving EcN
had a relapse during this time (p  0.0059, one-sided
test for proof of non-inferiority). Also the duration
of the remission phase was not significantly different
between the two treatment groups (mesalazine,
206 days; EcN, 221 days), which is also reflected by
the Kaplan–Meier plot of patients in remission in the
course of the study (Figure 20).
To confirm these results, another RCT with
double-dummy design was initiated to prove that
EcN is not inferior to mesalazine for maintenance of
remission in patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis
(155). This large double-blind study was conducted
in 10 European countries and included 327 patients,
maintenance of remission in patients with ulcerative
colitis into the treatment guidelines of the German
and the Austrian gastroenterological associations as
well as in the guidelines of the European Crohn and
Colitis Organisation (ECCO) (244–247).
Recently, similar results were obtained in an open
controlled pilot study in children and teenagers with
ulcerative colitis. In this study, 24 patients (mean age
14.6 years) received two capsules with EcN per
day for a 1-year period and 10 patients (mean age
14.0 years) received 1.2 g mesalazine per day for the
same time course. After 1 year, 25% of patients in
the EcN group and 30% of patients in the mesalazine
group experienced a relapse (248).

100 Duration of remission EcN

Mesalazine
90

80
Patients in remission(%)

70

60

50

40

30

20

10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Days

Figure 20. Comparison of mesalazine (5-aminosalicylic acid, 5-ASA) vs E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) for remission maintenance in patients
with ulcerative colitis (242). A total of 116 patients with active ulcerative colitis were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups
in a double-blind clinical trial with double-dummy design. Patients who had reached remission by standard corticosteroid therapy within
12 weeks were then given either mesalazine or EcN for 1 year. The Kaplan–Meier plot shows the percentage of patients in remission during
the course of the study (straight line, EcN; dotted line, mesalazine). With respect to clinical efficacy and time course of remission, there
were no statistically significant differences between the two study groups.

100
Per-protocol-analysis
Patients with relapses (%)
(n = 222)
80
60 Equivalence significant with p = 0.003
36.4%
40 33.9%
20
0
EcN Mesalazine
Figure 21. Clinical equivalence study between mesalazine
(5-aminosalicylic acid, 5-ASA) and E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) for
maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis (155). A total of 327
patients with quiescent ulcerative colitis were recruited and
randomly assigned to a double-blind clinical multicenter trial with
double-dummy design that was performed in 10 European
countries. Patients received either mesalazine or EcN for 1 year.
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
At the end of the study, 222 patients could be included in the
per-protocol analysis. Of these, 40/110 (36.4%) in the EcN group
and 38/112 (33.9%) in the mesalazine group showed a relapse
during the 1-year period of treatment. The data show significant
equivalence between both treatment groups with respect to clinical
efficacy (maintenance of remission) (p  0.003).
Jöres-Nguyen-Xuan et al. (170) have shown
recently in healthy volunteers that mesalazine and
EcN do not interfere when administered together,
opening the way for clinical trials on the usefulness
of a combination therapy for IBD.
Chronic constipation
The effectiveness of EcN to induce a normalization
of intestinal functions could also be shown in patients
with chronic constipation. Using a parallel group
comparison, constipated patients (after stopping the
use of laxatives) received either 2  15 ml lactulose
syrup per day (n  52) or 3  1 capsule with EcN
per day (n  56) (249). After 12 weeks of treatment,
in the EcN group the number of bowel movements
increased to 6.3 per week. In the lactulose group the
number of bowel movements increased to 5.5 per
week. The ease of evacuation improved significantly
in those patients taking EcN compared with those in
the lactulose group (p  0.001). Adverse events
(mainly flatulence and abdominal cramps) did occur
sometimes, but were seen more often in the lactulose
group.
In a further study (250) chronically constipated
patients received in a randomized double-blind study
either capsules with EcN or placebo capsules over
a period of 8 weeks. Initially, in a ‘run-in-phase’ all
patients received placebo for 1 week. Only those
patients who did not have more than two bowel
movements during the run-in-phase were thereafter
randomly attributed to verum or placebo group.
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 147
The EcN and the placebo capsules were taken at
breakfast each day. The following doses were applied:
3  2 capsules per day on days 1 and 2, 1  4 cap-
sules per day from day 3 onwards for a total of 8
weeks. Within 4 weeks the number of bowel move-
ments in the EcN group increased significantly (4.9/
week, p  0.001) compared with the placebo group
(2.6/week) (Figure 22). While patients in the EcN
group experienced a further increase in bowel move-
ments during the next 4 weeks (up to 6.0/week), the
number of bowel movements of patients in the pla-
cebo group decreased to 1.9/week. The study design
included a change-over to the other kind of treatment
for patients who did not experience an effect of either
medication (less than three bowel movements per
week) during the first 4 weeks. With respect to this,
13 placebo patients changed to EcN treatment,
which resulted in an increase of bowel movements
during the next 4 weeks up to 5.15/week. On the
other hand, two patients changed from EcN to pla-
cebo, but did not experience any increase of bowel
movements (2.5 per week).
The therapeutic efficacy of EcN in chronically
constipated patients might rather reflect the probiot-
ics’ ability to produce gut motility-enhancing short-
chain fatty acids, such as acetic acid (153) (discussed
earlier), but not the production of gases (CO2, H2),
since in a study with healthy volunteers EcN has
been shown to exert no effect on intestinal gas
dynamics and abdominal sensation (251).
Diarrhea in young children
Recently, efficacy and safety of EcN for the treatment
of acute diarrhea of babies and toddlers were studied
in a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind clin-
ical multicenter trial (252). Acute diarrhea was defined
as showing three non-bloody evacuations per day with
reduced consistency (liquid or almost liquid). Acute
diarrhea should not last longer than 3 consecutive
days. A total number of 113 babies and toddlers, aged
2–46 months (median 23 months), were recruited for
the study and randomly assigned to the EcN group
(n  55) or to the placebo group (n  58). Patients
received either EcN suspension (108 cfu/ml) or an
indistinguishable placebo from day 0 until day 9 in a
dosage dependent on age: babies (1 year) 1  1 ml
suspension/day, toddlers ( 1 to 3 years) 2  1 ml/
day, and older children ( 3 to 4 years) 3  1 ml/
day. Before enrollment, the mean duration of diarrhea
was 1.4 days for the infants in the EcN group and 1.6
days for the infants in the placebo group. None of the
children was dehydrated when included in the study.
In both treatment groups diarrhea was partly due to
bacterial or viral infections as well as other unspecific
causes that were not further elucidated. The primary
 148 U. Sonnenborn et al.

p < 0.001
9
p < 0.001
Maximum
8

Bowel movements / week

Minimum
7
Placebo
6
EcN
5

1 n = 35 n = 35 n = 30 n = 34 n = 16 n = 31
0
0 4 8 Weeks

Figure 22. Double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial with E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) for the treatment of chronic habitual
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017

constipation (250). Initially, all constipated patients (n  134, two bowel movements per week or less) in a blinded manner received a
placebo medication for 1 week which, however, was handed over to them by the principal investigator as a ‘new biological drug against
constipation’. After the 1-week course on placebo, only those patients who did not respond to this treatment (n  70) were allowed to
enter the real double-blind study and were randomly assigned to receive either EcN or placebo. The figure shows the development of the
main target criterion (number of bowel movements per week) during the 8-week course of the study. EcN was significantly better than
placebo in increasing the weekly frequency of bowel movements after 4 and after 8 weeks on medication (p  0.001 for EcN vs
placebo).

goal of the trial, to reduce the number of bowel move- mean duration until reaching this goal was 2.5 days
ments (less than or equal to three liquid or almost in the verum and 4.8 days in the placebo group
liquid evacuations per day on at least 2 consecutive (Figure 23A). Treatment with EcN thus reduced the
days), was reached by 52/55 patients (94.5%) in the mean duration of diarrhea by 2.3 days. This differ-
EcN group and 39/58 patients (67.2%) in the placebo ence between verum and placebo is statistically
group. By analysis according to Kaplan–Meier the significant (p  0.007).

A Significant difference
p < 0.0007
Gain in time:
diarrhoea

EcN suspension
2.3 days
Acute

Placebo suspension

0 1 2 3 4 5 Days
2.5 days 4.8 days

B Significant difference
p < 0.0001
Gain in time:
EcN suspension
3.3 days

∅ 5.8 days prolonged diarrhoea Placebo suspension

–5 –4 –3 –2 –1 0 1 2 3 4 5 Days

2.4 days 5.7 days

Figure 23. Two double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials have been performed with E. coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) suspension
(108 cfu/ml) for the treatment of acute diarrhea (A) or prolonged diarrhea (B) in young children (252,253) (see text for details). In the
study on acute diarrhea (A), EcN treatment shortened the duration of diarrhea by 2.3 days compared with placebo (p  0.0007). In the
study on prolonged diarrhea (B), EcN treatment shortened the duration of diarrhea by 3.3 days (p  0.0001). These results demonstrate
that EcN suspension is an effective treatment option for diarrheal diseases in infants.

