Next Article in Journal
Interplay of Total Antioxidant Capacity and Oxidative Stress Hydroperoxides with Circulating Biomarkers of Inflammation and Iron Status According to Oral Contraception Use
Next Article in Special Issue
Associations of Dietary Antioxidant and Phytochemical Indices with Cognitive Function: Mediating Roles of Basal Metabolic Rate and Systemic Inflammation
Previous Article in Journal
Biosacetalin (1,1-Diethoxyethane) Prolongs Survival and Alleviates Cachexia in the NSG Mice Bearing Neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y Cells
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Microbiota–Gut–Brain Axis Disruption, Neuroinflammation, and Potential Antioxidant-Based Treatments in Metabolic Diseases

by
Jazmín Carro-Rodríguez
1,†,
Gabriela Ibáñez-Cervantes
2,†,
Noemí Cárdenas-Rodríguez
3,
Iván Ignacio-Mejía
1,4,
Exsal Manuel Albores-Méndez
4,
Blanca Rosalba Pardo-Pacheco
5,
Verónica Fernández-Sánchez
6,
Ana María Balboa-Verduzco
7,
Cecilia Adame
1,
Eleazar Lara-Padilla
7,
Javier Mancilla-Ramírez
7,
Roberto Medina-Santillán
7,
Macarena Montoya-Olvera
8,
Alfredo Leonardo Cortes-Algara
9,
Saúl Gómez-Manzo
10,
Beatriz Hernández-Ochoa
11,
Heliodoro Moya-Amaya
12 and
Cindy Bandala
1,*
1
Laboratorio de Neurociencia Traslacional, Escuela Superior de Medicina, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Mexico City 11340, Mexico
2
Laboratorio de Microbiología y Biología Molecular, Departamento de Desarrollo de Tecnologías, Centro Interdisciplinario de Ciencias Marinas, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, La Paz 23096, Baja California Sur, Mexico
3
Laboratorio de Neurociencias, Instituto Nacional de Pediatría, Secretaría de Salud, Mexico City 04530, Mexico
4
Sección de Investigación, Escuela Militar de Graduados de Sanidad, Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo del Ejército y Fuerza Aérea Mexicanos, Universidad del Ejército y Fuerza Aérea, Mexico City 11200, Mexico
5
Nutriología Clínica, Servicio de Endocrinología y Bariatria, Hospital Juárez de México, Mexico City 07760, Mexico
6
Facultad de Estudios Superiores de Iztacala, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City 54090, Mexico
7
Sección de Estudios de Posgrado e Investigación, Escuela Superior de Medicina, Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Mexico City 11340, Mexico
8
Secretaría de Salud del Estado de México, Dirección del Instituto de Salud del Estado de México, Toluca 50070, State of Mexico, Mexico
9
Dirección General del Instituto Materno Infantil del Estado de México, Toluca 50170, State of Mexico, Mexico
10
Laboratorio de Bioquímica Genética, Instituto Nacional de Pediatría, Secretaría de Salud, Mexico City 04530, Mexico
11
Laboratorio de Investigación en Ciencias Ómicas y Epidemiología Microbiana, Hospital Infantil de México Federico Gómez, Secretaría de Salud, Mexico City 06720, Mexico
12
Grupo de Investigación CTS-595, Centro de Investigación en Rendimiento Físico y Deportivo (CIRFD), Universidad Pablo de Olavide, 41089 Sevilla, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Antioxidants 2026, 15(4), 522; https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox15040522
Submission received: 13 March 2026 / Revised: 5 April 2026 / Accepted: 17 April 2026 / Published: 21 April 2026

Abstract

Metabolic diseases are strongly associated with chronic systemic inflammation and oxidative stress, which disrupt the microbiota–gut–brain (MGB) axis and promote neuroinflammation. Dysbiosis favors the release of proinflammatory metabolites, reactive oxygen species (ROS), and lipopolysaccharides (LPS), increasing intestinal permeability and triggering systemic immune responses that reach the central nervous system (CNS) through a weakened blood–brain barrier (BBB). This review summarizes current knowledge on the pathophysiological mechanisms linking the MGB axis, metabolic disorders, and neuroinflammation, as well as the therapeutic potential of antioxidants. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and ScienceDirect and included original research articles, reviews, clinical trials, and meta-analyses related to microbiota, neuroinflammation, oxidative stress, and antioxidant interventions. Evidence indicates that dysbiosis exacerbates metabolic dysfunction by activating the nuclear factor kappa B (NF-κB) and NOD-like receptor family pyrin domain containing 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome pathways, while excessive ROS production impairs mitochondrial function, neuronal survival, and cognitive processes. Antioxidant strategies, including polyphenols, omega-3 fatty acids, curcumin, vitamins C and E, and probiotics, can restore microbial diversity, reinforce intestinal and BBB integrity, and modulate oxidative and inflammatory signaling. In conclusion, supplements and bacteria with antioxidant properties show promising therapeutic effects by targeting oxidative stress mechanisms involved in metabolic diseases and their pathological consequences, such as dysbiosis and neuroinflammation.

1. Introduction

Metabolic diseases are complex disorders that have shown an increasing global prevalence. Despite available therapeutic strategies, they remain a major global public health problem [1]. In this review, we include obesity, T2DM, dyslipidemia, and metabolic syndrome (MS), as these are closely related conditions that share diverse pathophysiological mechanisms, including oxidative stress, low-grade systemic inflammation, insulin resistance, and endothelial dysfunction, among others. These mechanisms also contribute to the modulation of intestinal dysbiosis, BBB integrity, and neuroinflammation [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]. In this context, metabolic diseases can trigger dysbiosis and neuroinflammation in a reinforcing circuit between them [8,10,11].
The MGB axis is a bidirectional communication system that connects the gastrointestinal tract, the gut microbiota, and the CNS. Several studies have shown that the MGB axis can regulate appetite and satiety [12,13,14] as well as processes related to cognition, attention and memory [15,16,17], which are also associated with neuroinflammation [18,19,20,21]. Neuroinflammation is considered a comorbidity of obesity and other metabolic diseases and may arise through various pathophysiological mechanisms, including proinflammatory adipokines, insulin resistance, excess lipids and, importantly, dysbiosis [10,22,23]. However, oxidative stress represents a key pathophysiological mechanism. Redox imbalance is an important therapeutic target, as it is both a cause and a consequence of metabolic dysfunction, dysbiosis, and neuroinflammation. In this regard, antioxidants have been proposed as complementary therapeutic tools due to their ability to modulate neuroinflammation [24,25], restore biological barriers [26], and promote a more stable microbiota [27]. The potential antioxidants (both bioactive molecules and probiotics), whether used alone or in combination, that may positively influence the treatment of metabolic diseases and their comorbidities, such as dysbiosis and neuroinflammation, remain to be fully elucidated.
In this review, we analyze the role of oxidative stress in metabolic diseases related to neuroinflammation and intestinal dysbiosis, as well as possible antioxidant strategies for their treatment.

2. Methodology

This narrative review focuses on two complementary aspects: (1) the pathophysiological mechanisms linking oxidative stress, gut dysbiosis, and neuroinflammation in metabolic diseases; and (2) antioxidant- and microbiota-targeted therapeutic strategies with potential clinical relevance. For the selection and analysis of the literature, we consulted the following sources: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect, SciFinder, ProQuest, EBSCO, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Supporting resources for compound/pathway information and toxicology background included PubChem, NCBI Bookshelf, DrugBank, and LiverTox.
We considered original research articles, reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, clinical trials, and book chapters. Searches were conducted using individual and combined keywords such as “gut microbiota,” “microbiota-gut-brain axis,” “neuroinflammation,” “metabolic disease,” “obesity,” “type 2 diabetes mellitus,” “dyslipidemia,” “metabolic syndrome,” “antioxidants,” “oxidative stress,” “inflammatory markers,” “prebiotics,” and “probiotics”. After selecting studies relevant to both pathophysiological mechanisms and antioxidant-based interventions, 212 references were selected for in-depth analysis. The searches were conducted from 1980 to 2026. Relevant studies on intestinal dysbiosis, oxidative stress, neuroinflammation, and metabolic diseases were included, whereas irrelevant reports, duplicate records, and studies lacking clear mechanistic or clinical relevance were excluded.

3. Pathophysiological Mechanisms Related to Neuroinflammation and Dysbiosis in Metabolic Diseases

Metabolic diseases have been linked to dysregulation of appetite and satiety, as well as cognitive and memory impairment, increased aggression, anxiety, depression, and social isolation [28,29]. Neuroinflammation, or gliosis, has been identified as an underlying factor contributing to these pathological conditions [30]. The pathophysiological mechanisms have been associated with low-grade chronic inflammation, redox imbalance, and dysbiosis [31,32]. It is important to recognize that metabolic disease, neuroinflammation, and dysbiosis are interconnected pathological conditions that interact with one another, with oxidative stress and inflammation acting as their primary axes [18,32,33].

3.1. Neuroinflammation in Obesity, T2DM, Dyslipidemia, and Metabolic Syndrome

Neuroinflammation in metabolic diseases is a multifactorial process involving a complex network of molecular signals, including impaired neuroprotective mechanisms and alterations in CNS homeostasis and BBB integrity [8]. The importance of the BBB lies in the fact that it is a dynamic structure composed primarily of endothelial cells connected by tight junctions, pericytes, astrocytes, and other components of the neurovascular unit [34]. Its function is to selectively regulate the passage of molecules, cells, and signals from the circulation into the CNS, thereby maintaining cerebral homeostasis; protecting nervous tissue from toxins, pathogens, and peripheral inflammatory mediators; and preserving proper neuronal function [34,35]. BBB destabilization is promoted by endothelial oxidative stress [36], altered expression of tight junction proteins [37], inflammatory activation of the neurovascular unit [38], and increased permeability to circulating cytokines, lipids, and endotoxins [8,31]. Once this barrier is compromised, peripheral inflammatory mediators gain greater access to the brain parenchyma, facilitating gliosis and sustained neuroinflammation [8,39], which involves the persistent activation of microglia and astrocytes, with harmful effects in the medium and long term [40].
Another mechanism that contributes to neuroinflammation is gut dysbiosis, which acts as a trigger by promoting NF-κB and NLRP3 inflammasome activation. This leads to the systemic release of cytokines such as tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), interleukin-1 beta (IL-1β), and interleukin-6 (IL-6), as well as chemokines that weaken the BBB [41,42]. In addition to this immune response, communication within the MGB axis is altered by changes in chemical mediators [7] and cholesterol metabolites [43]. These mediators and proinflammatory signals can cause significant shifts in extracellular ion levels, especially by changing potassium and calcium gradients—a key process involved in activating and directing microglia toward a proinflammatory state [44,45]. Therefore, disruption of ionic and chemical balance, intensified by vagus nerve signaling [46,47], sustains chronic gliosis and neurological damage. Simultaneously, repression of essential pathways is observed, manifested as decreased neuronal plasticity [48].
Obesity is a chronic metabolic disease characterized not only by excessive accumulation of adipose tissue but also by sustained activation of systemic and central inflammatory responses [31,49,50]. Visceral adipose tissue functions as an active endocrine and immunological organ that secretes proinflammatory adipokines, including leptin, TNF-α, and IL-6, which are related to neuroinflammation [51]. These adipokines are secreted by hypertrophic adipocytes, primarily from visceral fat, and are transported through the systemic circulation, preferentially affecting brain regions with high vascular exposure and specialized characteristics of the BBB [52]. This vascular configuration, along with relatively high blood flow, a more permeable BBB (secondary to endothelial inflammation, oxidative stress, and alterations in tight junction proteins), and its high exposure to peripheral endocrine and nutritional signals, explains why adipokines from visceral adipose tissue more readily access hypothalamic neurons [41,51]. Furthermore, due to their distribution throughout the systemic circulation, these mediators also reach regions of the hedonic brain, such as the ventral tegmental area and the nucleus accumbens which, although exhibiting a tighter BBB, can be influenced by active transport mechanisms and by increased permeability induced by inflammation [53]. At a functional level, leptin modulates the electrical activity and synaptic plasticity of proopiomelanocortin (POMC) neurons and neuropeptide Y/Agouti-related protein (NPY/AgRP) neurons in the hypothalamus, in addition to influencing dopaminergic signaling in reward circuits [54,55,56,57]. Elevated leptin levels in obese individuals also potentiate this activation via Janus kinase 2/signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (JAK2/STAT3), perpetuating the proinflammatory state and interfering with satiety signals [58]. In parallel, cytokines such as IL-6 and TNF-α induce microglial activation and neuroinflammation, reach the hypothalamus and reprogram microglia toward an M1 phenotype, characterized by the sustained release of IL-1β and interleukin-18 (IL-18), thereby impairing leptin and insulin signaling [59]. Taken together, the combination of high vascular accessibility and the expression of specific receptors allow circulating factors derived from visceral adipose tissue to simultaneously alter homeostatic and hedonic circuits, favoring appetite dysregulation, loss of satiety signaling, and increased food craving or reward-driven food consumption.
Another mechanism linked to neuroinflammation in obesity is a high-fat diet (HFD) [60]. Studies in animal models have shown that HFD induces microglial activation and astrogliosis in the arcuate nucleus of the hypothalamus, even before obesity becomes clinically apparent [61]. Although HFD models do not fully replicate the endocrine complexity of visceral adipose tissue, they provide complementary mechanistic evidence linking metabolic inflammation to BBB dysfunction and neural damage. HFD consumption increases ROS and enhances the production of adipokines such as TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β, which maintain low-grade systemic inflammation and a redox imbalance [62,63]. At the same time, exposure to an HFD has been associated with altered expression of BBB-related proteins, including tight junction proteins such as occludin, reduced barrier integrity in hypothalamic regions, and increased permeability to low- and high-molecular-weight markers, indicating early neurovascular dysfunction [64,65]. Experimental evidence also shows that animals fed an HFD develop adiposity, hyperleptinemia, insulin resistance, oxidative stress, and endotoxemia-related inflammation [65,66], factors that may contribute to endothelial dysfunction in the BBB [67,68,69,70]. Chronic activation of glial and astroglia, also observed in humans using neuroimaging techniques, has been associated with brain insulin resistance and deterioration of neural circuits involved in appetite regulation [50,61].
Finally, a decrease in the levels of neurotrophic factors such as BDNF has also been observed as part of neuroinflammation in obesity, which compromises neuroplasticity and synaptic function, contributing to cognitive and emotional alterations in individuals with obesity [48]. BDNF-mediated changes occur primarily in the hypothalamus (e.g., the arcuate nucleus), as well as in reward-related regions such as the hippocampus, ventral tegmental area, and nucleus accumbens [71,72]. These changes include both structural plasticity (dendritic remodeling and changes in synaptic density) and functional plasticity (modifications in neuronal activity, neurotransmitter signaling, and circuit dynamics) [73].
In T2DM, chronic hyperglycemia and insulin resistance are the main factors linked to neuroinflammation [74]. Hyperglycemia, through pathways such as the polyol pathway, advanced glycation end products (AGEs), and protein kinase C (PKC) activation, increases the activity of the NF-κB pathway, thereby enhancing the production of IL-1β, TNF-α and ROS while simultaneously reducing the activity of antioxidant enzymes such as superoxide dismutase (SOD) and catalase (CAT), ultimately leading to neuronal and glial damage [75]. Under normal conditions, insulin exerts neuroprotective and anti-inflammatory effects in the CNS. In insulin resistance, these effects are diminished, limiting neuronal survival and promoting glial activation and chronic inflammation [67,76,77,78]. Microglia and astrocytes are the primary cellular elements responsible for the release of inflammatory mediators in response to insulin resistance [67,74]. These glial cells exhibit insulin resistance mechanisms analogous to those observed in neurons, where impaired insulin receptor signaling disinhibits the activation of proinflammatory pathways such as NF-κB and c-Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) [9,75]. The gastrointestinal microbiota directly influences this central insulin resistance through the release of LPS, which activates Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4) in glial cells, exacerbating the production of cytokines (TNF-α, IL-6) that interfere with neuronal insulin signaling [6,79]. This process promotes degenerative neuronal changes, such as reduced BDNF levels and loss of synaptic integrity, linking dysbiosis to the cognitive impairment observed in diabetic patients [48,78]. Furthermore, central insulin resistance impairs the normal anti-inflammatory effects of this hormone, exacerbating gliosis and compromising brain structural integrity [78]. The consequences of neuroinflammation in diabetes include complications such as diabetic neuropathy, a disorder that affects peripheral and central nerves, causing pain, numbness, and loss of sensation [80]. In addition, diabetes increases the risk of cognitive impairment and dementia, including Alzheimer’s disease, due to chronic inflammation and synaptic dysfunction in the brain [81,82].
Dyslipidemia, characterized by elevated levels of total cholesterol, low-density lipoproteins (LDL), and triglycerides, together with reduced high-density lipoproteins (HDL), is associated with a systemic inflammatory state that includes neuroinflammation [83]. Excess free fatty acids induce the production of proinflammatory cytokines that can cross the BBB and contribute to neuroinflammation [49,84]. This inflammatory milieu is promoted by the accumulation of altered lipid species, particularly oxidized LDL (oxLDL) and triglyceride-rich lipoproteins, which activate endothelial cells, macrophages, and other immune effectors, increasing the production of mediators such as TNF-α, IL-6, IL-1β, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), and ROS [85,86]. Through endothelial dysfunction and BBB disruption, these lipotoxic and inflammatory signals facilitate the entry of peripheral mediators into the brain, promoting microglial and astrocytic activation and sustaining chronic neuroinflammation [5,87,88]. In addition, altered cholesterol metabolism in the CNS can promote the accumulation of toxic metabolites such as 24S-hydroxycholesterol, which intensifies oxidative stress and neuronal inflammation [43]. Excess free fatty acids induce the production of proinflammatory cytokines that can cross the BBB and contribute to neuroinflammation [49,84]. This inflammatory environment compromises synaptic plasticity and neuronal homeostasis, contributing to cognitive impairment and an increased risk of neurodegenerative conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease [89].
MS, a cluster of disorders that includes abdominal obesity, insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, increases the risk of cardiovascular disease and T2DM [90]. As expected, MS has also been linked to neuroinflammation [2,8,9,42,75,91], affecting brain energy homeostasis, including regulatory centers of the hypothalamus and the hedonic brain, as we mention previously [41,92]. Additionally, hypertension, as a central component of MS, contributes to the development of neuroinflammation through multiple hemodynamic and immunometabolic mechanisms, such as endothelial dysfunction and increased ROS production, which favors increased BBB permeability [93]. This process is further potentiated by the activation of the renin–angiotensin system, particularly through angiotensin II, which stimulates ROS production and activates proinflammatory pathways such as NF-κB in endothelial cells and microglia [94]. Consequently, microglial activation and astrogliosis occur, accompanied by the release of inflammatory mediators (IL-1β, TNF-α, and IL-6) that alter neuronal function and synaptic homeostasis, as previously described. In the context of MS, these effects are amplified by the coexistence of insulin resistance, visceral adiposity, and a low-grade systemic inflammatory state, which perpetuates neurovascular dysfunction and promotes neurodegeneration and cognitive decline [30,74,76].

3.2. Dysbiosis in Metabolic Disease

The MGB axis participates in the regulation of physiological processes related to metabolism, inflammation, and the response to oxidative stress (redox imbalance) [95,96]. It is important to note that oxidative stress is not only a consequence but also a key pathophysiological nexus linking metabolic inflammation with dysfunction of the MGB axis [33]. Alteration of the MGB axis is a key factor in the pathophysiology of metabolic diseases [97,98] and is associated with dysbiosis, which is characterized by reduced microbial diversity and an increased proportion of pathogenic bacteria [32]. Changes in the microbiota lead to the production of proinflammatory metabolites, such as LPS, which can cross the damaged intestinal barrier and activate the immune system. Once in the bloodstream, they can cross the BBB and activate microglia, triggering neuroinflammation [99]. Under homeostatic conditions, the microbiota produces metabolites such as short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs), which regulate neuroinflammation and oxidative stress [100,101]. However, in dysbiosis, the microbiota reduces SCFA production and increases the generation of proinflammatory metabolites and ROS, contributing to the development and progression of metabolic diseases such as obesity [97]. SCFAs, including acetate, propionate, and butyrate, act as ligands for G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), such as GPR41 and GPR43 [102]. Specifically, GPR41/43 is involved in energy regulation in response to SCFAs [101], particularly in enteroendocrine cells, where it promotes the secretion of satiety signals and adjusts the response of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis [46]. In contrast, GPR43 modulates the activity of NF-κB through β-arrestin 2 (βarr2), reducing the production of proinflammatory cytokines [102] and improving intestinal barrier integrity [103].
Obesity has been described as inducing intestinal dysbiosis, characterized by reduced microbial diversity and altered proportions of major bacterial phyla. These alterations include increased Firmicutes, members of the class Negativicutes, and the genus Lachnoclostridium, along with decreased levels of Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron [104,105], Akkermansia muciniphila [106,107], Faecalibacterium prausnitzii and Roseburia spp., which have been described as the main strains responsible for butyrate production [108]. The reduction or excess of certain microbial strains modifies the production of SCFAs (mainly acetate, propionate, butyrate), which are sensed by enteroendocrine cells and vagus nerve cells, thereby influencing the hypothalamus [109]. At the same time, the increased intestinal permeability characteristic of obesity facilitates the passage of LPS into the circulation, triggering low-grade systemic inflammation that aggravates insulin resistance and activates cerebral microglia, promoting neuroinflammatory processes [110]. In addition, the microbiota influences the endocrine axis by modulating hormones such as ghrelin, leptin, peptide YY, and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) [111].
In models of obesity and T2DM, intestinal dysbiosis promotes the growth of Gram-negative bacteria, which release LPS. These molecules are associated with increased levels of inflammatory biomarkers through activation of the immune system via Toll-like receptor 4/myeloid differentiation factor 2 (TLR4-MD-2), thereby triggering a systemic inflammatory response [79,112]. Intestinal dysbiosis and increased LPS production by Gram-negative bacteria, such as Escherichia coli, Enterobacter massiliensis, Salmonella enterica, and Shigella flexneri, activate the NLRP3 inflammasome, leading to increased production of IL-1β and IL-18 [98,113,114,115]. On the other hand, activation of TLR4 by LPS induces receptor dimerization, allowing Toll-like receptor-associated adaptor protein (TIRAP) and myeloid differentiation primary response protein 88 (MyD88) to activate interleukin receptor-associated protein kinases (IRAK1/2) and the TNF receptor-associated factor 6 (TRAF6) complex. This signaling cascade activates the NF-κB pathway and increases TNF-α and interleukin-6 (IL-6) levels [110]. Likewise, the vagus nerve is highly relevant in inflammation associated with the MGB axis, as it transmits inflammatory signals from the intestine to the brain, where it promotes microglial activation [47]. This activation contributes to neuroinflammation but is also associated with alterations in appetite control and energy homeostasis [116]. Intestinal dysbiosis in T2DM is associated with a decrease in butyrate-producing bacteria, including reduced levels of Bacteroides fragilis and other key species, and this deficit affects ROS production. In diabetic dysbiosis, low butyrate availability alleviates the inhibition of histone deacetylase 3 (HDAC3), leading to increased expression of NADPH oxidase 4 (NOX4), an enzyme responsible for ROS generation. This increase in ROS is associated with an altered inflammatory state and changes in colon permeability and function [117]. In addition, increased ROS production and other markers of oxidative stress have been positively correlated with a greater abundance of Escherichia coli and enterococci and negatively correlated with the presence of lactobacilli [118]. Elevated ROS levels in the intestine and adipose tissue, together with alterations in oxidative stress biomarkers such as thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS) and antioxidant enzymes including SOD, CAT, and glutathione peroxidase (GPx), are associated with mitochondrial dysfunction. This alteration compromises adenosine triphosphate (ATP) production, promotes the release of proinflammatory cytokines, and can lead to cellular damage and apoptosis [119,120].
The gut microbiota modulates the expression of antioxidant enzymes. Under conditions of dysbiosis, these antioxidant enzymes are compromised, increasing susceptibility to oxidative damage [119,121]. ROS, such as superoxide anion (O2●—) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), activate proinflammatory pathways, including NF-κB, which regulates the expression of genes involved in cell survival [122], and NLRP3, which is related to the pathogenesis of inflammatory diseases [123]. In turn, inflammatory cytokines such as TNF-α and IL-6 further increase ROS production [121,124]. This cycle perpetuates metabolic dysfunction. Oxidative stress induces deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) damage and promotes cellular senescence in metabolically active tissues such as the liver and adipose tissue [125]. This contributes to insulin resistance and hepatic steatosis [126,127], and persistent oxidative stress has also been linked to neurodegeneration [128]. Figure 1 illustrates the causal relationship between intestinal dysbiosis and neuroinflammation.

4. Antioxidant Strategies Targeting Gut Dysbiosis and Neuroinflammation in Metabolic Diseases

4.1. Redox-Modulating Bacteria: Pro-Oxidant vs. Antioxidant Profiles

Oxidative stress within the host is closely linked to the composition of the gut microbiome [129]. On the one hand, certain Gram-negative and sulfate-reducing bacteria produce endotoxins or hydrogen sulfide (H2S), which activate inflammatory pathways and damage the mucosal barrier, contributing to intestinal dysfunction and systemic inflammation [130]. In contrast, other microorganisms produce antioxidant enzymes such as SOD, generate butyrate, or synthesize reduced glutathione (GSH), processes that neutralize free radicals and strengthen mucosal integrity [131]. This microbial duality between pro-oxidants and antioxidants reveals potential therapeutic targets for restoring redox balance. Table 1 details some characteristics of pro-oxidant bacteria.
Due to the presence of pro-oxidant bacteria that form part of the gut microbiome and can induce systemic inflammatory conditions, including processes in the CNS such as neuroinflammation [138], recommending probiotics with antioxidant properties, which include free radical scavengers and antioxidant enzymes, may be a therapeutic resource for these pathological conditions [24]. Table 2 shows the antioxidant bacteria that have demonstrated therapeutic effects in models of dysbiosis, inflammatory conditions, and metabolic disorders.
Despite the limited information available on gut microbiota bacteria with antioxidant capabilities, evidence shows that they have therapeutic potential in different clinical contexts; for example, in metabolic diseases and their impact on neuroinflammation and dysbiosis.

4.2. Antioxidant Supplementation as a Therapeutic Strategy

Antioxidant supplements have been shown to have therapeutic implications for metabolic conditions such as obesity, neuroinflammation, and gut dysbiosis [10,25,27,148]. Polyphenols present in foods such as green tea, berries, and cocoa reach the colon, where they are metabolized by the gut microbiota into low-molecular-weight phenolic compounds with high bioavailability and potent antioxidant activity [149]. These compounds modulate bacterial composition, favoring the growth of genera such as Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, and Akkermansia, which in turn strengthen the intestinal barrier and promote the production of SCFAs (butyrate and propionate) with local anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects [149,150]. Structurally, the –OH groups of polyphenols capture free radicals and can activate the nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 (Nrf2) pathway in epithelial cells, increasing the expression of enzymes such as SOD, CAT, and GPx [151]. Resveratrol and curcumin are examples of polyphenols that inhibit proinflammatory pathways such as NF-κB, thereby reducing the production of inflammatory cytokines, including TNF-α and IL-1β [25]. This effect not only reduces neuroinflammation but also improves insulin sensitivity and metabolic function in models of obesity and metabolic diseases [36].
Polyphenols, vitamin C, vitamin E, and GSH act directly on ROS, reducing their concentration and preventing or mitigating oxidative damage to neurons and glial cells. In particular, vitamin E, a fat-soluble antioxidant, protects cell membranes from lipid peroxidation, a process common in diabetes and dyslipidemia [152].
Table 3 and Figure 2 summarize antioxidant compounds with effects on the microbiota and their impact on neuroinflammation.