In a second randomized placebo-controlled
double-blind multicenter study the efficacy of EcN
for the treatment of unspecific protracted diarrhea in
babies and toddlers was examined (253). Protracted
diarrhea was defined as follows: more than three
non-bloody liquid to almost liquid evacuations per
day. The diarrhea should have been present for at
least 4 days and not longer than 2 weeks. A total of
151 babies and toddlers, aged 1–47 months, who
experienced a prolonged diarrhea as defined above
were recruited for the study. They were randomly
assigned to the EcN group (n  75) or to the placebo
group (n  76). At the beginning of the study the
mean duration of diarrhea was 5.8 days for both
groups. The number of bowel evacuations during the
last 24 h before the onset of the study was four to
six, mostly of liquid consistency and with mucus
shedding. Patients received either the verum or the
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
placebo suspension from day 0 until day 20, applying
the same age-dependent dosage scheme as in the
study on acute diarrhea described above. To prevent
dehydration because of loss of liquid and electrolytes,
all patients initially received an oral rehydration ther-
apy (ORT) for 4 h according to the WHO Guideline
‘Treatment of diarrhoea (2001)’ in an outpatient
setting.
The main goal of this study was to achieve a
decrease of bowel movements (three or less liquid or
almost liquid evacuations per day for at least 4 con-
secutive days). Treatment with EcN should have
demonstrated superiority compared with placebo on
days 7 and 14. The primary aim of the study was
reached by 59/75 (78.7%) of patients in the EcN
group and by 45/76 (59.2%) of patients in the
placebo group on day 7. After 14 days this goal
was reached by 70/75 (93.3%) of the patients on
EcN and by 50/76 (65.8%) of the placebo patients
(Figure 23B). Therapy was stopped for 13 patients
because of ineffectiveness (2 patients on EcN, 11
patients on placebo). These patients were treated
thereafter with other drugs. Using sequential group
analysis it could be shown that already on day 7 there
was a strong tendency for superiority of EcN therapy
over placebo (p  0.0758). The difference between
the two groups increased in the course of the study
and was significant on day 14 (p  0.0017). Using
Kaplan–Meier analysis, the time to reach the main
goal of the study was calculated to be 2.4 days in the
EcN and 5.7 days in the placebo group. Treatment
with EcN reduced the mean duration of protracted
diarrhea for about 3.3 days.
In summary, probiotic therapy with the Nissle
strain showed statistically significant superiority
compared with placebo for acute as well as for pro-
longed (protracted) diarrhea in babies and toddlers.
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 149
Interestingly, with respect to the time-sparing effect
of EcN, a comparison of the efficacy of EcN to that
of other probiotics (19) also suggested superiority of
EcN over several LAB preparations, although a true
comparison between the preparations used is diffi-
cult because of very different study designs.
Colonization prophylaxis
Studies concerning colonization prophylaxis in pre-
term and full-term neonates have shown that the oral
application of EcN during the first days of life resulted
in a long-standing colonization of the gut with this
probiotic, followed by a reduced colonization with
true and potential pathogens (96,97). In addition, this
intentional colonization resulted in a significant
increase of specific immunoglobulins IgA and IgM
(121) as well as in an early induction of natural
immune defenses (122). This points to the develop-
ment of the gut immune system in the direction
towards an infection-preventing state, which is
reflected by an anti-allergic Th1-dominated immune
situation (111). Since children of allergic parents have
a high risk of developing allergies early in life, inten-
tional colonization of the gut with EcN might turn out
to be an effective alternative for allergy prevention.
Safety aspects in clinical use
EcN-treatment is generally well tolerated. No serious
adverse drug reactions have been reported from the
explorative and confirmatory clinical trials conducted
to date to demonstrate efficacy and tolerability of
EcN for different indications. Flatulence, which is
occasionally observed, especially at the beginning of
the probiotic therapy, is suspected to be due to the
metabolic activity of EcN in the gut. This ailment
probably represents individual overdosing and does
not require a cessation of medication nor specific
treatment, since in general it vanishes after reducing
the dose. In clinical investigations on the tolerability
of EcN in healthy volunteers, up to nine capsules per
day (about 1011 cfu/day) were tolerated without any
problems (E. Zieseniss, unpublished results).
High-risk patients, such as preterm infants and
also full-term babies, in whom the intestinal mucosal
barriers are not yet fully developed, are nevertheless
tolerant to a daily oral application of 1 ml EcN sus-
pension (108 cfu/day). This has been shown repeat-
edly during the course of several clinical trials on
neonates (96,97,121,122). Although the application
of EcN suspension to newborn infants directly after
birth (1 ml once a day for 5 days) resulted in an early
induction of the development of both the gut and the
systemic immune system (121,122), in a study on
 150 U. Sonnenborn et al.
healthy adult male volunteers the application of two
capsules with EcN once a day for a total of 3 days
did not reveal significant changes in any of the
immune parameters tested (cytokines, receptor mol-
ecules) (R. Gruber, unpublished results). Also,
neither induction of autoimmune phenomena nor
immunotoxic effects have been observed. These find-
ings underline the clinical safety of the EcN strain.
Clinical efficacy of E. coli Nissle 1917 in
veterinary medicine
Until the redefinition of the term probiotic by Fuller
in 1989 (30), viable microorganisms (LAB) were
used as feed additives or medical remedies mainly in
animals, although human experiences have existed for
several thousand years by the traditional consumption
of fermented foods. In animal breeding the addition
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
of viable bacteria to the feed was thought to stimulate
the growth of the animals, similar to the prophylactic
use of low-dose antibiotics, in order to increase the
efficacy of feed exploitation followed by the enhanced
production of meat, milk, and eggs and to improve
the general health condition of the animals (254). At
that time, there was more speculation than proof as
regards the scientific basis of clinical efficacy and the
modes of action of probiotics. Since the scientific
interest has concentrated in humans on the elucida-
tion of the modes of action of such preparations, the
number of studies on the use of probiotics in domes-
tic animals has decreased. Nevertheless, infectious
diarrhea is the leading cause of morbidity and mortal-
ity in young piglets and calves, induced by shortening
of the lactation period, industrialized maintenance
conditions, and inadequate feeding. Often more than
50% of newborn calves are affected by diarrhea
between the seventh and the tenth day of life, which
reduces the development of the animals and may be
the cause of about 8% of all newborn deaths (255).
The efficacy of a suspension with EcN for pre-
venting diarrhea in newborn calves has been tested
in a pilot study as well as in a confirmatory placebo-
controlled blinded clinical trial (133). In both studies
the animals received 15 ml EcN suspension (108
cfu/ml) on the day of birth, before the first intake of
colostrum, and then continuously once a day until
day 10 or 12. The oral application of EcN suspension
was executed each morning before conventional
feeding was performed. The control group of animals
received a similar placebo suspension (electrolyte
solution) also before feeding in the morning. The
newborn calves were fed colostrum on the first day
of life. Colostrum was then replaced by the addition
of pooled milk or commercially available milk
replacer. In the pilot study 172 calves were included
(placebo group, n  89; EcN group, n  83), and
the confirmatory controlled study comprised 163
calves (placebo group, n  81; EcN group, n  82).
In both studies the number of animals experiencing
diarrhea were counted. Diarrhea was defined as loose
or watery excrements on at least 2 following days. In
the first study, 58 animals (65.2%) in the placebo
group experienced diarrhea, but only 22 animals
(26.5%) in the EcN group. In the confirmatory clin-
ical trial, 51 animals (63%) in the placebo group, but
only 10 animals (12.2%) in the EcN group showed
diarrhea. This difference of 50.8% (p  0.001) rep-
resents a decrease in diarrhea episodes in the animal
population of more than 80% and proves the high
efficacy of EcN in the prophylaxis and therapy of
diarrhea in neonatal calves (133).
The anti-diarrheic efficacy of EcN was also
assessed in a pig model of intestinal bacterial infection
(256). Here, 1010 viable cells of porcine enterotoxi-
genic E. coli strain Abbotstown (EcA) were given via
an orogastric tube to weaned piglets (n  7) at day
21 postpartum. At 48 h after challenge electrophysi-
ological parameters of isolated jejunal epithelium
were assessed in Ussing chambers. In agreement with
clinical signs of diarrhea, tissue of challenged animals
showed an overshoot of secretory response after stim-
ulation of the cAMP-mediated second messenger
pathway by forskolin, indicating higher excitability of
chloride secretory channels under the infection. These
data were compared with the respective measure-
ments of jejunal tissues from animals that received a
daily dose of 1010 viable cells of EcN over 10 days
before EcA challenge (n  4), with a group on EcN
only (n  4), and with a group of untreated animals
(controls, n  6). EcN pretreatment completely abol-
ished clinical signs of secretory diarrhea and the over-
shoot of secretory response of intestinal epithelium
upon stimulation with forskolin, seen in mono-infected
animals. These results demonstrate clinical efficacy of
EcN in preventing gut infection and secretory diar-
rhea induced by enterotoxigenic E. coli in pigs.
Concluding remarks
Until recently, the use of living microorganisms (pro-
biotics) for therapeutic purposes in general has been
considered some kind of alternative or comple-
mentary medicine (257). Fortunately, this view has
changed considerably in the last couple of years,
which is reflected by the growing interest of basic
biomedical sciences and clinical medicine with
respect to this group of ‘active substances’. The
increasing interest is reflected by the exponentially
growing numbers of scientific papers and published
RCTs dealing with probiotics (see Figure 1).