4.3. Combined Antioxidant and Probiotic Strategies

The therapeutic strategy of combining probiotics with antioxidants may be promising for managing dysbiosis and neuroinflammation in metabolic diseases; however, much of the available evidence derives from related clinical contexts (e.g., psychiatric, cardiovascular, or endocrine conditions) and should therefore be interpreted as indirect but mechanistically relevant support. Although conclusive evidence remains limited, studies conducted in both experimental models and humans suggest that this approach may exert beneficial effects. In experimental models, Lactobacillus paracasei L14 supplementation (1010 colony-forming units, CFU) has been shown to reduce lipid peroxidation and increase the activity of antioxidant enzymes, including CAT, GPx and SOD, thereby attenuating inflammation and intestinal dysbiosis. These findings suggest systemic regulatory effects in a streptozotocin (STZ)-induced diabetes model in rats [167,168,169]. In a STZ plus nicotinamide-induced model, a multistrain formulation containing seven Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium species (5 × 1010 CFU), administered alone or in combination with resveratrol, was investigated in Wistar rats. This combination significantly reduced the insulin resistance index; however, a reduction in oxidative stress was observed only in the group co-administered with resveratrol [170]. Other probiotic strategies, including the use of Lactobacillus strains such as L. plantarum, L. gasseri, and L. fermentum, have been evaluated in experimental diabetes models, demonstrating antioxidant effects, reduced dysbiosis and normalization of glucose metabolism [171,172]. In murine models of metabolic disorder induced by HFD, the use of probiotic strains such as Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium decreased adipose tissue, insulin resistance and inflammation [173,174,175]. In addition, probiotic strains such as Lactobacillus, Streptococcus, Clostridium butyricum and Bifidobacterium have demonstrated neuroprotective properties in models of neurological diseases, improving synaptic plasticity and antioxidant capacity, reducing neurodegeneration/neuroinflammation, and preventing anxiety behavior and memory impairment [176,177,178,179,180,181]. CEREBIOME® (Lactobacillus helveticus R0052 and B. longum R0175) is a specific formulation of a probiotic blend. This treatment significantly improved the anxiety behavior observed in animals with obesity [182]. Another probiotic mixture (B. bifidum W23, B. lactis W52, L. acidophilus W37, L. brevis W63, L. casei W56, L. salivarius W24, and Lc. lactis W19, Lc. lactis W58) increased indole-3-propionic acid, a neuroprotective agent, and reduced depression in rats fed a HFD [183]. In another study, the prebiotic xylooligosaccharide and probiotic L. paracasei improved hippocampal plasticity and brain mitochondrial function and decreased microglial activation, thereby restoring cognitive function in male obese insulin-resistant rats induced by a HFD [184]. The use of L. plantarum and inulin also improves gut dysbiosis, oxidative stress and cognitive responses in diabetic rats [185]. This evidence suggests that these strains could also be used to treat neuroinflammation caused by metabolic conditions.
Regarding clinical studies, it has been observed that the use of probiotic strains such as Lactobacillus, Streptococcus, Saccharomyces and Bifidobacterium in individuals with T2DM, obesity or metabolic syndrome generally improves insulin resistance, lipid profile, immune system modulation, and metabolic function. Additionally, these interventions have been associated with improved intestinal epithelial barrier integrity, reduced triglyceride levels, and decreased inflammation markers and oxidative stress status [186,187,188,189,190,191]. On the other hand, polyphenols (epigallocatechin gallate, epicatechin gallate, epigallocatechin, gallocatechin, epicatechin and catechin) also exert prebiotic effects by stimulating beneficial bacteria and reducing the incidence of metabolic disorders and cardiometabolic risks [192]. Some polyphenols inhibit harmful bacteria such as Helicobacter pylori, Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli and Salmonella typhimurium or hepatitis C virus and Candida [193]. In contrast, other polyphenols promote the growth of beneficial bacteria, including Bifidobacterium spp., Lactobacillus spp., and Akkermansia muciniphila [193,194]. Moreover, it has been shown that the consumption of virgin olive oil, which is rich in polyphenols, in obese patients can restore gut microbiota balance and improve insulin sensitivity [195,196]. Whole grains rich in dietary fiber, lignans and phytosterols could also improve insulin sensitivity through modulation of the intestinal microbiota [197]. Furthermore, it has been suggested that polyphenols in combination with prebiotics and exercise may help prevent or attenuate neurogenerative diseases by modulating the gut microbiota and the gut–brain axis, partly due to their ability to cross the BBB [198,199]. Symbiotics, combinations of probiotics and prebiotics with antioxidant-rich components, represent a promising therapeutic strategy due to their potent anti-inflammatory and antioxidant properties. These effects contribute to maintaining a healthy gut environment and protecting against neuroinflammatory pathways [200].
The beneficial effects of probiotics, administered alone or in combination with antioxidants, have been observed in neurological and psychiatric symptoms associated with metabolic conditions in patients. In geriatric subjects with obesity, the consumption of kefir fortified with two strains, Lactobacillus helveticus and Bifidobacterium longum (dosage 3  ×  109 CFU of each strain), was associated with a reduction in depressive symptoms [201]. In subjects with T2DM and coronary heart disease, co-supplementation with a probiotic (8 × 109 CFU/day of Lactocare Zisttakhmir Co.) and vitamin D (50,000 IU every 2 weeks) for 12 weeks significantly decreased depression and anxiety [202]. Similarly, the use of probiotics (8 × 109 CFU/day of Lactobacillus acidophilus, Bifidobacterium bifidum, Lactobacillus reuteri and Lactobacillus fermentum; 2  ×  109 CFU/g each) combined with vitamin D (50,000 IU every 2 weeks) for 12 weeks also improved anxiety and depression symptoms in women with polycystic ovary syndrome [203]. The use of the same probiotic protocol combined with selenium co-supplementation (200 μg/day) over the same period also improved depression and anxiety symptoms in these patients [204]. In subjects with metabolic syndrome and chronic schizophrenia, the use of a probiotic (8 × 109 CFU/day containing Lactobacillus acidophilus, Bifidobacterium lactis, Bifidobacterium bifidum, and Bifidobacterium longum; 2  ×  109 CFU of each strain; LactoCare®, Zisttakhmir Company, Tehran, Iran) combined with selenium (200 μg/day) for 12 weeks improved the severity of neurological symptoms [205]. Additionally, in subjects after a myocardial infarction, the administration of Lactobacillus rhamnosus capsules (1.6 × 109 CFU) for 12 weeks significantly reduced depressive symptoms [206]. In pregnant women, the use of a probiotic formulation (Ecologic Barrier) has been used to manage symptoms of prenatal maternal anxiety and depression [207]. In a healthy elderly population, a probiotic formulation containing L. paracasei, L. rhamnosus, L. acidophilus, and B. lactis improved cognitive function and reduced inflammation [208]. The use of symbiotics containing L. acidophilus, B. bifidum, B. lactis, and B. longum, combined with prebiotics such as fructooligosaccharides, galactooligosaccharides, and inulin, also decreased depressive symptoms in patients undergoing hemodialysis [209]. Regarding clinical trials, a recent randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group interventional study is evaluating the effect of a symbiotic supplement (tannins 350 mg and strains including Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus casei, and Bifidobacterium lactis; 2 × 109 CFU/g each) on anxiety and depression in subjects with obesity over 3 years [210]. Finally, pharmacological approaches using antioxidant compounds such as resveratrol, curcumin, vitamin C, vitamin E, and β-carotene have been proposed to modulate the gut–brain axis and mitigate the progression of neuroinflammation [211,212].

5. Future Research Perspectives

Rather than representing a linear sequence of events, current evidence suggests the existence of a self-amplifying pathological circuit in which metabolic alterations, microbial imbalance, and inflammatory signaling in the brain interact bidirectionally, contributing to disease progression and the limited efficacy of current therapeutic strategies.
In this context, oxidative stress emerges as a central and convergent mechanism linking these processes, representing a promising therapeutic target. Therefore, future research should focus on elucidating the temporal and mechanistic hierarchy of these interactions, as well as on developing antioxidant-based strategies. These approaches include both bioactive compounds and microbiota-derived bacteria with antioxidant capacity, used individually or in combination with prebiotics, with the potential to modulate this pathological axis.
Furthermore, it is essential to strengthen research on how current therapies for metabolic diseases influence the gut–brain axis and neuroinflammation. Progress in this area will enable the development of more effective and accessible interventions, facilitating their application in translational studies.
Finally, it is necessary to develop strategies aimed not only at targeting the initial pathogenic mechanisms but also at limiting the long-term consequences of neuroinflammation and dysbiosis, including their association with neurodegenerative diseases and cancer.

6. Conclusions

Defining a precise causal mechanism between metabolic diseases, dysbiosis, and neuroinflammation is complex and challenging. Therefore, in this review, we integrate the main mechanisms that converge on oxidative stress as a common pathophysiological axis.
In this context, antioxidants have emerged as a promising therapeutic strategy, including compounds such as polyphenols, flavonoids, vitamins, and curcumin, as well as bacteria such as Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium. The use of antioxidants alone or in combination with strategies targeting microbiota and neuroinflammation represents an innovative and potentially synergistic approach for the treatment of metabolic diseases. However, significant gaps remain in clinical validation, treatment standardization, and the identification of optimal combinations, underscoring the need for future translational studies.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.B., J.C.-R. and G.I.-C.; investigation, N.C.-R., I.I.-M., B.R.P.-P., V.F.-S. and E.M.A.-M.; methodology, A.M.B.-V. and C.A.; formal analysis, E.L.-P., J.M.-R., R.M.-S., M.M.-O. and A.L.C.-A.; writing—original draft preparation, S.G.-M., B.H.-O., C.B., G.I.-C. and J.C.-R.; writing—review and editing, C.B., H.M.-A., J.C.-R., G.I.-C. and I.I.-M.; validation, I.I.-M., C.B., H.M.-A., G.I.-C. and N.C.-R.; supervision, C.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the Secretaría de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación for the postgraduate scholarships awarded to Jazmín Carro Rodríguez and María Cecilia Adame Valente. This review is the product of the multidisciplinary protocol registered in la Secretaria de Investigación y Posgrado del Instituto Politécnico Nacional (MULTI-2026-0043).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
APNAdiponectin
AGEsAdvanced Glycation End Products
ATPAdenosine Triphosphate
BATAdenosine Triphosphate
BBBBlood–Brain Barrier
BDNFBrain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor
CFUColony-Forming Units
CATCatalase
EPA/DHAEicosapentaenoic Acid/Docosahexaenoic Acid
FMTFecal Microbiota Transplantation
GLP-1Glucagon-Like Peptide-1
GPR41G-Protein-Coupled Receptor 41
GPR43G-Protein-Coupled Receptor 43
GPCRG-Protein-Coupled Receptor
GPxGlutathione Peroxidase
GSHReduced Glutathione
H2O2Hydrogen Peroxide
H2SHydrogen Sulfide
HFDHigh-Fat Diet
HDAC3Histone Deacetylase 3
HDLHigh-Density Lipoprotein
IL-1βInterleukin-1 Beta
IL-6Interleukin-6
IL-18Interleukin-18
IRAK1/2Interleukin-1 Receptor-Associated Kinase 1/2
JNKc-Jun N-terminal Kinase
Keap1Kelch-like ECH-Associated Protein 1
LPSLipopolysaccharide(s)
LDLLow-Density Lipoprotein
MCP-1Monocyte Chemoattractant Protein-1
MD-2Myeloid Differentiation Factor 2
MGBMicrobiota–Gut–Brain Axis
MPOMyeloperoxidase
MSMetabolic Syndrome
MyD88Myeloid Differentiation Primary Response 88
NF-κBNuclear Factor Kappa-Light-Chain-Enhancer of Activated B Cells
NLRP3NOD-Like Receptor Family, Pyrin Domain Containing 3
NOX4NADPH Oxidase 4
NPYNeuropeptide Y
Nrf2Nuclear Factor Erythroid 2-Related Factor 2
oxLDLOxidized Low-Density Lipoprotein
POMCProopiomelanocortin
PKCProtein Kinase C
ROSReactive Oxygen Species
SCFAsShort-Chain Fatty Acids
SODSuperoxide Dismutase
STZStreptozotocin
TLR4Toll-Like Receptor 4
TNF-αTumor Necrosis Factor Alpha
TIRAPToll/Interleukin-1 Receptor Domain-Containing Adaptor Protein
TRAF6TNF Receptor-Associated Factor 6
VDRVitamin D Receptor
WATWhite Adipose Tissue