Although most probiotic preparations tradition-
ally contain LAB, as suggested by Metchnikoff in
the old days, E. coli strain Nissle 1917 (EcN) has
many features in common with the probiotic LAB.
As described in detail above, the reported mecha-
nisms of action, safety aspects, and clinical efficacy
for defined indications allow EcN to be described as
a probiotic microorganism. We could review several
valid RCTs that were performed using this non-
LAB organism as a probiotic. In these clinical
studies, the therapeutic efficacy of EcN has been
demonstrated for different gastrointestinal indica-
tions. Because of the numerous experimental studies
elucidating the modes of action, the questions of
biosafety, including the responsible genetic back-
ground on the basis of a differential genome analy-
sis, EcN is now one of the best examined probiotic
strains. As a logical consequence, EcN is often used
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
as a reference strain and a model organism for
different scientific purposes (258–263). Owing to
the excellent tolerability of EcN and its capability
for colonization of or persistence in the human as
well as the animal intestinal tract, EcN is very well
suited to take on functions as a carrier for bioactive
molecules, e.g. novel adhesins, insulinotropic pro-
teins, signaling molecules or anti-HIV microbicides
(264–267). This also concerns further recombinant
manipulations of the EcN genome, e.g. by con-
structing tripartite vector systems for live oral vac-
cine development (268), no matter whether an
application for therapeutic purposes will be possible
in the near future.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the valuable
assistance of Martina Schiemann, Doris Schrott, and
Monika Wienbeck, Herdecke, in producing this
review. Many thanks also to Tobias Ölschläger,
Würzburg, for critical reading of the manuscript and
helpful discussions. We are grateful to K. Eiteljörge,
Herdecke, M.A. Schmidt and C. Cichon, Münster,
and the Alfred-Nissle-Gesellschaft, Hagen, for the
kind supply of photos.
Declaration of interest: Ulrich Sonnenborn is cur-
rently head of the Department of Biological Research
at Ardeypharm GmbH, Herdecke, Germany. Jürgen
Schulze was head of Ardeypharm’s Department of
Medicine until his retirement in January 2006.
Ardeypharm GmbH produces and distributes the
licensed microbial drug Mutaflor®, containing E. coli
strain Nissle 1917 (EcN) as the active principle, in
Germany and some other European countries. The
authors alone are responsible for the content and
writing of the paper.
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 151
References
1. McCracken VJ, Lorenz RG. The gastrointestinal ecosystem:
a precarious alliance among epithelium, immunity and
microbiota. Cell Microbiol 2001;3:1–11.
2. Delcenserie V, Martel D, Lamoureux M, Amiot J, Boutin Y,
Roy D. Immunomodulatory effects of probiotics in the
intestinal tract. Curr Issues Mol Biol 2008;10:37–54.
3. Guarner F, Malagelada JR. Gut flora in health and disease.
Lancet 2003;360:512–19.
4. Ouwehand AC, Vaughan EE, editors. Gastrointestinal
microbiology. New York: Taylor & Francis. 2006.
5. Rambaud JC, Buts JP, Corthier G, Flourie B, editors. Gut
microflora – digestive physiology and pathology. Paris: John
Libbey Eurotext. 2006.
6. Stecher B, Hardt WD. The role of microbiota in infectious
disease. Trends Microbiol 2008;16:107–14.
7. Yan F, Polk DB. Commensal bacteria in the gut: learning
who our friends are. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 2004;20:
565–71.
8. Chichlowski M, Hale LP. Bacterial–mucosal interactions
in inflammatory bowel disease – an alliance gone bad.
Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2008;295:
G1139–49.
9. Haenel H, Bendig J. Intestinal flora in health and disease.
Prog Food Nutr Sci 1975;1:21–64.
10. Mai V, Draganov PV. Recent advances and remaining gaps
in our knowledge of associations between gut microbiota
and human health. World J Gastroenterol 2009;15:81–5.
11. Savage DC. The ecological digestive system and its coloni-
sation. Rev Sci Tech Off Int Epiz 1989;8:259–73.
12. Schultz M, Schölmerich J, Rath HC. Rationale for probiotic
and antibiotic treatment strategies in inflammatory bowel
diseases. Dig Dis 2003;21:105–28.
13. Schulze J, Sonnenborn U. The role of the gut flora in inflam-
matory bowel diseases. In: Shimoyama T, Axon A, Lee A,
Podolsky DK, O’Morain C, editors. Helicobacter meets
inflammatory bowel disease. Tokyo: Medical Tribune Inc.
2002. p. 393–417.
14. Arias CA, Murray BE. Antibiotic-resistant bugs in the 21st
century – a clinical super-challenge. N Engl J Med 2009;
360:439–43.
15. Chadwick DJ, Goode J, editors. Antibiotic resistance:
origins, evolution, selection and spread. Ciba Foundation
Symposium 207. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. 1997.
16. Davies J. Microbes have the last word. A drastic re-
evaluation of antimicrobial treatment is needed to overcome
the threat of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. EMBO Rep 2007;
8:616–21.
17. Hawkey PM. Action against antibiotic resistance: no time
to lose. Lancet 1998;351:1298–9.
18. Witte W, Cuny C, Klare I, Nübel U, Strommenger B,
Werner G. Emergence and spread of antibiotic-resistant
gram-positive bacterial pathogens. Int J Med Microbiol
2008;298:365–77.
19. Schulze J, Sonnenborn U, Ölschläger T, Kruis W.
Probiotika - Mikroökologie, Mikrobiologie, Qualität,
Sicherheit und gesundheitliche Effekte. Stuttgart:
Hippokrates/Thieme. 2008.
20. Borchers AT, Selmi C, Meyers FJ, Keen CL, Gershwin ME.
Probiotics and immunity. J Gastroenterol 2009;44:26–46.
21. Fric P. Probiotics in gastroenterology. Z Gastroenterol
2002;40:197–201.
22. Montrose DC, Floch MH. Probiotics used in human stud-
ies. J Clin Gastroenterol 2005;39:469–84.
23. Sartor RB. Probiotic therapy of intestinal inflammation and
infections. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 2005;21:44–50.
 152 U. Sonnenborn et al.
24. Sullivan A, Nord CE. Probiotics and gastrointestinal dis-
eases. J Intern Med 2005;257:78–92.
25. Tannock GW. Probiotics: time for a dose of realism. Curr
Issues Intest Microbiol 2003;4:33–42.
26. FAO/WHO. 2001. Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation
on Evaluation of Health and Nutritional Properties of Pro-
biotics in Food Including Powder Milk with Live Lactic
Acid Bacteria. Cordoba, Argentina, 1–4 October 2001.
27. Vergin F. Anti- und Probiotika. Hippokrates 1954;25:
116–9.
28. Lilly DM, Stillwell RH. Probiotics: growth-promoting
factors produced by microorganisms. Science 1965;147:
747–8.
29. Parker RB. Probiotics, the other half of the antibiotic story.
Anim Nutr Health 1974;29:4–8.
30. Fuller R. Probiotics in man and animals. J Appl Bacteriol
1989;66:365–78.
31. Guarner F, Schaafsma GJ. Probiotics. Int J Food Microbiol
1998;39:237–8.
32. Elmer GW, Surawicz CM, McFarland LV. Biotherapeutic
agents. A neglected modality for the treatment and preven-
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
tion of selected intestinal and vaginal infections. JAMA
1996;275:870–6.
33. McFarland LV, Bernasconi P. Saccharomyces boulardii: a
review of an innovative biotherapeutic agent. Microb Ecol
Health Dis 1993;6:157–71.
34. Baumgart DC, Dignass AU. Current biological therapies for
inflammatory bowel disease. Curr Pharm Des 2004;10:
4127–47.
35. Sandborn WJ, Targan SR. Biologic therapy of inflammatory
bowel disease. Gastroenterology 2002;122:1592–608.
36. Sandborn WJ, Faubion WA. Biologics in inflammatory
bowel disease: how much progress have we made? Gut
2004;53:1366–73.
37. Vermeire S, Rutgeerts P. Novel biological strategies in
inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2004;10
(Suppl 1):S44–51.
38. Bansal T, Garg S. Probiotics: from functional foods to
pharmaceutical products. Curr Pharm Biotechnol 2008;9:
267–87.
39. Bengmark S. Bioecologic control of the gastrointestinal
tract: the role of flora and supplemented probiotics and
synbiotics. Gastroenterol Clin North Am 2005;34:413–36.
40. Callaway TR, Edrington TS, Anderson RC, Harvey RB,
Genovese KJ, Kennedy CN, et al. Probiotics, prebiotics and
competitive exclusion for prophylaxis against bacterial dis-
ease. Anim Health Res Rev 2008;9:217–25.
41. De Vrese M, Schrezenmeir J. Probiotics, prebiotics, and
synbiotics. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol 2008;111:1–66.
42. Marteau P. Living drugs for gastrointestinal diseases: the
case for probiotics. Dig Dis 2006;24:137–47.
43. Gill H, Prasad J. Probiotics, immunomodulation, and health
benefits. Adv Exp Med Biol 2008;606:423–54.
44. Hart AL, Stagg AJ, Kamm MA. Use of probiotics in the
treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. J Clin Gastroen-
terol 2003;36:111–19.
45. Heselmans M, Reid G, Akkermans LM, Savelkoul H,
Timmerman H, Rombouts FM. Gut flora in health and
disease: potential role of probiotics. Curr Issues Intest
Microbiol 2005;6:1–7.
46. Reid G, Devillard E. Probiotics for mother and child. J Clin
Gastroenterol 2004;38(Suppl 2):S94–101.
47. Schultz M. Clinical use of E. coli Nissle 1917 in inflamma-
tory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2008;14:1012–18.
48. Nissle A. Die antagonistische Behandlung chronis-
cher Darmstörungen mit Colibakterien. Med Klin 1918;
2:29–33.
49. Nissle A. Weiteres über Grundlagen und Praxis der
Mutaflorbehandlung. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1925;44:
1809–13.
50. Hamilton-Miller JMT. A review of clinical trials of probiot-
ics in the management of inflammatory bowel disease.
Infect Dis Rev 2001;3:83–7.
51. Krammer HJ, Kämper H, Von Bünau R, Zieseniß E,
Stange C, Schlieger F, et al. Probiotische Arzneimittelther-
apie mit E. coli Stamm Nissle 1917 (EcN): Ergebnisse einer
prospektiven Datenerhebung mit 3807 Patienten. Z Gastro-
enterol 2006;44:651–6.
52. Kruis W. Antibiotics and probiotics in inflammatory bowel
disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2004;20(s4):75–8.
53. Blum-Oehler G, Oswald S, Eiteljörge K, Sonnenborn U,
Schulze J, Kruis W, et al. Development of strain-specific
PCR reactions for the detection of the probiotic Escherichia
coli strain Nissle 1917 in fecal samples. Res Microbiol
2003;154:59–66.
54. Blum G, Marre R, Hacker J. Properties of Escherichia coli
strains of serotype O6. Infection 1995;23:234–6.
55. Grozdanov L, Zähringer U, Blum-Oehler G, Brade L,
Henne A, Knirel YA, et al. A single nucleotide exchange in
the wzy gene is responsible for the semirough O6 lipopoly-
saccharide phenotype and serum sensitivity of Escherichia
coli strain Nissle 1917. J Bacteriol 2002;184:5912–25.
56. Grozdanov L, Raasch C, Schulze J, Sonnenborn U,
Gottschalk G, Hacker J, et al. Analysis of the genome struc-
ture of the nonpathogenic probiotic Escherichia coli strain
Nissle 1917. J Bacteriol 2004;186:5432–41.
57. Rietschel ET, Brade H, Holst O, Brade L, Müller-Loennies
S, Mamat U, et al. Bacterial endotoxin: chemical constitution,
biological recognition, host response, and immunological
detoxification. In: Rietschel ET, Wagner H, editors. Pathology
of septic shock. Current Topics in Microbiology and Immu-
nology, 216. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. 1996. p. 39–81.
58. Ott M, Bender L, Blum G, Schmittroth M, Achtman M,
Tschäpe H, et al. Virulence patterns and long-range genetic
mapping of extraintestinal Escherichia coli K1, K5, and
K100 isolates: use of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. Infect
Immun 1991;59:2664–72.
59. Taylor PW. Bactericidal and bacteriolytic activity of
serum against gram-negative bacteria. Microbiol Rev 1983;
47:46–83.
60. Hughes C, Phillips R, Roberts AP. Serum resistance among
Escherichia coli strains causing urinary tract infection in
relation to O type and the carriage of hemolysin, colicin,
and antibiotic resistance determinants. Infect Immun
1982;35:270–5.
61. Cario E. Bacterial interactions with cells of the
intestinal mucosa: Toll-like receptors and NOD2. Gut 2005;
54:1182–93.
62. Wang Q, Suzuki A, Mariconda S, Porwollik S, Harshey RM.
Sensing wetness: a new role for the bacterial flagellum.
EMBO J 2005;24:2034–42.
63. Lasaro MA, Salinger N, Zhang J, Wang Y, Zhong Z, Goulian
M, et al. F1C fimbriae play an important role in biofilm
formation and intestinal colonization by the Escherichia coli
commensal strain Nissle 1917. Appl Environ Microbiol
2009;75:246–51.
64. Stentebjerg-Olesen B, Chakraborty T, Klemm P. Type 1
fimbriation and phase switching in a natural Escherichia
coli fimB null strain, Nissle 1917. J Bacteriol 1999;181:
7470–8.
65. Hammar M, Arnqvist A, Bian Z, Olsen A, Normark S.
Expression of two csg operons is required for production of
fibronectin- and Congo red-binding curli polymers in
Escherichia coli K-12. Mol Microbiol 1995;18:661–70.

66. Olsen A, Jonsson A, Normark S. Fibronectin binding medi-
ated by a novel class of surface organelles on Escherichia
coli. Nature 1989;338:652–5.
67. Ahmed N, Dobrindt U, Hacker J, Hasnain SE. Genomic
fluidity and pathogenic bacteria: applications in diagnostics,
epidemiology and intervention. Nat Rev Microbiol 2008;6:
387–94.
68. Hacker J, Kaper JB. Pathogenicity islands and the evolution
of microbes. Annu Rev Microbiol 2000;54:641–79.
69. Hacker J, Carniel E. Ecological fitness, genomic islands and
bacterial pathogenicity. A Darwinian view of the evolution
of microbes. EMBO Rep 2001;2:376–81.
70. Hacker J, Hentschel U, Dobrindt U. Prokaryotic chromo-
somes and disease. Science 2003;301:790–3.
71. Große C, Scherer J, Koch D, Otto M, Taudte N, Grass G.
A new ferrous iron-uptake transporter, EfeU (YcdN), from
Escherichia coli. Mol Microbiol 2006;62:120–31.
72. Neilands JB. Mechanism and regulation of synthesis of aer-
obactin in Escherichia coli K12 (pColV-K30). Can J Micro-
biol 1992;30:728–33.
73. Schubert S, Rakin A, Karch H, Carniel E, Heesemann J.
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
Prevalence of the “high-pathogenicity island” of Yersinia
species among Escherichia coli strains that are pathogenic
to humans. Infect Immun 1998;66:480–5.
74. Schubert S, Rakin A, Fischer D, Sorsa J, Heesemann J.
Characterization of the integration site of Yersinia high-
pathogenicity island in Escherichia coli. FEMS Microbiol
Lett 1999;179:409–14.
75. Torres AG, Payne SM. Haem iron-transport system in
enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157:H7. Mol Micro-
biol 1997;23:825–33.
76. Azpiroz MF, Rodriguez E, Lavina M. The structure, func-
tion, and origin of the microcin H47 ATP- binding cassette
exporter indicate its relatedness to that of colicin V. Antimi-
crob Agents Chemother 2001;45:969–72.
77. Gaggero C, Moreno F, Lavina M. Genetic analysis
of microcin H47 antibiotic system. J Bacteriol 1993;175:
5420–7.
78. Rodriguez E, Gaggero C, Lavina M. The structural gene for
microcin H47 encodes a peptide precursor with antibiotic
activity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999;43:2176–82.
79. Patzer SI, Baquero MR, Bravo D, Moreno F, Hantke K.
The colicin G, H and X determinants encode microcins M
and H47, which might utilize the catecholate siderophore
receptors FepA, Cir, Fiu and IroN. Microbiology 2003;
149:2557–70.
80. Homburg S, Oswald E, Hacker J, Dobrindt U. Expression
analysis of the colibactin gene cluster coding for a novel
polyketide in Escherichia coli. FEMS Microbiol Lett
2007;275:255–62.
81. Nougayrede JP, Homburg S, Taieb F, Boury M,
Brzuszkiewicz E, Gottschalk G, et al. Escherichia coli
induces DNA double-strand breaks in eukaryotic cells.
Science 2006;313:848–51.
82. Zijlstra JB, Beukema J, Wolthers BG, Byrne BM, Groen A,
Dankert J. Pretreatment methods prior to gas chromato-
graphic analysis of volatile fatty acids from faecal samples.
Clin Chim Acta 1977;78:243–50.
83. Schmidt DS. Molekulare Analyse des probiotischen Stamms
Escherichia coli Nissle 1917. Dissertation, Technische
Universität Dresden, 2009.
84. Dobrindt U. (Patho)-Genomics of Escherichia coli. Int J
Med Microbiol 2005;295:357–71.
85. Sun J, Gunzer F, Westendorf AM, Buer J, Scharfe M, Jarek M,
et al. Genomic peculiarity of coding sequences and meta-
bolic potential of probiotic Escherichia coli strain Nissle
1917 inferred from raw genome data. J Biotechnol
2005;117:147–61.
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 153
86. Feldgarden M, Golden S, Wilson H, Riley MA. Can phage
defence maintain colicin plasmids in Escherichia coli?
Microbiology 1995;141:2977–84.
87. Reissbrodt R, Hammes WP, Dal Bello F, Prager R, Fruth A,
Hantke K, et al. Inhibition of growth of Shiga toxin-
producing Escherichia coli by nonpathogenic Escherichia
coli. FEMS Microbiol Lett 2009;290:62–9.
88. Sonnenborn U, Greinwald R. 1991. Beziehungen zwischen
Wirtsorganismus und Darmflora unter besonderer Berück-
sichtigung von Physiologie und Funktion der normalen
Escherichia-coli-Flora. Stuttgart: Schattauer Verlag.
89. Halbert SP. The antagonism of coliform bacteria against
shigellae. J Immunol 1948;58:153–67.
90. Mayr-Harting A, Hedges AJ, Berkeley RCW. Methods
for studying bacterocins. Methods Microbiol 1972;7a:
315–422.
91. Denou E, Rezzonico E, Panoff JM, Arigoni F, Brüssow H.
A mesocosm of Lactobacillus johnsonii, Bifidobacterium
longum, and Escherichia coli in the mouse gut. DNA Cell
Biol 2009;28:413–22.
92. Lorenz A, Schulze J. Establishment of E. coli Nissle 1917
and its interaction with Candida albicans in gnotobiotic rats.
Microecol Ther 1996;24:45–51.
93. Mandel L, Trebichavsky I, Splichal I, Schulze J. Stimulation
of intestinal immune cells by E. coli in gnotobiotic piglets. In:
Mestecky J, Russell MW, Jackson S, Michalek SM, Tlaska-
lova-Hogenova H, Sterzl J, editors. Advances in mucosal
immunology. New York: Plenum Press. 1995. p. 463–4.
94. Schulze J, Lorenz A, Mandel L. Colonisation of Escherichia
coli in different gnotobiotic animal models. Microb Ecol
Health Dis 1992;5:iv–v.
95. Leatham MP, Banerjee S, Autieri SM, Mercado-Lubo R,
Conway T, Cohen PS. Precolonized human commensal
Escherichia coli strains serve as a barrier to E. coli O157:H7
growth in the streptomycin-treated mouse intestine. Infect
Immun 2009;77:2876–86.
96. Lodinova-Zadnikova R, Sonnenborn U. Effect of preventive
administration of a nonpathogenic Escherichia coli strain
on the colonization of the intestine with microbial patho-
gens in newborn infants. Biol Neonate 1997;71:224–32.
97. Schröder H. Entwicklung der aeroben Darmflora bei Neu-
geborenen nach Kolonisierung mit dem E. coli-Stamm
Nissle 1917. Der Kinderarzt 1992;23:1619–25.
98. Swidsinski A, Swidsinski S, Godzun A, Orthner M, Lochs
H. Therapy with E. coli Nissle reduces concentrations of
mucosa associated colonic flora in patients with ulcerative
colitis. Gastroenterology 2000;118:A1138.
99. Altenhoefer A, Oswald S, Sonnenborn U, Enders C, Schulze
J, Hacker J, et al. The probiotic Escherichia coli strain Nissle
1917 interferes with invasion of human intestinal epithelial
cells by different enteroinvasive bacterial pathogens. FEMS
Immunol Med Microbiol 2004;40:223–9.
100. Oelschlaeger TA, Altenhoefer A, Hacker J. Inhibition of
Salmonella typhimurium invasion into intestinal cells by the
probiotic E. coli strain Nissle 1917. Gastroenterology 2001;
120(5 Suppl 1):A-326.
101. Boudeau J, Glasser AL, Julien S, Colombel JF, Darfeuille-
Michaud A. Inhibitory effect of probiotic Escherichia coli
strain Nissle 1917 on adhesion to and invasion of intestinal
epithelial cells by adherent-invasive E. coli strains isolated
from patients with Crohn’s disease. Aliment Pharmacol
Ther 2003;18:45–56.
102. Duncker S. Auswirkung von oral verabreichtem Escherichia
coli Nissle 1917 auf das Darm-assoziierte Immunsystem
des Schweins. Dissertation, Tierärztl, Hochschule Hannover,
2005.
103. Duncker SC, Lorentz A, Schroeder B, Breves G, Bischoff SC.
Effect of orally administered probiotic E. coli strain
 154 U. Sonnenborn et al.
Nissle 1917 on intestinal mucosal immune cells of
healthy young pigs. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 2006;