References

  1. Clemente-Suárez, V.J.; Martín-Rodríguez, A.; Redondo-Flórez, L.; López-Mora, C.; Yáñez-Sepúlveda, R.; Tornero-Aguilera, J.F. New Insights and Potential Therapeutic Interventions in Metabolic Diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 10672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Guillemot-Legris, O.; Muccioli, G.G. Obesity-Induced Neuroinflammation: Beyond the Hypothalamus. Trends Neurosci. 2017, 40, 237–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Kilian, M.; Chapple, I.L.C.; Hannig, M.; Marsh, P.D.; Meuric, V.; Pedersen, A.M.L.; Tonetti, M.S.; Wade, W.G.; Zaura, E. The Oral Microbiome—An Update for Oral Healthcare Professionals. Br. Dent. J. 2016, 221, 657–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Lynch, S.V. The Lung Microbiome and Airway Disease. Ann. Am. Thorac. Soc. 2016, 13, S462–S465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. de Lima Oliveira, B.C.; Bellozi, P.M.Q.; Reis, H.J.; de Oliveira, A.C.P. Inflammation as a Possible Link Between Dyslipidemia and Alzheimer’s Disease. Neuroscience 2018, 376, 127–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Scheithauer, T.P.M.; Rampanelli, E.; Nieuwdorp, M.; Vallance, B.A.; Verchere, C.B.; van Raalte, D.H.; Herrema, H. Gut Microbiota as a Trigger for Metabolic Inflammation in Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes. Front. Immunol. 2020, 11, 571731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Strandwitz, P. Neurotransmitter Modulation by the Gut Microbiota. Brain Res. 2018, 1693, 128–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Van Dyken, P.; Lacoste, B. Impact of Metabolic Syndrome on Neuroinflammation and the Blood–Brain Barrier. Front. Neurosci. 2018, 12, 930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Zatterale, F.; Longo, M.; Naderi, J.; Raciti, G.A.; Desiderio, A.; Miele, C.; Beguinot, F. Chronic Adipose Tissue Inflammation Linking Obesity to Insulin Resistance and Type 2 Diabetes. Front. Physiol. 2020, 10, 1607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bandala, C.; Cárdenas-Rodríguez, N.; Reyes-Long, S.; Cortes-Altamirano, J.L.; Garciadiego-Cázares, D.; Lara-Padilla, E.; Ibáñez-Cervantes, G.; Mancilla-Ramírez, J.; Gómez-Manzo, S.; Alfaro-Rodríguez, A. Trends in Gliosis in Obesity, and the Role of Antioxidants as a Therapeutic Alternative. Antioxidants 2022, 11, 1972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ma, B.; Barathan, M.; Ng, M.H.; Law, J.X. Oxidative Stress, Gut Microbiota, and Extracellular Vesicles: Interconnected Pathways and Therapeutic Potentials. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 26, 3148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Bernstein, C.N. The Brain-Gut Axis and Stress in Inflammatory Bowel Disease. Gastroenterol. Clin. N. Am. 2017, 46, 839–846. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Konturek, S.J.; Konturek, J.W.; Pawlik, T.; Brzozowski, T. Brain-Gut Axis and Its Role in the Control of Food Intake. J. Physiol. Pharmacol. Off. J. Pol. Physiol. Soc. 2004, 55, 137–154. [Google Scholar]
  14. Taché, Y.; Vale, W.; Rivier, J.; Brown, M. Brain Regulation of Gastric Secretion: Influence of Neuropeptides. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1980, 77, 5515–5519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Agustí, A.; García-Pardo, M.P.; López-Almela, I.; Campillo, I.; Maes, M.; Romaní-Pérez, M.; Sanz, Y. Interplay Between the Gut-Brain Axis, Obesity and Cognitive Function. Front. Neurosci. 2018, 12, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Carabotti, M.; Scirocco, A.; Maselli, M.A.; Severi, C. The Gut-Brain Axis: Interactions between Enteric Microbiota, Central and Enteric Nervous Systems. Ann. Gastroenterol. 2015, 28, 203–209. [Google Scholar]
  17. Sarkar, A.; Lehto, S.M.; Harty, S.; Dinan, T.G.; Cryan, J.F.; Burnet, P.W.J. Psychobiotics and the Manipulation of Bacteria–Gut–Brain Signals. Trends Neurosci. 2016, 39, 763–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Dinan, T.G.; Cryan, J.F. Brain–Gut–Microbiota Axis—Mood, Metabolism and Behavior. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2017, 14, 69–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Gao, X.; Cao, Q.; Cheng, Y.; Zhao, D.; Wang, Z.; Yang, H.; Wu, Q.; You, L.; Wang, Y.; Lin, Y.; et al. Chronic Stress Promotes Colitis by Disturbing the Gut Microbiota and Triggering Immune System Response. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, E2960–E2969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Herrera-Quintana, L.; Iturbe-Sanz, P.; Olivares-Arancibia, J.; Vázquez-Lorente, H.; Plaza-Diaz, J. Interplay of Microbiome, Oxidative Stress and Inflammation in Health and Disease. Antioxidants 2026, 15, 222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Yuan, Y.; Wang, X.; Huang, S.; Wang, H.; Shen, G. Low-Level Inflammation, Immunity, and Brain-Gut Axis in IBS: Unraveling the Complex Relationships. Gut Microbes 2023, 15, 2263209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Choudhary, A.K. Neuroinflammation and Cognitive Health in Type 2 Diabetes. Med. Res. Arch. 2025, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Tiwari, V.; Simons, M. Lipid Metabolism and Neuroinflammation: What Is the Link? J. Exp. Med. 2025, 222, e20241232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Caliman-Sturdza, O.A.; Vaz, J.A.; Lupaescu, A.V.; Lobiuc, A.; Bran, C.; Gheorghita, R.E. Antioxidant and Anti-Inflammatory Activities of Probiotic Strains. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2026, 27, 1079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Rapti, E.; Adamantidi, T.; Efthymiopoulos, P.; Kyzas, G.Z.; Tsoupras, A. Potential Applications of the Anti-Inflammatory, Antithrombotic and Antioxidant Health-Promoting Properties of Curcumin: A Critical Review. Nutraceuticals 2024, 4, 562–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Martins-Gomes, C.; Nunes, F.M.; Silva, A.M. Natural Products as Dietary Agents for the Prevention and Mitigation of Oxidative Damage and Inflammation in the Intestinal Barrier. Antioxidants 2024, 13, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Riaz Rajoka, M.S.; Thirumdas, R.; Mehwish, H.M.; Umair, M.; Khurshid, M.; Hayat, H.F.; Phimolsiripol, Y.; Pallarés, N.; Martí-Quijal, F.J.; Barba, F.J. Role of Food Antioxidants in Modulating Gut Microbial Communities: Novel Understandings in Intestinal Oxidative Stress Damage and Their Impact on Host Health. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 1563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Yu, Z.; Muehleman, V. Eating Disorders and Metabolic Diseases. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health 2023, 20, 2446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Dyndał, K.; Pańczyszyn-Trzewik, P.; Sowa-Kućma, M. Metabolic Modulators in Depression: Emerging Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Opportunities. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 26, 8755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Purkayastha, S.; Cai, D. Neuroinflammatory Basis of Metabolic Syndrome. Mol. Metab. 2013, 2, 356–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hotamisligil, G.S. Inflammation and Metabolic Disorders. Nature 2006, 444, 860–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Mostafavi Abdolmaleky, H.; Zhou, J.-R. Gut Microbiota Dysbiosis, Oxidative Stress, Inflammation, and Epigenetic Alterations in Metabolic Diseases. Antioxidants 2024, 13, 985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Masenga, S.K.; Kabwe, L.S.; Chakulya, M.; Kirabo, A. Mechanisms of Oxidative Stress in Metabolic Syndrome. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 7898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Alahmari, A. Blood–Brain Barrier Overview: Structural and Functional Correlation. Neural Plast. 2021, 2021, 6564585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Shimizu, F.; Nakamori, M. Blood–Brain Barrier Disruption in Neuroimmunological Disease. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 10625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Dama, A.; Shpati, K.; Daliu, P.; Dumur, S.; Gorica, E.; Santini, A. Targeting Metabolic Diseases: The Role of Nutraceuticals in Modulating Oxidative Stress and Inflammation. Nutrients 2024, 16, 507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Cha, H.-J. Tight Junction Proteins at the Crossroads of Inflammation, Barrier Function, and Disease Modulation. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 26, 8115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Coucha, M.; Abdelsaid, M.; Ward, R.; Abdul, Y.; Ergul, A. Impact of Metabolic Diseases on Cerebral Circulation: Structural and Functional Consequences. Compr. Physiol. 2018, 8, 773–799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Zeng, J.; Cheong, L.Y.T.; Lo, C.H. Therapeutic Targeting of Obesity-Induced Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration. Front. Endocrinol. 2025, 15, 1456948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Ly, M.; Yu, G.Z.; Mian, A.; Cramer, A.; Meysami, S.; Merrill, D.A.; Samara, A.; Eisenstein, S.A.; Hershey, T.; Babulal, G.M.; et al. Neuroinflammation: A Modifiable Pathway Linking Obesity, Alzheimer’s Disease, and Depression. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry Off. J. Am. Assoc. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2023, 31, 853–866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Le Thuc, O.; Stobbe, K.; Cansell, C.; Nahon, J.-L.; Blondeau, N.; Rovère, C. Hypothalamic Inflammation and Energy Balance Disruptions: Spotlight on Chemokines. Front. Endocrinol. 2017, 8, 197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Uti, D.E.; Atangwho, I.J.; Omang, W.A.; Alum, E.U.; Obeten, U.N.; Udeozor, P.A.; Agada, S.A.; Bawa, I.; Ogbu, C.O. Cytokines as Key Players in Obesity Low Grade Inflammation and Related Complications. Obes. Med. 2025, 54, 100585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Sodero, A.O. 24S-Hydroxycholesterol: Cellular Effects and Variations in Brain Diseases. J. Neurochem. 2021, 157, 899–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Madry, C.; Kyrargyri, V.; Arancibia-Cárcamo, I.L.; Jolivet, R.; Kohsaka, S.; Bryan, R.M.; Attwell, D. Microglial Ramification, Surveillance, and Interleukin-1β Release Are Regulated by the Two-Pore Domain K+ Channel THIK-1. Neuron 2018, 97, 299–312.e6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Pellegrini, C.; Antonioli, L.; Colucci, R.; Blandizzi, C.; Fornai, M. Interplay among Gut Microbiota, Intestinal Mucosal Barrier and Enteric Neuro-Immune System: A Common Path to Neurodegenerative Diseases? Acta Neuropathol. 2018, 136, 345–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Asadi, A.; Shadab Mehr, N.; Mohamadi, M.H.; Shokri, F.; Heidary, M.; Sadeghifard, N.; Khoshnood, S. Obesity and Gut–Microbiota–Brain Axis: A Narrative Review. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 2022, 36, e24420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Megur, A.; Baltriukienė, D.; Bukelskienė, V.; Burokas, A. The Microbiota–Gut–Brain Axis and Alzheimer’s Disease: Neuroinflammation Is to Blame? Nutrients 2021, 13, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Mruczyk, K.; Molska, M.; Wójciak, R.W.; Śliwicka, E.; Cisek-Woźniak, A. Associated between Cognition, Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF) and Macronutrients in Normal and Overweight Postmenopausal Women. Exp. Gerontol. 2024, 192, 112449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Thaler, J.P.; Yi, C.-X.; Schur, E.A.; Guyenet, S.J.; Hwang, B.H.; Dietrich, M.O.; Zhao, X.; Sarruf, D.A.; Izgur, V.; Maravilla, K.R.; et al. Obesity Is Associated with Hypothalamic Injury in Rodents and Humans. J. Clin. Investig. 2012, 122, 153–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Batarseh, N.; Khalil, R.; Al-Domi, H.A. Hypothalamic Neuroinflammation Induced by Obesity and the Effect of Liraglutide. J. Adv. Pharm. Educ. Res. 2022, 12, 46–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lim, J.S.; Kwak, S.; Yu, M.-H.; Park, M.-N.; Baek, H.S.; Kang, J.; Hong, J.-H.; Kim, J.K.; Lee, H.W.; Lee, S.-W.; et al. Western Diet-Induced Visceral Adipose Tissue Inflammation Promotes Alzheimer’s Disease Pathology via Microglial Activation in a Mouse Model. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2025, 17, 1644988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Pan, W.; Kastin, A.J. Adipokines and the Blood–Brain Barrier. Peptides 2007, 28, 1317–1330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Watts, A.G.; Kanoski, S.E.; Sanchez-Watts, G.; Langhans, W. The Physiological Control of Eating: Signals, Neurons, and Networks. Physiol. Rev. 2022, 102, 689–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Baver, S.B.; Hope, K.; Guyot, S.; Bjørbaek, C.; Kaczorowski, C.; O’Connell, K.M.S. Leptin Modulates the Intrinsic Excitability of AgRP/NPY Neurons in the Arcuate Nucleus of the Hypothalamus. J. Neurosci. 2014, 34, 5486–5496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Johansen, V.B.I.; Petersen, J.; Lund, J.; Mathiesen, C.V.; Fenselau, H.; Clemmensen, C. Brain Control of Energy Homeostasis: Implications for Anti-Obesity Pharmacotherapy. Cell 2025, 188, 4178–4212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Jouque, V.; Miralpeix, C.; López-Gambero, A.J.; Nicolas, J.C.; Quarta, C.; Cota, D. Beyond Satiety: Unraveling the Complex Roles of POMC Neurons in Behavior and Metabolism. Rev. Endocr. Metab. Disord. 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kasbi, N.A.; Stopschinski, B.E.; Polyak, A.G.; Malladi, A.R.; Manouchehri, N.; Scherer, P.E.; Stuve, O. Leptin as a Potential Modifier of Neuroinflammation: Contrasting Roles in Alzheimer’s Disease and Multiple Sclerosis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 27, 168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Jiang, M.; He, J.; Sun, Y.; Dong, X.; Yao, J.; Gu, H.; Liu, L. Leptin Induced TLR4 Expression via the JAK2-STAT3 Pathway in Obesity-Related Osteoarthritis. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2021, 2021, 7385160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Hayden, M.R. Overview of Neuroglia Activation, Chronic Neuroinflammation, Remodeling, and Impaired Cognition Due to Perivascular Adipose Tissue-Derived Extracellular Vesicle Exosomes in Obesity and Diabetes. Neuroglia 2022, 3, 112–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Song, M.; Bai, Y.; Song, F. High-Fat Diet and Neuroinflammation: The Role of Mitochondria. Pharmacol. Res. 2025, 212, 107615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Sewaybricker, L.E.; Huang, A.; Chandrasekaran, S.; Melhorn, S.J.; Schur, E.A. The Significance of Hypothalamic Inflammation and Gliosis for the Pathogenesis of Obesity in Humans. Endocr. Rev. 2022, 44, 281–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Jiang, S.; Liu, H.; Li, C. Dietary Regulation of Oxidative Stress in Chronic Metabolic Diseases. Foods 2021, 10, 1854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Lasker, S.; Rahman, M.M.; Parvez, F.; Zamila, M.; Miah, P.; Nahar, K.; Kabir, F.; Sharmin, S.B.; Subhan, N.; Ahsan, G.U.; et al. High-Fat Diet-Induced Metabolic Syndrome and Oxidative Stress in Obese Rats Are Ameliorated by Yogurt Supplementation. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 20026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Leidmaa, E.; Zimmer, A.; Stein, V.; Gellner, A.-K. Acute High-Fat High-Sugar Diet Rapidly Increases Blood–Brain Barrier Permeability in Mice. J. Nutr. Health Aging 2025, 29, 100574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Ubaldo-Reyes, L.M.; Espitia-Bautista, E.; Barajas-Martínez, A.; Martínez-Tapia, R.; Rodríguez-Mata, V.; Noriega-Navarro, R.; Escalona, R.; Castillo-Hernández, J.; Pérez-Torres, A.; Navarro, L. High-Fat Diet-Induced Blood–Brain Barrier Dysfunction: Impact on Allodynia and Motor Coordination in Rats. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 11218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Huwart, S.J.P.; Fayt, C.; Gangarossa, G.; Luquet, S.; Cani, P.D.; Everard, A. TLR4-Dependent Neuroinflammation Mediates LPS-Driven Food-Reward Alterations during High-Fat Exposure. J. Neuroinflamm. 2024, 21, 305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Darwish, R.; Alcibahy, Y.; Bucheeri, S.; Albishtawi, A.; Tama, M.; Shetty, J.; Butler, A.E. The Role of Hypothalamic Microglia in the Onset of Insulin Resistance and Type 2 Diabetes: A Neuro-Immune Perspective. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 13169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Gao, C.; Jiang, J.; Tan, Y.; Chen, S. Microglia in Neurodegenerative Diseases: Mechanism and Potential Therapeutic Targets. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2023, 8, 359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Manu, D.R.; Slevin, M.; Barcutean, L.; Forro, T.; Boghitoiu, T.; Balasa, R. Astrocyte Involvement in Blood–Brain Barrier Function: A Critical Update Highlighting Novel, Complex, Neurovascular Interactions. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 17146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Varatharaj, A.; Galea, I. The Blood–Brain Barrier in Systemic Inflammation. Brain. Behav. Immun. 2017, 60, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Inoue, D.S.; Monteiro, P.A.; Gerosa-Neto, J.; Santana, P.R.; Peres, F.P.; Edwards, K.M.; Lira, F.S. Acute Increases in Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Following High or Moderate-Intensity Exercise Is Accompanied with Better Cognition Performance in Obese Adults. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 13493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Katuri, R.B.; Gaur, G.S.; Sahoo, J.P.; Bobby, Z.; Shanmugavel, K. Association of Circulating Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor with Cognition among Adult Obese Population. J. Obes. Metab. Syndr. 2021, 30, 163–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Toader, C.; Serban, M.; Munteanu, O.; Covache-Busuioc, R.-A.; Enyedi, M.; Ciurea, A.V.; Tataru, C.P. From Synaptic Plasticity to Neurodegeneration: BDNF as a Transformative Target in Medicine. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 26, 4271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Dutta, B.J.; Singh, S.; Seksaria, S.; Das Gupta, G.; Singh, A. Inside the Diabetic Brain: Insulin Resistance and Molecular Mechanism Associated with Cognitive Impairment and Its Possible Therapeutic Strategies. Pharmacol. Res. 2022, 182, 106358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Rom, S.; Zuluaga-Ramirez, V.; Gajghate, S.; Seliga, A.; Winfield, M.; Heldt, N.A.; Kolpakov, M.A.; Bashkirova, Y.V.; Sabri, A.K.; Persidsky, Y. Hyperglycemia-Driven Neuroinflammation Compromises BBB Leading to Memory Loss in Both Diabetes Mellitus (DM) Type 1 and Type 2 Mouse Models. Mol. Neurobiol. 2019, 56, 1883–1896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  76. Canteiro, P.B.; Antero, D.C.; dos Santos Tramontin, N.; Simon, K.U.; Mendes, C.; Anastácio Borges Correa, M.E.; Silveira, P.C.L.; Muller, A.P. Insulin Treatment Protects the Brain against Neuroinflammation by Reducing Cerebral Cytokines and Modulating Mitochondrial Function. Brain Res. Bull. 2019, 149, 120–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Chen, W.; Liu, X.; Muñoz, V.R.; Kahn, C.R. Loss of Insulin Signaling in Microglia Impairs Cellular Uptake of Aβ and Neuroinflammatory Response Exacerbating AD-like Neuropathology. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2025, 122, e2501527122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Vinuesa, A.; Pomilio, C.; Gregosa, A.; Bentivegna, M.; Presa, J.; Bellotto, M.; Saravia, F.; Beauquis, J. Inflammation and Insulin Resistance as Risk Factors and Potential Therapeutic Targets for Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Neurosci. 2021, 15, 653651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Salguero, M.V.; Al-Obaide, M.A.I.; Singh, R.; Siepmann, T.; Vasylyeva, T.L. Dysbiosis of Gram-Negative Gut Microbiota and the Associated Serum Lipopolysaccharide Exacerbates Inflammation in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease. Exp. Ther. Med. 2019, 18, 3461–3469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Botas Velasco, M.; Cervell Rodríguez, D.; Rodríguez Montalbán, A.I.; Vicente Jiménez, S.; Fernández de Valderrama Martínez, I. Actualización en el diagnóstico, tratamiento y prevención de la neuropatía diabética periférica. Angiología 2017, 69, 174–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Cao, F.; Yang, F.; Li, J.; Guo, W.; Zhang, C.; Gao, F.; Sun, X.; Zhou, Y.; Zhang, W. The Relationship between Diabetes and the Dementia Risk: A Meta-Analysis. Diabetol. Metab. Syndr. 2024, 16, 101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Tong, S.-H.; Liu, D.-L.; Liao, P.; Zhang, S.-Y.; Zhou, J.; Zong, Y.; Zhang, C.-Q.; Huang, Y.-G.; Gao, J.-J. Emerging Role of Macrophages in Neuropathic Pain. J. Orthop. Transl. 2025, 51, 227–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. O’Hagan, R.; Berg, A.R.; Hong, C.G.; Parel, P.M.; Mehta, N.N.; Teague, H.L. Systemic Consequences of Abnormal Cholesterol Handling: Interdependent Pathways of Inflammation and Dyslipidemia. Front. Immunol. 2022, 13, 972140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Valdearcos, M.; Xu, A.W.; Koliwad, S.K. Hypothalamic Inflammation in the Control of Metabolic Function. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 2015, 77, 131–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Mosalmanzadeh, N.; Pence, B.D. Oxidized Low-Density Lipoprotein and Its Role in Immunometabolism. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 11386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Radford-Smith, D.E.; Yates, A.G.; Rizvi, L.; Anthony, D.C.; Probert, F. HDL and LDL Have Distinct, Opposing Effects on LPS-Induced Brain Inflammation. Lipids Health Dis. 2023, 22, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Rong, X.; Wei, F.; Jiang, Y.; Ma, Q.; Wang, D.; Shen, J. Microglial Activation and Hypothalamic Structural Plasticity in HFD Obesity: Insights from Semaglutide and Minocycline. J. Lipid Res. 2024, 66, 100736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Zhang, W.; Xiao, D.; Mao, Q.; Xia, H. Role of Neuroinflammation in Neurodegeneration Development. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2023, 8, 267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Adamu, A.; Li, S.; Gao, F.; Xue, G. The Role of Neuroinflammation in Neurodegenerative Diseases: Current Understanding and Future Therapeutic Targets. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2024, 16, 1347987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Frentz, I.; Marcolini, S.; Schneider, C.C.I.; Ikram, M.A.; Mondragon, J.; De Deyn, P.P. Metabolic Syndrome Status Changes and Cognitive Functioning: Insights from the Lifelines Cohort Study. J. Prev. Alzheimers Dis. 2024, 11, 1283–1290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Li, Z.; Jiang, Y.; Long, C.; Peng, X.; Tao, J.; Pu, Y.; Yue, R. Bridging Metabolic Syndrome and Cognitive Dysfunction: Role of Astrocytes. Front. Endocrinol. 2024, 15, 1393253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Plakkot, B.; Di Agostino, A.; Subramanian, M. Implications of Hypothalamic Neural Stem Cells on Aging and Obesity-Associated Cardiovascular Diseases. Cells 2023, 12, 769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Colombari, E.; Biancardi, V.C.; Colombari, D.S.A.; Katayama, P.L.; de Campos de Medeiros, F.; Aitken, A.V.; Xavier, C.H.; Pedrino, G.R.; Bragin, D.E. Hypertension, Blood–Brain Barrier Disruption and Changes in Intracranial Pressure. J. Physiol. 2025, 603, 2245–2261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Young, C.N.; Davisson, R.L. Angiotensin-II, the Brain, and Hypertension: An Update. Hypertension 2015, 66, 920–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Cryan, J.F.; O’Riordan, K.J.; Cowan, C.S.M.; Sandhu, K.V.; Bastiaanssen, T.F.S.; Boehme, M.; Codagnone, M.G.; Cussotto, S.; Fulling, C.; Golubeva, A.V.; et al. The Microbiota-Gut-Brain Axis. Physiol. Rev. 2019, 99, 1877–2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Morais, L.H.; Schreiber, H.L.; Mazmanian, S.K. The Gut Microbiota–Brain Axis in Behavior and Brain Disorders. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2021, 19, 241–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Bandopadhyay, P.; Ganguly, D. Chapter Six—Gut Dysbiosis and Metabolic Diseases. In Progress in Molecular Biology and Translational Science; Das, B., Singh, V., Eds.; Human Microbiome in Health and Disease—Part A.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2022; Volume 191, pp. 153–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Tilg, H.; Zmora, N.; Adolph, T.E.; Elinav, E. The Intestinal Microbiota Fuelling Metabolic Inflammation. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2020, 20, 40–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Solanki, R.; Karande, A.; Ranganathan, P. Emerging Role of Gut Microbiota Dysbiosis in Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration. Front. Neurol. 2023, 14, 1149618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Adak, A.; Khan, M.R. An Insight into Gut Microbiota and Its Functionalities. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. CMLS 2018, 76, 473–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Du, Y.; He, C.; An, Y.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, H.; Fu, W.; Wang, M.; Shan, Z.; Xie, J.; Yang, Y.; et al. The Role of Short Chain Fatty Acids in Inflammation and Body Health. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 7379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Maslowski, K.M.; Vieira, A.T.; Ng, A.; Kranich, J.; Sierro, F.; Yu, D.; Schilter, H.C.; Rolph, M.S.; Mackay, F.; Artis, D.; et al. Regulation of Inflammatory Responses by Gut Microbiota and Chemoattractant Receptor GPR43. Nature 2009, 461, 1282–1286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Morrison, D.J.; Preston, T. Formation of Short Chain Fatty Acids by the Gut Microbiota and Their Impact on Human Metabolism. Gut Microbes 2016, 7, 189–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Ley, R.E.; Turnbaugh, P.J.; Klein, S.; Gordon, J.I. Human Gut Microbes Associated with Obesity. Nature 2006, 444, 1022–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  105. Riggen-Bueno, V.; Del Toro-Arreola, S.; Baltazar-Díaz, T.A.; Vega-Magaña, A.N.; Peña-Rodríguez, M.; Castaño-Jiménez, P.A.; Sánchez-Orozco, L.V.; Vera-Cruz, J.M.; Bueno-Topete, M.R. Intestinal Dysbiosis in Subjects with Obesity from Western Mexico and Its Association with a Proinflammatory Profile and Disturbances of Folate (B9) and Carbohydrate Metabolism. Metabolites 2024, 14, 121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  106. Everard, A.; Belzer, C.; Geurts, L.; Ouwerkerk, J.P.; Druart, C.; Bindels, L.B.; Guiot, Y.; Derrien, M.; Muccioli, G.G.; Delzenne, N.M.; et al. Cross-Talk between Akkermansia muciniphila and Intestinal Epithelium Controls Diet-Induced Obesity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 9066–9071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Liu, R.; Hong, J.; Xu, X.; Feng, Q.; Zhang, D.; Gu, Y.; Shi, J.; Zhao, S.; Liu, W.; Wang, X.; et al. Gut Microbiome and Serum Metabolome Alterations in Obesity and after Weight-Loss Intervention. Nat. Med. 2017, 23, 859–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Louis, P.; Flint, H.J. Diversity, Metabolism and Microbial Ecology of Butyrate-Producing Bacteria from the Human Large Intestine. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2009, 294, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Byrne, C.S.; Chambers, E.S.; Morrison, D.J.; Frost, G. The Role of Short Chain Fatty Acids in Appetite Regulation and Energy Homeostasis. Int. J. Obes. 2015, 39, 1331–1338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Ciesielska, A.; Matyjek, M.; Kwiatkowska, K. TLR4 and CD14 Trafficking and Its Influence on LPS-Induced pro-Inflammatory Signaling. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2020, 78, 1233–1261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Yu, M.; Yu, B.; Chen, D. The Effects of Gut Microbiota on Appetite Regulation and the Underlying Mechanisms. Gut Microbes 2024, 16, 2414796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Zhao, Z.; Ning, J.; Bao, X.; Shang, M.; Ma, J.; Li, G.; Zhang, D. Fecal Microbiota Transplantation Protects Rotenone-Induced Parkinson’s Disease Mice via Suppressing Inflammation Mediated by the Lipopolysaccharide-TLR4 Signaling Pathway through the Microbiota-Gut-Brain Axis. Microbiome 2021, 9, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Rutsch, A.; Kantsjö, J.B.; Ronchi, F. The Gut-Brain Axis: How Microbiota and Host Inflammasome Influence Brain Physiology and Pathology. Front. Immunol. 2020, 11, 604179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Alfadul, H.; Sabico, S.; Al-Daghri, N.M. The Role of Interleukin-1β in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front. Endocrinol. 2022, 13, 901616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Jourdan, T.; Godlewski, G.; Cinar, R.; Bertola, A.; Szanda, G.; Liu, J.; Tarn, J.; Han, T.; Mukhopadhyay, B.; Skarulis, M.C.; et al. Activation of the Nlrp3 Inflammasome in Infiltrating Macrophages by Endocannabinoids Mediates Beta Cell Loss in Type 2 Diabetes. Nat. Med. 2013, 19, 1132–1140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Marcos, J.L.; Olivares-Barraza, R.; Ceballo, K.; Wastavino, M.; Ortiz, V.; Riquelme, J.; Martínez-Pinto, J.; Muñoz, P.; Cruz, G.; Sotomayor-Zárate, R. Obesogenic Diet-Induced Neuroinflammation: A Pathological Link between Hedonic and Homeostatic Control of Food Intake. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 1468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Noureldein, M.H.; Bitar, S.; Youssef, N.; Azar, S.; Eid, A.A. Butyrate Modulates Diabetes-Linked Gut Dysbiosis: Epigenetic and Mechanistic Modifications. J. Mol. Endocrinol. 2020, 64, 29–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Qiao, Y.; Sun, J.; Ding, Y.; Le, G.; Shi, Y. Alterations of the Gut Microbiota in High-Fat Diet Mice Is Strongly Linked to Oxidative Stress. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2013, 97, 1689–1697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Shandilya, S.; Kumar, S.; Kumar Jha, N.; Kumar Kesari, K.; Ruokolainen, J. Interplay of Gut Microbiota and Oxidative Stress: Perspective on Neurodegeneration and Neuroprotection. J. Adv. Res. 2022, 38, 223–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Misrani, A.; Tabassum, S.; Yang, L. Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Oxidative Stress in Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2021, 13, 617588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Kunst, C.; Schmid, S.; Michalski, M.; Tümen, D.; Buttenschön, J.; Müller, M.; Gülow, K. The Influence of Gut Microbiota on Oxidative Stress and the Immune System. Biomedicines 2023, 11, 1388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Hong, Y.; Boiti, A.; Vallone, D.; Foulkes, N.S. Reactive Oxygen Species Signaling and Oxidative Stress: Transcriptional Regulation and Evolution. Antioxidants 2024, 13, 312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Dominic, A.; Le, N.-T.; Takahashi, M. Loop Between NLRP3 Inflammasome and Reactive Oxygen Species. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2022, 36, 784–796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  124. Kim, J.J.; Lee, S.B.; Park, J.K.; Yoo, Y.D. TNF-α-Induced ROS Production Triggering Apoptosis Is Directly Linked to Romo1 and Bcl-XL. Cell Death Differ. 2010, 17, 1420–1434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Faraonio, R. Oxidative Stress and Cell Senescence Process. Antioxidants 2022, 11, 1718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Caturano, A.; D’Angelo, M.; Mormone, A.; Russo, V.; Mollica, M.P.; Salvatore, T.; Galiero, R.; Rinaldi, L.; Vetrano, E.; Marfella, R.; et al. Oxidative Stress in Type 2 Diabetes: Impacts from Pathogenesis to Lifestyle Modifications. Curr. Issues Mol. Biol. 2023, 45, 6651–6666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Rolo, A.P.; Teodoro, J.S.; Palmeira, C.M. Role of Oxidative Stress in the Pathogenesis of Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2012, 52, 59–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Pizzino, G.; Irrera, N.; Cucinotta, M.; Pallio, G.; Mannino, F.; Arcoraci, V.; Squadrito, F.; Altavilla, D.; Bitto, A. Oxidative Stress: Harms and Benefits for Human Health. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 2017, 2017, 8416763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Semenova, N.; Garashchenko, N.; Kolesnikov, S.; Darenskaya, M.; Kolesnikova, L. Gut Microbiome Interactions with Oxidative Stress: Mechanisms and Consequences for Health. Pathophysiology 2024, 31, 309–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Braccia, D.J.; Jiang, X.; Pop, M.; Hall, A.B. The Capacity to Produce Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) via Cysteine Degradation Is Ubiquitous in the Human Gut Microbiome. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 705583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Huycke, M.M.; Abrams, V.; Moore, D.R. Enterococcus faecalis Produces Extracellular Superoxide and Hydrogen Peroxide That Damages Colonic Epithelial Cell DNA. Carcinogenesis 2002, 23, 529–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Fei, N.; Bruneau, A.; Zhang, X.; Wang, R.; Wang, J.; Rabot, S.; Gérard, P.; Zhao, L. Endotoxin Producers Overgrowing in Human Gut Microbiota as the Causative Agents for Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. mBio 2020, 11, e03263-19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Baldelli, V.; Scaldaferri, F.; Putignani, L.; Del Chierico, F. The Role of Enterobacteriaceae in Gut Microbiota Dysbiosis in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Daca, A.; Jarzembowski, T. From the Friend to the Foe—Enterococcus faecalis Diverse Impact on the Human Immune System. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2024, 25, 2422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Zhang, L.; Deng, M.; Liu, J.; Zhang, J.; Wang, F.; Yu, W. The Pathogenicity of Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecalis to Colon Cancer Cells. BMC Infect. Dis. 2024, 24, 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Carbonero, F.; Benefiel, A.C.; Alizadeh-Ghamsari, A.H.; Gaskins, H.R. Microbial Pathways in Colonic Sulfur Metabolism and Links with Health and Disease. Front. Physiol. 2012, 3, 448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Devkota, S.; Wang, Y.; Musch, M.W.; Leone, V.; Fehlner-Peach, H.; Nadimpalli, A.; Antonopoulos, D.A.; Jabri, B.; Chang, E.B. Dietary-Fat-Induced Taurocholic Acid Promotes Pathobiont Expansion and Colitis in Il10−/−Mice. Nature 2012, 487, 104–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Xu, J.; Lu, Y. The Microbiota-Gut-Brain Axis and Central Nervous System Diseases: From Mechanisms of Pathogenesis to Therapeutic Strategies. Front. Microbiol. 2025, 16, 1583562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Yang, K.; Zhou, B.; Xu, Q.; Li, Y.; Lin, J.; Zhou, Y.; Liu, M.; Zhao, J.; Zhu, Y.; Dai, X. Comparing the Antioxidant Effects of Single and Binary Combinations of Lactiplantibacillus plantarum in Vitro and in Vivo and Their Application in Yogurt. J. Dairy Sci. 2025, 108, 2276–2292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. LeBlanc, J.G.; Milani, C.; de Giori, G.S.; Sesma, F.; van Sinderen, D.; Ventura, M. Bacteria as Vitamin Suppliers to Their Host: A Gut Microbiota Perspective. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2013, 24, 160–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Nakagawa, H.; Miyazaki, T.; Nakagawa, H.; Miyazaki, T. Beneficial Effects of Antioxidative Lactic Acid Bacteria. AIMS Microbiol. 2017, 3, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Pham, V.T.; Dold, S.; Rehman, A.; Bird, J.K.; Steinert, R.E. Vitamins, the Gut Microbiome and Gastrointestinal Health in Humans. Nutr. Res. 2021, 95, 35–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  143. Cani, P.D.; Possemiers, S.; de Wiele, T.V.; Guiot, Y.; Everard, A.; Rottier, O.; Geurts, L.; Naslain, D.; Neyrinck, A.; Lambert, D.M.; et al. Changes in Gut Microbiota Control Inflammation in Obese Mice through a Mechanism Involving GLP-2-Driven Improvement of Gut Permeability. Gut 2009, 58, 1091–1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Sokol, H.; Pigneur, B.; Watterlot, L.; Lakhdari, O.; Bermúdez-Humarán, L.G.; Gratadoux, J.-J.; Blugeon, S.; Bridonneau, C.; Furet, J.-P.; Corthier, G.; et al. Faecalibacterium prausnitzii Is an Anti-Inflammatory Commensal Bacterium Identified by Gut Microbiota Analysis of Crohn Disease Patients. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008, 105, 16731–16736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Breyner, N.M.; Michon, C.; de Sousa, C.S.; Vilas Boas, P.B.; Chain, F.; Azevedo, V.A.; Langella, P.; Chatel, J.M. Microbial Anti-Inflammatory Molecule (MAM) from Faecalibacterium prausnitzii Shows a Protective Effect on DNBS and DSS-Induced Colitis Model in Mice through Inhibition of NF-κB Pathway. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Tabatabaei, S.A.S.; Ghadim, H.Y.; Alaei, S.; Abdolvand, F.; Mazaheri, H.; Shamsi, F.; SarveAhrabi, Y.; Behrouzi, A. The Association between the Health of the Intestines and the Human Body with Akkermansia muciniphila. Microbe 2025, 7, 100352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Hagi, T.; Belzer, C. The Interaction of Akkermansia muciniphila with Host-Derived Substances, Bacteria and Diets. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2021, 105, 4833–4841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Cárdenas-Rodríguez, N.; Bandala, C.; Vanoye-Carlo, A.; Ignacio-Mejía, I.; Gómez-Manzo, S.; Hernández-Cruz, E.Y.; Pedraza-Chaverri, J.; Carmona-Aparicio, L.; Hernández-Ochoa, B. Use of Antioxidants for the Neuro-Therapeutic Management of COVID-19. Antioxidants 2021, 10, 971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Plamada, D.; Vodnar, D.C. Polyphenols—Gut Microbiota Interrelationship: A Transition to a New Generation of Prebiotics. Nutrients 2021, 14, 137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Nemzer, B.V.; Al-Taher, F.; Kalita, D.; Yashin, A.Y.; Yashin, Y.I. Health-Improving Effects of Polyphenols on the Human Intestinal Microbiota: A Review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 26, 1335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Wang, X.; Qi, Y.; Zheng, H. Dietary Polyphenol, Gut Microbiota, and Health Benefits. Antioxidants 2022, 11, 1212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Beytut, E.; Yilmaz, S.; Aksakal, M.; Polat, S. The Possible Protective Effects of Vitamin E and Selenium Administration in Oxidative Stress Caused by High Doses of Glucocorticoid Administration in the Brain of Rats. J. Trace Elem. Med. Biol. 2018, 45, 131–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  153. Thomas, R.L.; Jiang, L.; Adams, J.S.; Xu, Z.Z.; Shen, J.; Janssen, S.; Ackermann, G.; Vanderschueren, D.; Pauwels, S.; Knight, R.; et al. Vitamin D Metabolites and the Gut Microbiome in Older Men. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 5997. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  154. Singh, P.; Rawat, A.; Alwakeel, M.; Sharif, E.; Al Khodor, S. The Potential Role of Vitamin D Supplementation as a Gut Microbiota Modifier in Healthy Individuals. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 21641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  155. Charoenngam, N.; Shirvani, A.; Kalajian, T.A.; Song, A.; Holick, M.F. The Effect of Various Doses of Oral Vitamin D3 Supplementation on Gut Microbiota in Healthy Adults: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Dose–Response Study. Anticancer Res. 2020, 40, 551–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Gawron-Skarbek, A.; Guligowska, A.; Prymont-Przymińska, A.; Nowak, D.; Kostka, T. The Anti-Inflammatory and Antioxidant Impact of Dietary Fatty Acids in Cardiovascular Protection in Older Adults May Be Related to Vitamin C Intake. Antioxidants 2023, 12, 267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Gothandapani, D.; Makpol, S. Effects of Vitamin E on the Gut Microbiome in Aging and Its Relationship with Age-Related Diseases: A Review of the Current Literature. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 14667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Godos, J.; Romano, G.L.; Gozzo, L.; Laudani, S.; Paladino, N.; Dominguez Azpíroz, I.; Martínez López, N.M.; Giampieri, F.; Quiles, J.L.; Battino, M.; et al. Resveratrol and Vascular Health: Evidence from Clinical Studies and Mechanisms of Actions Related to Its Metabolites Produced by Gut Microbiota. Front. Pharmacol. 2024, 15, 1368949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Cai, T.-T.; Ye, X.-L.; Li, R.-R.; Chen, H.; Wang, Y.-Y.; Yong, H.-J.; Pan, M.-L.; Lu, W.; Tang, Y.; Miao, H.; et al. Resveratrol Modulates the Gut Microbiota and Inflammation to Protect Against Diabetic Nephropathy in Mice. Front. Pharmacol. 2020, 11, 1249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Candelario-Jalil, E.; de Oliveira, A.C.P.; Gräf, S.; Bhatia, H.S.; Hüll, M.; Muñoz, E.; Fiebich, B.L. Resveratrol Potently Reduces Prostaglandin E2 Production and Free Radical Formation in Lipopolysaccharide-Activated Primary Rat Microglia. J. Neuroinflamm. 