111:239–50.
104. Hockertz S. Immunmodulierende Wirkung von abgetöteten
apathogenen Escherichia coli Stamm Nissle 1917 auf das
Makrophagensystem. Arzneim-Forsch/Drug Res 1991;41:
1108–12.
105. Cross ML, Ganner A, Teilab D, Fray LM. Patterns of
cytokine induction by gram-positive and gram-negative
probiotic bacteria. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol
2004;42:173–80.
106. Fink LN, Frokiaer H. Dendritic cells from Peyer’s patches
and mesenteric lymph nodes differ from spleen dendritic
cells in their response to commensal gut bacteria. Scand J
Immunol 2008;68:270–9.
107. Helwig U, Lammers KM, Rizzello F, Brigidi P, Rohleder V,
Caramelli E, et al. Lactobacilli, bifidobacteria and E. coli
Nissle induce pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines in
peripheral blood mononuclear cells. World J Gastroenterol
2006;12:5978–86.
108. Kamada N, Maeda K, Inoue N, Hisamatsu T, Okamoto S,
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
Hong KS, et al. Non-pathogenic Escherichia coli strain
Nissle 1917 inhibits signal transduction in intestinal epithe-
lial cells. Infect Immun 2008;76:214–20.
109. Krämer S, Sellge G, Lorentz A, Krueger D, Schemann M,
Feilhauer K, et al. Selective activation of human intestinal
mast cells by Escherichia coli hemolysin. J Immunol
2008;181:1438–45.
110. Otte JM, Podolsky DK. Functional modulation of entero-
cytes by gram-positive and gram-negative microorgan-
isms. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2004;286:
G613–26.
111. Rasche C, Wolfram C, Wahls M, Worm M. Differential
immunomodulating effects of inactivated probiotic bacteria
on the allergic immune response. Acta Derm Venereol 2007;
87:305–11.
112. Sturm A, Rilling K, Baumgart DC, Gargas K, Abou-
Ghazale T, Raupach B, et al. Escherichia coli Nissle 1917
distinctively modulates T-cell cycling and expansion via toll-like
receptor 2 signaling. Infect Immun 2005;73:1452–65.
113. Ukena SN, Westendorf AM, Hansen W, Rohde M, Geffers R,
Coldewey S, et al. The host response to the probiotic
Escherichia coli strain Nissle 1917: specific up-regulation
of the proinflammatory chemokine MCP-1. BMC Med
Genet 2005;6:1–13.
114. Wehkamp J, Harder J, Wehkamp K, Wehkamp-von
Meissner B, Schlee M, Enders C, et al. NF-κB- and AP-1-
mediated induction of human beta defensin-2 in intestinal
epithelial cells by Escherichia coli Nissle 1917: a novel effect
of a probiotic bacterium. Infect Immun 2004;72:5750–8.
115. Zyrek AA, Cichon C, Helms S, Enders C, Sonnenborn U,
Schmidt MA. Molecular mechanisms underlying the probi-
otic effects of Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 involve ZO-2 and
PKCZeta redistribution resulting in tight junction and epi-
thelial barrier repair. Cell Microbiol 2007;9:804–16.
116. Maeda K, Inoue N, Kamada N, Hong KS, Ogata H, Ishii H,
et al. Non-pathogenic Escherichia coli inhibits signal trans-
duction pathway in intestinal epithelia cells: a novel mecha-
nism of action. Gastroenterology 2004;126(4 Suppl 2):
A-577.
117. Otte JM, Mahjurian-Namari R, Brand S, Werner I, Schmidt
WE, Schmitz F. Probiotics regulate the expression of COX-2
in intestinal epithelial cells. Nutr Cancer 2009;61:103–13.
118. Grabig A, Paclik D, Dankof A, Baumgart DC, Erckenbrecht J,
Raupach B, et al. Escherichia coli strain Nissle 1917 amel-
iorates experimental colitis via Toll-like receptor 2- and Toll-
like receptor 4-dependent pathways. Infect Immun 2006;74:
4075–82.
119. Guzy C, Paclik D, Schirbel A, Sonnenborn U, Wiedenmann B,
Sturm A. The probiotic Escherichia coli strain Nissle 1917
induces gammadelta T cell apoptosis via caspase- and FasL-
dependent pathways. Int Immunol 2008;20:829–40.
120. Trebichavsky I, Cukrowska B, Kozakova H, Schulze J,
Rehakova Z, Sinkora J, et al. Association of germ-free piglets
with two non-pathogenic E. coli strains: Nissle 1917 stimu-
lates the immune system more than O86 strain. J Mol Med
1998;76:B-9.
121. Lodinová-Zádníková R, Tlaskalová-Hogenová H, Sonnen-
born U. Local and serum antibody response in fullterm and
premature infants after artificial colonization of the intestine
with E. coli strain Nissle 1917 (Mutaflor). Pediatr Allergy
Immunol 1992;3:43–8.
122. Cukrowska B, Lodinová-Zádníková R, Enders C, Sonnen-
born U, Schulze J, Tlaskalová-Hogenová H. Specific prolif-
erative and antibody responses of premature infants to
intestinal colonization with nonpathogenic probiotic E. coli
strain Nissle 1917. Scand J Immunol 2002;55:204–9.
123. Bohn E, Bechtold O, Zahir N, Frick JS, Reimann J, Jilge B,
et al. Host gene expression in the colon of gnotobiotic
interleukin-2-deficient mice colonized with commensal col-
itogenic or noncolitogenic bacterial strains: common pat-
terns and bacteria strain specific signatures. Inflamm Bowel
Dis 2006;12:853–62.
124. Waidmann M, Bechtold O, Frick JS, Lehr HA, Schubert S,
Dobrindt U, et al. Bacteroides vulgatus protects against
Escherichia coli-induced colitis in gnotobiotic interleukin-
2-deficient mice. Gastroenterology 2003;125:162–77.
125. Arribas B, Rodriguez-Cabezas ME, Camuesco D,
Comalada M, Ballon E, Utrilla P, et al. A probiotic strain of
Escherichia coli, Nissle 1917, given orally exerts local and
systemic anti-inflammatory effects in lipopolysaccharide-
induced sepsis in mice. Br J Pharmacol 2009;157:1024–33.
126. Hudcovic T, Stepankova R, Kozakova H, Hrncir T,
Tlaskalova-Hogenova H. Effects of monocolonization with
Escherichia coli strains O6K13 and Nissle 1917 on the
development of experimentally induced acute and chronic
intestinal inflammation in germ-free immunocompetent and
immunodeficient mice. Folia Microbiol 2007;52:618–26.
127. Kamada N, Inoue N, Hisamatsu T, Okamoto S, Matsuoka
K, Sato T, et al. Nonpathogenic Escherichia coli strain
Nissle 1917 prevents murine acute and chronic colitis.
Inflamm Bowel Dis 2005;11:455–63.
128. Kokesova A, Frolova L, Kverka M, Sokol D, Rossmann P,
Bartova J, et al. Oral administration of probiotic bacteria (E.
coli Nissle, E. coli O83, Lactobacillus casei) influences the
severity of dextran sodium sulfate-induced colitis in BALB/c
mice. Folia Microbiol 2006;51:478–84.
129. Schultz M, Strauch UG, Linde HJ, Watzl S, Obermeier F,
Göttl C, et al. Preventive effects of Escherichia coli strain
Nissle 1917 on acute and chronic intestinal inflammation
in two different murine models of colitis. Clin Diagn Lab
Immunol 2004;11:372–8.
130. Ukena SN, Singh A, Dringenberg U, Engelhardt R, Seidler U,
Hansen W, et al. Probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917
inhibits leaky gut by enhancing mucosal integrity. PLoS
One 2007;2:e1308.
131. Bickert T, Trujillo-Vargas CM, Duechs M, Wohlleben G,
Polte T, Hansen G, et al. Probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle
1917 suppresses allergen-induced Th2 responses in the air-
ways. Int Arch Allergy Immunol 2009;149:219–30.
132. Hockertz S. Augmentation of host defence against bacterial
and fungal infections of mice pretreated with the non-
pathogenic Escherichia coli strain Nissle 1917. Arzneim-
Forsch/Drug Res 1997;47(I):793–6.
133. Von Bünau R, Jaekel L, Schubotz E, Schwarz S, Stroff T,
Krüger M. Escherichia coli strain Nissle 1917: significant

reduction of neonatal calf diarrhea. J Dairy Sci 2005;
88:317–23.
134. Clavel T, Haller D. Molecular interactions between bacteria,
the epithelium, and the mucosal immune system in the
intestinal tract: implications for chronic inflammation. Curr
Issues Intest Microbiol 2007;8:25–43.
135. Zoumpopoulou G, Tsakalidou E, Dewulf J, Pot B,
Grangette C. Differential crosstalk between epithelial cells,
dendritic cells and bacteria in a co-culture model. Int J
Food Microbiol 2009;131:40–51.
136. Schultz M, Butt AG. Methodological aspects in probiotic
research – a brief review with an emphasis on epithelial
barrier function. Int J Probiotics Prebiotics 2007;2:85–96.
137. Cichon C, Enders C, Sonnenborn U, Schmidt MA. DNA-
microarray-based comparison of cellular responses in polar-
ized T84 epithelial cells triggered by probiotics: E. coli Nissle
1917 (EcN) and Lactobacillus acidophilus PZ1041. Gastro-
enterology 2004;126(4 Suppl. 2):A-578–9.
138. Wehkamp J, Harder J, Wehkamp-von Meissner B,
Schwichtenberg L, Fellermann K, Herrlinger KR, et al. The
probiotic E. coli Nissle 1917 (Mutaflor) induces defensins
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
in intestinal epithelial cells: a novel mechanism of action.
Gastroenterology 2002;122(4 Suppl):A75–6.
139. Schlee M, Wehkamp J, Altenhoefer A, Oelschlaeger TA,
Stange EF, Fellermann K. Induction of human beta-de-
fensin-2 by the probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 is
mediated through flagellin. Infect Immun 2007;75:
2399–407.
140. Hafez M, Hayes K, Goldrick M, Warhurst G, Grencis R,
Roberts IS. The K5 capsule of Escherichia coli strain Nissle
1917 is important in mediating interactions with intestinal
epithelial cells and chemokine induction. Infect Immun
2009;77:2995–3003.
141. Konturek PC, Brzozowski TM, Burnat G, Pajdo R,
Hahn EG, Konturek SJ. Protective effects of probiotic
Echerichia coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) bacterial strain against
stress-induced acute gastric mucosal lesions. Gastroenterol-
ogy 2007;132(4 Suppl S1):A-411.
142. Johne B, Fagerhol MK, Lyberg T, Prydz H, Brandtzaeg P,
Naess-Andresen CF, et al. Functional and clinical aspects
of the myelomonocyte protein calprotectin. Mol Pathol
1997;50:113–23.
143. Kido J, Kido R, Fagerhol MK, Nagata T. Calprotectin
release from human neutrophils is induced by Porphyromo-
nas gingivalis lipopolysacccharide via the CD14-Toll-like
receptor-nuclear factor kappaB pathway. J Period Res
2003;38:557–63.
144. Nisapakultorn K, Ross KF, Herzberg MC. Calprotectin
expression inhibits bacterial binding to mucosal epithelial
cells. Infect Immun 2001;69:3692–6.
145. Splichal I, Fagerhol MK, Trebichavsky I, Splichalova A,
Schulze J. The effect of intestinal colonization of germ-free
pigs with Escherichia coli on calprotectin levels in plasma,
intestinal and bronchoalveolar lavages. Immunobiology
2005;209:681–7.
146. Hooper LV, Gordon JI. Commensal host–bacterial relation-
ships in the gut. Science 2001;292:1115–18.
147. Hord NG. Eukaryotic-microbiota crosstalk: potential
mechanisms for health benefits of prebiotics and probiotics.
Annu Rev Nutr 2008;28:215–31.
148. Horswill AR, Nauseef WM. Host interception of bacterial
communication signals. Cell Host Microbe 2008;4:507–9.
149. Köhler H, McCormick BA, Walker WA. Bacterial–entero-
cyte crosstalk: cellular mechanisms in health and disease. J
Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2003;36:175–85.
150. Spiller R, Campbell E. Post-infectious irritable bowel syn-
drome. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 2006;22:13–7.
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 155
151. Spiller RC. Postinfective bowel dysfunction. Curr Opin
Gastroenterol 1997;13:85–9.
152. Liebregts T, Adam B, Bertel A, Jones S, Schulze J, Enders C,
et al. Effect of E. coli Nissle 1917 on post-inflammatory
visceral sensory function in a rat model. Neurogastroenterol
Motil 2005;17:410–14.
153. Bär F, von Koschitzky H, Roblick U, Bruch HP, Schulze L,
Sonnenborn U, et al. Cell-free supernatants of Escherichia
coli Nissle 1917 modulate human colonic motility: evidence
from an in vitro organ bath study. Neurogastroenterol Motil
2009;21:559–66.
154. Goel A, Mittal A, Evstatiev R, Nemeth M, Kruis W, Stolte
M, et al. In vivo effects of mesalazine or E. coli Nissle 1917
on microsatellite instability in ulcerative colitis. Aliment
Pharmacol Ther 2009;30:634–42.
155. Kruis W, Fric P, Pokrotnieks J, Lukas M, Fixa B, Kascak M,
et al. Maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis with the
probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 is as effective as with
standard mesalazine. Gut 2004;53:1617–23.
156. Maron DM, Ames BN. Revised methods for the Salmonella
mutagenicity test. Mutat Res 1983;113:173–215.
157. Speit G, Hartmann A. The comet assay: a sensitive genoto-
xicity test for the detection of DNA damage. Methods Mol
Biol 2005;291:85–95.
158. Sonnenborn U, Janosch D, Dubbert S, Stroff T, Schulze L,
Müller H. Antimutagenic activity of the probiotic E. coli
strain Nissle 1917. J Crohn’s Colitis 2009;3:136.
159. Schultz M, Watzl S, Ölschläger T, Rath HC, Göttl C,
Lehn N, et al. Green fluorescent protein for detection of the
probiotic microorganism Escherichia coli strain Nissle 1917
(EcN) in vivo. J Microbiol Methods 2005;61:389–98.
160. Westendorf AM, Gunzer F, Deppenmeier S, Tapadar D,
Hunger JK, Schmidt MA, et al. Intestinal immunity of
Escherichia coli Nissle 1917: a safe carrier for therapeutic
molecules. FEMS Immunol Med Microbiol 2005;43:
373–84.
161. Nagy G, Dobrindt U, Grozdanov L, Hacker J, Emödy L.
Transcriptional regulation through RfaH contributes to
intestinal colonization by Escherichia coli. FEMS Microbiol
Lett 2005;244:173–80.
162. Monteiro C, Saxena I, Wang X, Kader A, Bokranz W,
Simm R, et al. Characterization of cellulose production in
Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 and its biological consequences.
Environ Microbiol 2009;11:1105–16.
163. Brombacher E, Dorel C, Zehnder AJB, Landini P. The curli
biosynthesis regulator CsgD co-ordinates the expression of
both positive and negative determinants for biofilm forma-
tion in Escherichia coli. Microbiology 2003;149:2847–57.
164. Kuhnert P, Hacker J, Mühldorfer I, Burnens AP, Nicolet J,
Frey J. Detection system for Escherichia coli-specific viru-
lence genes: absence of virulence determinants in B and C
strains. Appl Environ Microbiol 1997;63:703–9.
165. Ott M, Hoschützky H, Jann K, Van Die I, Hacker J. Gene
clusters for S fimbrial adhesin (sfa) and F1C fimbriae (foc)
of Escherichia coli: comparative aspects of structure and
function. J Bacteriol 1988;170:3983–90.
166. Zingler G, Ott M, Blum G, Falkenhagen U, Naumann G,
Sokolowska-Köhler W, et al. Clonal analysis of Escherichia
coli serotype O6 strains from urinary tract infections.
Microb Pathog 1992;12:299–310.
167. Zingler G, Blum G, Falkenhagen U, Orskov I, Orskov F,
Hacker J, et al. Clonal differentiation of uropathogenic
Escherichia coli isolates of serotype O6:K5 by fimbrial anti-
gen typing and DNA long-range mapping techniques. Med
Microbiol Immunol 1993;182:13–24.
168. Valdebenito M, Crumbliss AL, Winkelmann G, Hantke K.
Environmental factors influence the production of enterobactin,
 156 U. Sonnenborn et al.
salmochelin, aerobactin, and yersiniabactin in Escherichia coli
strain Nissle 1917. Int J Med Microbiol 2006;296:513–20.
169. Malchow H, Sonnenborn U, Greinwald R, Körner A. Col-
onization of adults by an apathogenic E. coli strain admin-
istered after gut decontamination. Gastroenterology 1995;
108:A-869.
170. Jöres-Nguyen-Xuan TH, Boehm SK, Joeres L, Schulze J,
Kruis W. Survival of the probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle
1917 (EcN) in the gastrointestinal tract given in combina-
tion with oral mesalamine to healthy volunteers. Inflamm
Bowel Dis 2009 July 27 [Epub ahead of print].
171. Prilassnig M, Wenisch C, Daxboeck F, Feierl G. Are probi-
otics detectable in human feces after oral uptake by healthy
volunteers? Wien Klin Wochenschr 2007;119:1–7.
172. Bernardeau M, Guguen M, Vernoux JP. Beneficial lactoba-
cilli in food and feed: long-term use, biodiversity and pro-
posals for specific and realistic safety assessments. FEMS
Microbiol Rev 2006;30:487–513.
173. Besselink MGH, van Santvoort HC, Buskens E, Boer-
meester MA, van Goor H, Timmerman HM, et al. Probiotic
prophylaxis in predicted severe acute pancreatitis: a ran-
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
domised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet
2008;371:651–9.
174. Boyle RJ, Robins-Browne RM, Tang ML. Probiotic use in
clinical practice: what are the risks? Am J Clin Nutr
2006;83:1256–64.
175. Ezendam J, Van Loveren H. Probiotics: immunomodulation
and evaluation of safety and efficacy. Nutr Rev 2006; 64:1–14.
176. Mattia A, Merker R. Regulation of probiotic substances as
ingredients in foods: premarket approval or “generally recog-
nized as safe” notification. Clin Infect Dis 2008;46 (Suppl 2):
115–8.
177. Snydman DR. The safety of probiotics. Clin Infect Dis
2008;46(Suppl 2):104–11.
178. Vankerckhoven V, Huys G, Vancanneyt M, Vael C, Klare I,
Romond M-B, et al. Biosafety assessment of probiotics used
for human consumption: recommendations from the EU-
PROSAFE project. Trends Food Sci Tech 2008;19:102–14.
179. Wassenaar TM, Klein G. Safety aspects and implications of
regulation of probiotic bacteria in food and food supple-
ments. J Food Protect 2008;71:1734–41.
180. Blum G, Falbo V, Caprioli A, Hacker J. Gene clusters
encoding the cytotoxic necrotizing factor type 1, Prs-
fimbriae and alpha-hemolysin form the pathogenicity island
II of the uropathogenic Escherichia coli strain J96. FEMS
Microbiol Lett 1995;126:189–95.
181. Evans DJ Jr, Evans DG. Classification of pathogenic
Escherichia coli according to serotype and the production of
virulence factors, with special reference to colonization-factor
antigens. Rev Infect Dis 1983;5(Suppl 4):S692–701.
182. Levine MM. Escherichia coli that cause diarrhea: entero-
toxigenic, enteropathogenic, enteroinvasive, enterohemor-
rhagic, and enteroadherent. J Infect Dis 1987;155:377–89.
183. Nataro JP, Kaper JB. Diarrheagenic Escherichia coli. Clin
Microbiol Rev 1998;11:142–201.
184. Orskov I, Orskov F. Escherichia coli in extra-intestinal
infections. J Hyg 1985;95:551–75.
185. Karch H, Meyer T. Evaluation of oligonucleotide probes for
identification of Shiga-like-toxin-producing Escherichia
coli. J Clin Microbiol 1989;27:1180–6.
186. Mandel L, Travnicek J. The minipig as a model in gnotobi-
ology. Die Nahrung 1987;31:613–17.
187. Sereny B. Experimental keratoconjunctivitis Shigellosa.
Acta Microbiol Hung 1957;4:367–76.
188. Beutin L, Gleier K, Kontny I, Echeverria P, Scheutz F. Ori-
gin and characteristics of enteroinvasive strains of Escheri-
chia coli (EIEC) isolated in Germany. Epidemiol Infect
1997;118:199–205.
189. Small PLC, Isberg RR, Falkow S. Comparison of the ability of
enteroinvasive Escherichia coli, Salmonella typhimurium, Yers-
inia pseudotuberculosis, andYersinia enterocolitica to enter and
replicate within Hep-2-cells. Infect Immun 1987;55:1674–9.
190. Tröger H, Richter J, Beutin L, Epple HJ, Fromm M,
Zeitz M, et al. Wege der bakteriellen Translokation in Kolon-
Epithelzellen unter dem Einfluss pro-inflammatorischer
Zytokine. Z Gastroenterol 2003;41:771.
191. Reeves P. Role of O-antigen variation in the immune
response. Trends Microbiol 1995;3:381–6.
192. Cassels FJ, Wolf MK. Colonization factors of diarrheagenic
E. coli and their intestinal receptors. J Ind Microbiol 1995;
15:214–26.
193. Zingler G, Schmidt G, Orskov I, Orskov F, Falkenhagen U,
Naumann G. K-antigen identification, hemolysin produc-
tion, and hemagglutination types of Escherichia coli O6
strains isolated from patients with urinary tract infections.
Zbl Bakt 1990;274:372–81.
194. Gaastra W, Svennerholm AM. Colonization factors of
human enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC). Trends
Microbiol 1996;4:444–52.
195. Klemm P. Fimbrial adhesins of Escherichia coli. Rev Infect
Dis 1985;7:321–40.
196. Johnson JR. Virulence factors in Escherichia coli urinary
tract infection. Clin Microbiol Rev 1991;4:80–128.
197. Marre R, Hacker J, Henkel W, Goebel W. Contribution of
cloned virulence factors from uropathogenic Escherichia
coli strains to nephropathogenicity in an experimental rat
pyelonephritis model. Infect Immun 1986;54:761–7.
198. NCCLS (National Committee for Clinical Laboratory
Standards). Methods for dilution antimicrobial susceptibil-
ity tests for bacteria that grow aerobically, 4th edn. Approved
standard M7–A4. 1997.
199. Frick JS, Zahir N, Kirschning C, Bohn E, Autenrieth
IB. Commensal bacteria differentially modulate cytokine
expression in dendritic cells. Int J Med Microbiol 2005;
295:131.
200. Bleich A, Sundberg JP, Smoczek A, Von Wasielewski R,
De Buhr MF, Janus LM, et al. Sensitivity to Escherichia
coli Nissle 1917 in mice is dependent on environment and
genetic background. Int J Exp Pathol 2008;89:45–54.
201. Burmeister M, Ulanovsky L, editors. 1992. Pulsed-field gel
electrophoresis; protocols, methods, and theories. Totowa,
NJ: Humana Press.
202. Versalovic J, Koeuth T, Lupski JR. Distribution of repetitive
DNA sequences in eubacteria and application to fingerprinting
of bacterial genomes. Nucleic Acids Res 1991;19:6823–31.
203. Hardy KG, editor. 1987. Plasmids – a practical approach.
Washington, DC: IRL Press.
204. Oswald S. Einführung von Virulenz-assoziierten Antigenen
in den Escherichia coli-Carrier-Stamm DSM 6601. Dis-
sertation, Bayr. Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg,
1997.
205. Datz M, Janetzki-Mittmann C, Franke S, Gunzer F, Schmidt
H, Karch H. Analysis of the enterohemorrhagic Escherichia
coli O157 DNA region containing lambdoid phage gene P
and Shiga-like toxin structural genes. Appl Environ Micro-
biol 1996;62:791–7.
206. Magistrelli C, Colombo E, Tognoni A, Grandi G. Transfec-
tion of E. coli with lambda DNA by electroporation. Micro-
biologica 1992;15:397–8.
207. Smith HW, Green P, Parsell Z. Vero cell toxins in Escherichia
coli and related bacteria: transfer by phage and conjugation
and toxic action in laboratory animals, chickens, and pigs.
J Gen Microbiol 1983;129:3121–37.
208. Krammer HJ, Schlieger F, Harder H, Franke A, Singer MV.
Probiotika in der Therapie des Reizdarmsyndroms. Z Gas-
troenterol 2005;43:467–71.

209. Kruis W, Chrubasik S, Stange C, Schulze J. Therapeutische
Wirksamkeit des probiotischen E. coli-Stammes Nissle 1917
bei Reizdarm-Subgruppen. Z Gastroenterol 2004;42:785.
210. Plaßmann D, Schulte-Witte H. Therapie des Reizdarmsyn-
droms mit Escherichia coli Stamm Nissle 1917 (EcN). Eine
retrospektive Untersuchung. Med Klin 2007;102:888–92.
211. Tromm A, Niewerth U, Khoury M, Baestlein E, Wilhelms G,
Schulze J, et al. The probiotic E. coli strain Nissle 1917 for
the treatment of collagenous colitis: first results of an open-
label trial. Z Gastroenterol 2004;42:365–9.
212. Goerg KJ, Schlörer E. Probiotische Therapie einer pseu-
domembranösen Kolitis. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1998;
123:1274–8.
213. Goerg KJ, Wybierala M, Rauen-Vossloh J, Hader C. A new
approach in pseudomembranous colitis: probiotic Escherichia
coli Nissle 1917 after intestinal lavage. Eur J Gastroenterol
Hepatol 2008;20:155–6.
214. Matthes H, Krummenerl T, Giensch M, Wolff C, Schulze J.
Treatment of mild to moderate acute attacks of distal ulcer-
ative colitis with rectally-administered E. coli Nissle 1917:
dose-dependent efficacy. Gastroenterology 2006;130(4
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
Suppl 2):A-119.
215. Malchow H. Crohn’s disease and Escherichia coli. A new
approach in therapy to maintain remission of colonic
Crohn’s disease? J Clin Gastroenterol 1997;25:653–8.
216. Fric P, Zavoral M. The effect of non-pathogenic Escherichia
coli in symptomatic uncomplicated diverticular disease of
the colon. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 2003;15:313–15.
217. Kuzela L, Kascak M, Vavrecka A. Induction and mainte-
nance of remission with nonpathogenic Escherichia coli in
patients with pouchitis. Am J Gastroenterol 2001;96:
3218–19.
218. Henker J, Schuster F, Nissler K. Successful treatment of
gut-caused halitosis with a suspension of living non-patho-
genic Escherichia coli bacteria – a case report. Eur J Pediatr
2001;160:592–4.
219. Lata J, Novotny I, Pribramska V, Jurankova J, Fric P,
Kroupa R, et al. The effect of probiotics on gut flora, level
of endotoxin and Child-Pugh score in cirrhotic patients:
results of a double-blind randomized study. Eur J Gastro-
enterol Hepatol 2007;19:1111–3.
220. Wurzel RM. Prophylaxe der polymorphen Lichtdermatose.
Aktuel Dermatol 1999;25:329–33.
221. Hibi T, Inoue N, Ogata H, Naganuma M. Introduction and
overview: recent advances in the immunotherapy of inflam-
matory bowel disease. J Gastroenterol 2003;38(Suppl 15):
36–42.
222. Loftus EV Jr. Clinical epidemiology of inflammatory bowel
disease: incidence, prevalence, and environmental influ-
ences. Gastroenterology 2004;126:1504–17.
223. Mathew CG, Lewis CM. Genetics of inflammatory bowel
disease: progress and prospects. Hum Mol Genet 2004;
13:R161–8.
224. Danese S, Sans M, Fiocchi C. Inflammatory bowel disease:
the role of environmental factors. Autoimmunity Reviews
2004;3:394–400.
225. Mahida YR, Rolfe VE. Host–bacterial interactions in inflam-
matory bowel disease. Clin Sci 2004;107:331–41.
226. Betsi GI, Papadavid E, Falagas ME. Probiotics for the treat-
ment or prevention of atopic dermatitis: a review of the
evidence from randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin
Dermatol 2008;9:93–103.
227. Böhm SK, Kruis W. Probiotics. Do they help to control
intestinal inflammation? In: Domschke WW, Kagnoff MF,
Kucharzik TF, Mayer LF, Targan SR, editors. Inflammatory
bowel disease. Genetics, barrier function, immunologic
mechanisms, and microbial pathways. Ann N Y Acad Sci
2006;1072:339–50.
E. coli strain Nissle 1917 as probiotic 157
228. Duchmann R. The role of probiotics and antibiotics in
regulating mucosal inflammation. In: Neurath MF, Blum-
berg RS, editors. Immune mechanisms in inflammatory
bowel disease. Advances in Experimental Medicine and
Biology, 579. Berlin: Springer Science. 2006. p. 219–26.
229. Ewaschuk JB, Dieleman LA. Probiotics and prebiotics in
chronic inflammatory bowel diseases. World J Gastroenterol
2006;12:5941–50.
230. Fedorak RN, Dieleman LA. Probiotics in the treatment of
human inflammatory bowel diseases: update 2008. J Clin
Gastroenterol 2008;42(Suppl 2):S97–103.
231. Floch MH. Probiotics, irritable bowel syndrome, and
inflammatory bowel disease. Curr Treat Options Gastroen-
terol 2003;6:283–8.
232. Floch MH, Montrose DC. Use of probiotics in humans: an
analysis of the literature. Gastroenterol Clin North Am
2005;34:547–70.
233. Gionchetti P, Rizzello F, Lammers KM, Morselli C, Sollazzi L,
Davies S, et al. Antibiotics and probiotics in treatment of
inflammatory bowel disease. World J Gastroenterol 2006;
12:3306–13.
234. Jones JL, Foxx-Orenstein AE. Probiotics in inflammatory
bowel disease. Pract Gastroenterol 2006;30:44–50.
235. Kligler B, Hanaway P, Cohrssen A. Probiotics in children.
Pediatr Clin North Am 2007;54:949–67.
236. Kwon JH, Farrell RJ. Probiotics and inflammatory bowel
disease. BioDrugs 2003;17:179–86.
237. Marteau P, Seksik P, Jian R. Probiotics and intestinal health
effects: a clinical perspective. Br J Nutr 2002;88(Suppl 1):
S51–7.
238. Marteau P, Seksik P, Jian R. Probiotics and health: new facts
and ideas. Curr Opin Biotechnol 2002;13:486–9.
239. Sartor RB. Therapeutic manipulation of the enteric micro-
flora in inflammatory bowel diseases: antibiotics, probiotics,
and prebiotics. Gastroenterology 2004;126:1620–33.
240. Sartor RB. Microbial influences in inflammatory bowel
diseases. Gastroenterology 2008;134:577–94.
241. Kruis W, Schütz E, Fric P, Fixa B, Judmaier G, Stolte M.
Double-blind comparison of an oral Escherichia coli prep-
aration and mesalazine in maintaining remission of ulcer-
ative colitis. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 1997;11:853–8.
242. Rembacken BJ, Snelling AM, Hawkey PM, Chalmers DM,
Axon ATR. Non-pathogenic Escherichia coli versus mesala-
zine for the treatment of ulcerative colitis: a randomised
trial. Lancet 1999;354:635–9.
243. Burke DA, Axon ATR. Adhesive Escherichia coli in inflam-
matory bowel disease and infective diarrhoea. BMJ 1988;
297:102–4.
244. Hoffmann JC, Zeitz M, Bischoff SC, Brambs HJ, Bruch HP,
Buhr HJ, et al. Diagnostik und Therapie der Colitis
Ulcerosa: Ergebnisse einer evidenzbasierten Konsensuskon-
ferenz der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Verdauungs- und
Stoffwechselerkrankungen zusammen mit dem Kompeten-
znetz chronisch entzündliche Darmerkrankungen. Z Gas-
troenterol 2004;42:979–83.
245. Stange EF, Riemann J, Von Herbay A, Lochs H, Fleig WE,
Schölmerich J, et al. Diagnostik und Therapie der Colitis
ulcerosa - Ergebnisse einer evidenzbasierten Konsensuskon-
ferenz der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Verdauungs- und
Stoffwechselkrankheiten. Leitlinien der DGVS. Z Gastro-
enterol 2001;39:19–72.
246. Travis SPL, Stange EF, Lémann M, Oresland T,
Bemelman WA, Chowers Y, et al. European evidence-based
consensus on the management of ulcerative colitis: current
management. J Crohn’s Colitis 2008;2:24–62.
247. Vogelsang H, Tilg H, Petritsch W, Knoflach P. Colitis ulce-
rosa: medikamentöse Rezidivprophylaxe. Österreichische
Ärztezeitung 2003;1/2:40–1.
 158 U. Sonnenborn et al.
248. Henker J, Müller S, Laass MW, Schreiner A, Schulze J.
Probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 (EcN) for successful
remission maintenance of ulcerative colitis in children and
adolescents: an open-label pilot study. Z Gastroenterol
2008;46:874–5.
249. Bruckschen E, Horosiewicz H. Chronische Obstipation,
Vergleich von mikrobiologischer Therapie und Lactulose.
Münch Med Wochenschr 1994;16:241–5.
250. Möllenbrink M, Bruckschen E. Behandlung der chro-
nischen Obstipation mit physiologischen Escherichia-coli-
Bakterien. Med Klin 1994;89:587–93.
251. Hernando-Harder AC, Von Bünau R, Nadarajah M,
Singer MV, Harder H. Influence of E. coli Strain Nissle 1917
(EcN) on intestinal gas dynamics and abdominal sensation.
Dig Dis Sci 2008;53:443–50.
252. Henker J, Laass M, Blokhin BM, Bolbot YK, Maydannik
VG, Elze M, et al. The probiotic Escherichia coli strain
Nissle 1917 (EcN) stops acute diarrhoea in infants and tod-
dlers. Eur J Pediatr 2007;166:311–8.
253. Henker J, Laass MW, Blokhin BM, Maydannik VG, BolbotYK,
Elze M, et al. Probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 versus
Downloaded by [201.75.65.196] at 11:37 25 December 2017
placebo for treating diarrhea of greater than 4 days duration in
infants and toddlers. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008;27:494–9.
254. Fuller R. History and development of probiotics. 1992. In:
Fuller R, editor. Probiotics. London: Champman & Hall. p
1–8.
255. Bendali F, Sanaa M, Bichet H, Schelcher F. Risk factors
associated with diarrhoea in newborn calves. Vet Res
1999;30:509–22.
256. Schroeder B, Duncker S, Barth S, Bauerfeind R, Gruber AD,
Deppenmeier S, et al. Preventive effects of the probiotic Escher-
ichia coli strain Nissle 1917 on acute secretory diarrhea in a pig
model of intestinal infection. Dig Dis Sci 2006;51:724–31.
257. Drisko JA, Giles CK, Bischoff BJ. Probiotics in health main-
tenance and disease prevention. Altern Med Rev
2003;8:143–55.
258. Autieri SM, Lins JJ, Leatham MP, Laux DC, Conway T,
Cohen PS. L-fucose stimulates utilization of D-ribose by
Escherichia coli MG1655 (Delta)fucAO and E. coli Nissle
1917 (delta)fucAO mutants in the mouse intestine and in
M9 minimal medium. Infect Immun 2007;75:5465–75.
COMMENT
U. Sonnenborn & J. Schulze: The non-pathogenic Escherichia coli
strain Nissle 1917 – features of a versatile probiotic
This article is a comprehensive review considering a
specific strain of Escherichia coli, which has been used
as a probiotic for several decades. Over the years
MEHD has published similar reviews on leading
probiotic products, and they have all been very well
received. I am quite sure that will also be the case for
the present review. It is an amazing story about an
amazing strain and with an amazing future strategy.
My concern has been some statements documented
ISSN 0891-060X print/ISSN 1651-2235 online © 2009 Informa UK Ltd. (Informa Healthcare, Taylor & Francis AS)
DOI: 10.3109/08910600903462558
259. Brader P, Stritzker J, Riedl CC, Zanzonico P, Cai S, Burnazi
EM, et al. Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 facilitates tumor
detection by positron emission tomography and optical
imaging. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:2295–302.
260. Coldewey SM, Hartmann M, Schmidt DS, Engelking U,
Ukena S, Gunzer F. Impact of the rpoS genotype for acid
resistance patterns of pathogenic and probiotic Escherichia
coli. BMC Microbiol 2007;7:21.
261. Hejnova J, Pages D, Rusniok C, Glaser P, Sebo P,
Buchrieser C. Specific regions of genome plasticity and
genetic diversity of the commensal Escherichia coli A0
34/86. Int J Med Microbiol 2006;296:541–6.
262. Mundy R, Girard F, FitzGerald AJ, Frankel G. Comparison
of colonization dynamics and pathology of mice infected
with enteropathogenic Escherichia coli, enterohaemor-
rhagic E. coli and Citrobacter rodentium. FEMS Microbiol
Lett 2006;265:126–32.
263. Stritzker J, Weibel S, Hill PJ, Oelschlaeger TA, Goebel W,
Szalay AA. Tumor-specific colonization, tissue distribution,
and gene induction by probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle
1917 in live mice. Int J Med Microbiol 2007;297:151–62.
264. Duan F, March JC. Interrupting Vibrio cholerae infection
of human epithelial cells with engineered commensal bacte-
rial signaling. Biotechnol Bioeng 2008;101:128–34.
265. Duan F, Curtis KL, March JC. Secretion of insulinotropic
proteins by commensal bacteria: rewiring the gut to treat
diabetes. Appl Environ Microbiol 2008;74:7437–8.
266. Rao S, Hu S, McHugh L, Lueders K, Henry K, Zhao Q,
et al. Toward a live microbial microbicide for HIV: com-
mensal bacteria secreting an HIV fusion inhibitor peptide.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:1993–8.
267. Remer KA, Bartrow M, Roeger B, Moll H, Sonnenborn U,
Oelschlaeger TA. Split immune response after oral vaccina-
tion of mice with recombinant Escherichia coli Nissle 1917
expressing fimbrial adhesin K88. Int J Med Microbiol
2009;299:467–78.
268. Buddenborg C, Daudel D, Liebrecht S, Greune L,
Humberg V, Schmidt MA. Development of a tripartite
vector system for live oral immunization using a Gram-
negative probiotic carrier. Int J Med Microbiol 2008;298:
105–14.
by ‘unpublished results’. Usually, I dislike similar
statements so much that the authors have to re-write.
Why have I broken my own rule this time? The rea-
son is very simple: the results reflect indications on
exciting ongoing research. E. coli Nissle 1917 is more
vivid than ever.
Tore Midtvedt,
Editor-in-Chief