2007, 4, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Borsini, A.; Nicolaou, A.; Camacho-Muñoz, D.; Kendall, A.C.; Di Benedetto, M.G.; Giacobbe, J.; Su, K.-P.; Pariante, C.M. Omega-3 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Protect against Inflammation through Production of LOX and CYP450 Lipid Mediators: Relevance for Major Depression and for Human Hippocampal Neurogenesis. Mol. Psychiatry 2021, 26, 6773–6788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Banaszak, M.; Dobrzyńska, M.; Kawka, A.; Górna, I.; Woźniak, D.; Przysławski, J.; Drzymała-Czyż, S. Role of Omega-3 Fatty Acids Eicosapentaenoic (EPA) and Docosahexaenoic (DHA) as Modulatory and Anti-Inflammatory Agents in Noncommunicable Diet-Related Diseases—Reports from the Last 10 Years. Clin. Nutr. ESPEN 2024, 63, 240–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Calder, P.C. Omega-3 Fatty Acids and Inflammatory Processes. Nutrients 2010, 2, 355–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Zhu, J.; He, L. The Modulatory Effects of Curcumin on the Gut Microbiota: A Potential Strategy for Disease Treatment and Health Promotion. Microorganisms 2024, 12, 642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  165. Enayati, A.; Soghi, A.; Butler, A.E.; Rizzo, M.; Sahebkar, A. The Effect of Curcumin on the Gut-Brain Axis: Therapeutic Implications. J. Neurogastroenterol. Motil. 2023, 29, 409–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  166. Peng, Y.; Ao, M.; Dong, B.; Jiang, Y.; Yu, L.; Chen, Z.; Hu, C.; Xu, R. Anti-Inflammatory Effects of Curcumin in the Inflammatory Diseases: Status, Limitations and Countermeasures. Drug Des. Dev. Ther. 2021, 15, 4503–4525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  167. Khan, A.N.; Ghazanfar, S.; Hassan, M.N.; Ahmad, A.; Khan, N.; Khalid, S.; Yasmin, H. Probiotic Potential of Lactobacillus agilis against Oxidative, Inflammatory and Diabetic Stresses. J. King Saud Univ.-Sci. 2024, 36, 103144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Zeng, Z.; Yuan, Q.; Yu, R.; Zhang, J.; Ma, H.; Chen, S. Ameliorative Effects of Probiotic Lactobacillus paracasei NL41 on Insulin Sensitivity, Oxidative Stress, and Beta-Cell Function in a Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Rat Model. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2019, 63, e1900457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Zeng, Z.; Yang, Y.; Zhong, X.; Dai, F.; Chen, S.; Tong, X. Ameliorative Effects of Lactobacillus paracasei L14 on Oxidative Stress and Gut Microbiota in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Rats. Antioxidants 2023, 12, 1515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Pegah, A.; Abbasi-Oshaghi, E.; Khodadadi, I.; Mirzaei, F.; Tayebinai, H. Probiotic and Resveratrol Normalize GLP-1 Levels and Oxidative Stress in the Intestine of Diabetic Rats. Metab. Open 2021, 10, 100093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Kumar, N.; Tomar, S.K.; Thakur, K.; Singh, A.K. The Ameliorative Effects of Probiotic Lactobacillus fermentum Strain RS-2 on Alloxan Induced Diabetic Rats. J. Funct. Foods 2017, 28, 275–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Song, H.; Xue, H.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, J.; Li, A.; Zhang, J.; Luo, P.; Zhan, M.; Zhou, X.; Chen, L.; et al. Amelioration of Type 2 Diabetes Using Four Strains of Lactobacillus probiotics: Effects on Gut Microbiota Reconstitution-Mediated Regulation of Glucose Homeostasis, Inflammation, and Oxidative Stress in Mice. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2023, 71, 20801–20814. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Hadi, A.; Arab, A.; Khalesi, S.; Rafie, N.; Kafeshani, M.; Kazemi, M. Effects of Probiotic Supplementation on Anthropometric and Metabolic Characteristics in Adults with Metabolic Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. Clin. Nutr. 2021, 40, 4662–4673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  174. Stadlbauer, V.; Leber, B.; Lemesch, S.; Trajanoski, S.; Bashir, M.; Horvath, A.; Tawdrous, M.; Stojakovic, T.; Fauler, G.; Fickert, P.; et al. Lactobacillus casei Shirota Supplementation Does Not Restore Gut Microbiota Composition and Gut Barrier in Metabolic Syndrome: A Randomized Pilot Study. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0141399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Wang, J.; Tang, H.; Zhang, C.; Zhao, Y.; Derrien, M.; Rocher, E.; van-Hylckama Vlieg, J.E.; Strissel, K.; Zhao, L.; Obin, M.; et al. Modulation of Gut Microbiota during Probiotic-Mediated Attenuation of Metabolic Syndrome in High Fat Diet-Fed Mice. ISME J. 2015, 9, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  176. Ezendam, J.; de Klerk, A.; Gremmer, E.R.; van Loveren, H. Effects of Bifidobacterium animalis Administered during Lactation on Allergic and Autoimmune Responses in Rodents. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 2008, 154, 424–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Kobayashi, T.; Kato, I.; Nanno, M.; Shida, K.; Shibuya, K.; Matsuoka, Y.; Onoue, M. Oral Administration of Probiotic Bacteria, Lactobacillus casei and Bifidobacterium breve, Does Not Exacerbate Neurological Symptoms in Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis. Immunopharmacol. Immunotoxicol. 2010, 32, 116–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Lavasani, S.; Dzhambazov, B.; Nouri, M.; Fåk, F.; Buske, S.; Molin, G.; Thorlacius, H.; Alenfall, J.; Jeppsson, B.; Weström, B. A Novel Probiotic Mixture Exerts a Therapeutic Effect on Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis Mediated by IL-10 Producing Regulatory T Cells. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e9009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Liu, J.; Sun, J.; Wang, F.; Yu, X.; Ling, Z.; Li, H.; Zhang, H.; Jin, J.; Chen, W.; Pang, M.; et al. Neuroprotective Effects of Clostridium butyricum against Vascular Dementia in Mice via Metabolic Butyrate. BioMed Res. Int. 2015, 2015, 412946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Ohland, C.L.; Kish, L.; Bell, H.; Thiesen, A.; Hotte, N.; Pankiv, E.; Madsen, K.L. Effects of Lactobacillus helveticus on Murine Behavior Are Dependent on Diet and Genotype and Correlate with Alterations in the Gut Microbiome. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2013, 38, 1738–1747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Sun, J.; Ling, Z.; Wang, F.; Chen, W.; Li, H.; Jin, J.; Zhang, H.; Pang, M.; Yu, J.; Liu, J. Clostridium butyricum Pretreatment Attenuates Cerebral Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury in Mice via Anti-Oxidation and Anti-Apoptosis. Neurosci. Lett. 2016, 613, 30–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Myles, E.M.; O’Leary, M.E.; Smith, R.; MacPherson, C.W.; Oprea, A.; Melanson, E.H.; Tompkins, T.A.; Perrot, T.S. Supplementation with Combined Lactobacillus helveticus R0052 and Bifidobacterium longum R0175 Across Development Reveals Sex Differences in Physiological and Behavioral Effects of Western Diet in Long–Evans Rats. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 1527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  183. Abildgaard, A.; Elfving, B.; Hokland, M.; Wegener, G.; Lund, S. Probiotic Treatment Reduces Depressive-like Behavior in Rats Independently of Diet. Psychoneuroendocrinology 2017, 79, 40–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  184. Chunchai, T.; Thunapong, W.; Yasom, S.; Wanchai, K.; Eaimworawuthikul, S.; Metzler, G.; Lungkaphin, A.; Pongchaidecha, A.; Sirilun, S.; Chaiyasut, C.; et al. Decreased Microglial Activation through Gut-Brain Axis by Prebiotics, Probiotics, or Synbiotics Effectively Restored Cognitive Function in Obese-Insulin Resistant Rats. J. Neuroinflamm. 2018, 15, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  185. Morshedi, M.; Saghafi-Asl, M.; Hosseinifard, E.-S. The Potential Therapeutic Effects of the Gut Microbiome Manipulation by Synbiotic Containing-Lactobacillus Plantarum on Neuropsychological Performance of Diabetic Rats. J. Transl. Med. 2020, 18, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Lee, S.H.F.; Ahmad, S.R.; Lim, Y.C.; Zulkipli, I.N. The Use of Probiotic Therapy in Metabolic and Neurological Diseases. Front. Nutr. 2022, 9, 887019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  187. Li, G.; Feng, H.; Mao, X.-L.; Deng, Y.-J.; Wang, X.-B.; Zhang, Q.; Guo, Y.; Xiao, S.-M. The Effects of Probiotics Supplementation on Glycemic Control among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials. J. Transl. Med. 2023, 21, 442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Moravejolahkami, A.R.; Shakibaei, M.; Fairley, A.M.; Sharma, M. Probiotics, Prebiotics, and Synbiotics in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trials. Diabetes Metab. Res. Rev. 2024, 40, e3655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Naseri, K.; Saadati, S.; Ashtary-Larky, D.; Asbaghi, O.; Ghaemi, F.; Pashayee-Khamene, F.; Yari, Z.; de Courten, B. Probiotics and Synbiotics Supplementation Improve Glycemic Control Parameters in Subjects with Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A GRADE-Assessed Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression of Randomized Clinical Trials. Pharmacol. Res. 2022, 184, 106399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Wang, X.; Chen, L.; Zhang, C.; Shi, Q.; Zhu, L.; Zhao, S.; Luo, Z.; Long, Y. Effect of Probiotics at Different Intervention Time on Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front. Endocrinol. 2024, 15, 1392306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Zhang, C.; Jiang, J.; Wang, C.; Li, S.; Yu, L.; Tian, F.; Zhao, J.; Zhang, H.; Chen, W.; Zhai, Q. Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of the Effects of Probiotics on Type 2 Diabetes in Adults. Clin. Nutr. 2022, 41, 365–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Nesci, A.; Carnuccio, C.; Ruggieri, V.; D’Alessandro, A.; Di Giorgio, A.; Santoro, L.; Gasbarrini, A.; Santoliquido, A.; Ponziani, F.R. Gut Microbiota and Cardiovascular Disease: Evidence on the Metabolic and Inflammatory Background of a Complex Relationship. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 9087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Duda-Chodak, A.; Tarko, T.; Satora, P.; Sroka, P. Interaction of Dietary Compounds, Especially Polyphenols, with the Intestinal Microbiota: A Review. Eur. J. Nutr. 2015, 54, 325–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Gwiazdowska, D.; Juś, K.; Jasnowska-Małecka, J.; Kluczyńska, K. The Impact of Polyphenols on Bifidobacterium Growth. Acta Biochim. Pol. 2015, 62, 895–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  195. Haro, C.; Montes-Borrego, M.; Rangel-Zúñiga, O.A.; Alcalá-Díaz, J.F.; Gómez-Delgado, F.; Pérez-Martínez, P.; Delgado-Lista, J.; Quintana-Navarro, G.M.; Tinahones, F.J.; Landa, B.B.; et al. Two Healthy Diets Modulate Gut Microbial Community Improving Insulin Sensitivity in a Human Obese Population. J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. 2016, 101, 233–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  196. Haro, C.; García-Carpintero, S.; Rangel-Zúñiga, O.A.; Alcalá-Díaz, J.F.; Landa, B.B.; Clemente, J.C.; Pérez-Martínez, P.; López-Miranda, J.; Pérez-Jiménez, F.; Camargo, A. Consumption of Two Healthy Dietary Patterns Restored Microbiota Dysbiosis in Obese Patients with Metabolic Dysfunction. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2017, 61, 1700300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  197. Fardet, A. New Hypotheses for the Health-Protective Mechanisms of Whole-Grain Cereals: What Is beyond Fiber? Nutr. Res. Rev. 2010, 23, 65–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Martemucci, G.; Khalil, M.; Di Luca, A.; Abdallah, H.; D’Alessandro, A.G. Comprehensive Strategies for Metabolic Syndrome: How Nutrition, Dietary Polyphenols, Physical Activity, and Lifestyle Modifications Address Diabesity, Cardiovascular Diseases, and Neurodegenerative Conditions. Metabolites 2024, 14, 327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Velásquez-Jiménez, D.; Corella-Salazar, D.A.; Zuñiga-Martínez, B.S.; Domínguez-Avila, J.A.; Montiel-Herrera, M.; Salazar-López, N.J.; Rodrigo-Garcia, J.; Villegas-Ochoa, M.A.; González-Aguilar, G.A. Phenolic Compounds That Cross the Blood–Brain Barrier Exert Positive Health Effects as Central Nervous System Antioxidants. Food Funct. 2021, 12, 10356–10369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  200. Kurhaluk, N.; Kamiński, P.; Bilski, R.; Kołodziejska, R.; Woźniak, A.; Tkaczenko, H. Role of Antioxidants in Modulating the Microbiota–Gut–Brain Axis and Their Impact on Neurodegenerative Diseases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2025, 26, 3658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Noori, M.; Shateri, Z.; Babajafari, S.; Eskandari, M.H.; Parastouei, K.; Ghasemi, M.; Afshari, H.; Samadi, M. The Effect of Probiotic-Fortified Kefir on Depression, Appetite, Oxidative Stress, and Inflammatory Parameters in Iranian Overweight and Obese Elderly: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial. J. Health Popul. Nutr. 2025, 44, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Raygan, F.; Ostadmohammadi, V.; Bahmani, F.; Asemi, Z. The Effects of Vitamin D and Probiotic Co-Supplementation on Mental Health Parameters and Metabolic Status in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol. Biol. Psychiatry 2018, 84, 50–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  203. Ostadmohammadi, V.; Jamilian, M.; Bahmani, F.; Asemi, Z. Vitamin D and Probiotic Co-Supplementation Affects Mental Health, Hormonal, Inflammatory and Oxidative Stress Parameters in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. J. Ovarian Res. 2019, 12, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  204. Jamilian, M.; Mansury, S.; Bahmani, F.; Heidar, Z.; Amirani, E.; Asemi, Z. The Effects of Probiotic and Selenium Co-Supplementation on Parameters of Mental Health, Hormonal Profiles, and Biomarkers of Inflammation and Oxidative Stress in Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. J. Ovarian Res. 2018, 11, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  205. Jamilian, H.; Ghaderi, A. The Effects of Probiotic and Selenium Co-Supplementation on Clinical and Metabolic Scales in Chronic Schizophrenia: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 2021, 199, 4430–4438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  206. Moludi, J.; Alizadeh, M.; Mohammadzad, M.H.S.; Davari, M. The Effect of Probiotic Supplementation on Depressive Symptoms and Quality of Life in Patients After Myocardial Infarction: Results of a Preliminary Double-Blind Clinical Trial. Biopsychosoc. Sci. Med. 2019, 81, 770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  207. Browne, P.D.; Bolte, A.C.; Besseling-van der Vaart, I.; Claassen, E.; de Weerth, C. Probiotics as a Treatment for Prenatal Maternal Anxiety and Depression: A Double-Blind Randomized Pilot Trial. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 3051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Louzada, E.R.; Ribeiro, S.M.L. Synbiotic Supplementation, Systemic Inflammation, and Symptoms of Brain Disorders in Elders: A Secondary Study from a Randomized Clinical Trial. Nutr. Neurosci. 2020, 23, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. Haghighat, N.; Rajabi, S.; Mohammadshahi, M. Effect of Synbiotic and Probiotic Supplementation on Serum Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor Level, Depression and Anxiety Symptoms in Hemodialysis Patients: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Clinical Trial. Nutr. Neurosci. 2021, 24, 490–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Bañuls, C. New Dietary Intervention Strategies on the Intestinal Microbiota to Improve Mental Health Subjects with Obesity: Therapeutic Potential of a Synbiotic. 2025. Available online: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT06901739?tab=researcher (accessed on 14 January 2026).
  211. Hyży, A.; Rozenek, H.; Gondek, E.; Jaworski, M. Effect of Antioxidants on the Gut Microbiome Profile and Brain Functions: A Review of Randomized Controlled Trial Studies. Foods 2025, 14, 176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Loh, J.S.; Mak, W.Q.; Tan, L.K.S.; Ng, C.X.; Chan, H.H.; Yeow, S.H.; Foo, J.B.; Ong, Y.S.; How, C.W.; Khaw, K.Y. Microbiota–Gut–Brain Axis and Its Therapeutic Applications in Neurodegenerative Diseases. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2024, 9, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Cause–effect relationship between intestinal dysbiosis and brain inflammation: The left panel illustrates potential triggers of dysbiosis, such as aging, a Western diet, antibiotic use, intestinal diseases, and chronic stress. Below, dysbiosis promotes the release of ROS (O2●—, H2S) and LPS by bacteria (1), and this new environment degrades the intestinal barrier (2), allowing these molecules to pass through the damaged mucosa into the bloodstream, where they bind to receptors such as TLR4 and trigger systemic inflammation (3). Subsequently, these molecules enter through a compromised BBB (4), activating microglia, which releases even more inflammatory molecules (5), perpetuating neuroinflammation. Created in BioRender. Bandala, C. (2026) https://BioRender.com/7x6m0mz (accessed on 1 March 2026).
Figure 1. Cause–effect relationship between intestinal dysbiosis and brain inflammation: The left panel illustrates potential triggers of dysbiosis, such as aging, a Western diet, antibiotic use, intestinal diseases, and chronic stress. Below, dysbiosis promotes the release of ROS (O2●—, H2S) and LPS by bacteria (1), and this new environment degrades the intestinal barrier (2), allowing these molecules to pass through the damaged mucosa into the bloodstream, where they bind to receptors such as TLR4 and trigger systemic inflammation (3). Subsequently, these molecules enter through a compromised BBB (4), activating microglia, which releases even more inflammatory molecules (5), perpetuating neuroinflammation. Created in BioRender. Bandala, C. (2026) https://BioRender.com/7x6m0mz (accessed on 1 March 2026).
Antioxidants 15 00522 g001
Figure 2. Proposed antioxidant-based strategies targeting gut dysbiosis and neuroinflammation in metabolic diseases. The diagram summarizes representative compounds and their mechanisms of action: Numbers 1–5 in the figure indicate the corresponding mechanisms described below. 1. Resveratrol activates Nrf2 to increase SOD, catalase, and GPx, limiting microglial activation in the CNS. 2. EPA/DHA are incorporated into the cell membrane, displacing proinflammatory precursors and generating resolvins that reduce the release of TNF-α and IL-1β in the BBB. 3. Cholecalciferol and curcumin reorganize the microbiota in favor of Lactobacillus and Akkermansia, inhibit NF-κB signaling, and suppress TNF-α and IL-6, thereby strengthening the intestinal barrier. 4. Vitamins C, D, and E scavenge free radicals, mutually regenerate their active form, and interrupt lipid peroxidation while promoting SCFA production. 5. Resveratrol neutralizes ROS (·O2, H2O2) in the intestinal lumen by donating electrons to free radicals and activating Nrf2 to increase antioxidant enzymes. Overall, these strategies provide simultaneous protection of the intestinal mucosa and the BBB, reducing proinflammatory molecules and reinforcing epithelial and endothelial integrity. Created in BioRender. Bandala, C. (2026) https://BioRender.com/kvl0gqx (accessed on 1 March 2026).
Figure 2. Proposed antioxidant-based strategies targeting gut dysbiosis and neuroinflammation in metabolic diseases. The diagram summarizes representative compounds and their mechanisms of action: Numbers 1–5 in the figure indicate the corresponding mechanisms described below. 1. Resveratrol activates Nrf2 to increase SOD, catalase, and GPx, limiting microglial activation in the CNS. 2. EPA/DHA are incorporated into the cell membrane, displacing proinflammatory precursors and generating resolvins that reduce the release of TNF-α and IL-1β in the BBB. 3. Cholecalciferol and curcumin reorganize the microbiota in favor of Lactobacillus and Akkermansia, inhibit NF-κB signaling, and suppress TNF-α and IL-6, thereby strengthening the intestinal barrier. 4. Vitamins C, D, and E scavenge free radicals, mutually regenerate their active form, and interrupt lipid peroxidation while promoting SCFA production. 5. Resveratrol neutralizes ROS (·O2, H2O2) in the intestinal lumen by donating electrons to free radicals and activating Nrf2 to increase antioxidant enzymes. Overall, these strategies provide simultaneous protection of the intestinal mucosa and the BBB, reducing proinflammatory molecules and reinforcing epithelial and endothelial integrity. Created in BioRender. Bandala, C. (2026) https://BioRender.com/kvl0gqx (accessed on 1 March 2026).
Antioxidants 15 00522 g002
Table 1. Bacteria with pro-oxidant potential.
Table 1. Bacteria with pro-oxidant potential.
Pro-Oxidant BacteriaOxidative MechanismReported Effects
Enterobacteriaceae
(e.g., Escherichia coli, Enterobacter cloacae) [132,133].
Their endotoxin (LPS) binds to TLR4 in host cells and activates nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide Phosphate [NADPH] Oxidases (NOX) and inflammatory pathways, generating large amounts of ROS.They aggravate systemic inflammation and contribute to metabolic dysfunction in obesity.
Enterococcus faecalis [131,134,135]Produces extracellular O2●— and H2O2 to survive, which damages colonic cell DNA and induces the formation of hydroxyl radicals (●HO).They promote genomic instability and are associated with colorectal cancer.
Sulfate-reducing bacteria (e.g., Bilophila wadsworthia, Desulfovibrio spp.) [130,136,137].They use sulfate/sulfite as final electron acceptors and generate H2S. In excess, H2S damages the mucosal barrier and activates proinflammatory Th1 responses.They promote colitis and disruption of the intestinal barrier in susceptible hosts.
Table 2. Bacteria with antioxidant potential.
Table 2. Bacteria with antioxidant potential.
Antioxidant BacteriaAntioxidant MechanismReported Effects
Lactobacillus spp. (e.g., L. casei, L. fermentum, L. plantarum) [139,140,141].They produce SOD and use manganese complexes to neutralize ROS. Prevent ●HO radicals and suppress pro-oxidant intestinal bacteria. Generate GSH, reduce glycation and lipid peroxidationThey reinforce the antioxidant status of the intestinal epithelium and reduce oxidative damage.
Bifidobacterium spp. (e.g., B. longum, B. animalis) [142,143].They ferment dietary fiber, generating acetate and lactate, which may support barrier integrity and reduce permeability to proinflammatory and oxidative mediators. In obesity, they can decrease LPS, normalizing markers of oxidative stress. They provide B vitamins that act as cofactors in the host’s antioxidant pathways.They improve mucosal integrity and reduce systemic oxidative inflammation.
Faecalibacterium prausnitzii (clostridia group IV) [144,145] Main producer of butyrate, which nourishes colonocytes and reduces ROS generation by improving barrier function. Secrets microbial anti-inflammatory molecules (MAM), inhibiting NF-κB signalingContributes to an anti-inflammatory and antioxidant environment in the colon and improves insulin sensitivity.
Akkermansia muciniphila (Verrucomicrobia) [146,147]Degrades mucin and strengthens the mucus layer, limiting the translocation of endotoxins. It is related to lower ROS in the intestinal lumen.Promotes barrier integrity and reduces oxidative stress in the colon, improving metabolism.
Table 3. Antioxidant compounds and supplements targeting gut dysbiosis and neuroinflammation.
Table 3. Antioxidant compounds and supplements targeting gut dysbiosis and neuroinflammation.
SupplementEffects on Microbiota, Oxidative Stress, and NeuroinflammationTherapeutic Relevance
Vitamin D (cholecalciferol) [153,154,155].Restructures the microbiota increase diversity and beneficial genera such as Akkermansia muciniphila and Bifidobacterium. Reduces intestinal permeability and endotoxemia by strengthening tight junctions. In addition, it activates the vitamin D receptor (VDR) receptors in microglia, modulating the brain’s immune response and decreasing markers of neuroinflammation.Improves the intestinal barrier, reduces systemic inflammation, and protects cognitive functions by attenuating neuroinflammation.
Vitamins C and E (classic antioxidants) [142,156,157].Both act as free radical scavengers at the systemic and intestinal levels. Vitamin C, in high doses, enhances SCFA production (e.g., butyrate) via microbiota. Vitamin E (α-tocopherol) promotes SCFA-producing commensals and strengthens the mucosal barrier. Together, they decrease proinflammatory cytokines and reduce neuronal oxidative stress in models of cerebral obesity and neuroinflammation.They reinforce epithelial integrity, normalize redox metabolism, and preserve neuronal function by mitigating oxidative damage and neuroinflammation.
Polyphenols (e.g., resveratrol, grape polyphenols) [158,159,160].They directly neutralize ROS and regulate NF-κB, modulating inflammatory circuits. They function as prebiotics, increasing beneficial genera (Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Akkermansia), reducing Enterobacteriaceae, and reducing barrier permeability. In models of metabolic syndrome, they limit microglia activation and decrease markers of neuroinflammation.They restore the microbial ecosystem, improve insulin sensitivity, and protect cognitive functions by reducing oxidative stress and neuroinflammation.
Omega-3 fatty acids (Eicosapentaenoic Acid/Docosahexaenoic Acid (EPA/DHA)) [161,162,163].They inhibit proinflammatory pathways (e.g., NF-κB) and generate resolvins; they promote butyrate-producing bacteria and reduce pro-inflammatory pathogens. They strengthen tight junctions in the intestine and promote regulatory T cells. Metabolites cross the BBB to attenuate pro-inflammatory cytokines and decrease microglial activation.They maintain intestinal homeostasis, reduce systemic inflammation, and preserve neurocognitive function by modulating the gut–brain axis.
Curcumin (turmeric polyphenol) [25,164,165,166].It is biotransformed in the colon and enhances beneficial genera (Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium), suppressing Enterobacteriaceae and Prevotellaceae. It reduces permeability and circulating LPS. It crosses the BBB in low proportions, inhibits microglia and astroglia activation, and decreases markers of cerebral oxidative stress in models of neurodegeneration and obesity.It optimizes barrier function, normalizes the inflammatory profile, and preserves memory and other cognitive functions by mitigating neuroinflammation and oxidative stress.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Carro-Rodríguez, J.; Ibáñez-Cervantes, G.; Cárdenas-Rodríguez, N.; Ignacio-Mejía, I.; Albores-Méndez, E.M.; Pardo-Pacheco, B.R.; Fernández-Sánchez, V.; Balboa-Verduzco, A.M.; Adame, C.; Lara-Padilla, E.; et al. Microbiota–Gut–Brain Axis Disruption, Neuroinflammation, and Potential Antioxidant-Based Treatments in Metabolic Diseases. Antioxidants 2026, 15, 522. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox15040522

AMA Style

Carro-Rodríguez J, Ibáñez-Cervantes G, Cárdenas-Rodríguez N, Ignacio-Mejía I, Albores-Méndez EM, Pardo-Pacheco BR, Fernández-Sánchez V, Balboa-Verduzco AM, Adame C, Lara-Padilla E, et al. Microbiota–Gut–Brain Axis Disruption, Neuroinflammation, and Potential Antioxidant-Based Treatments in Metabolic Diseases. Antioxidants. 2026; 15(4):522. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox15040522

Chicago/Turabian Style

Carro-Rodríguez, Jazmín, Gabriela Ibáñez-Cervantes, Noemí Cárdenas-Rodríguez, Iván Ignacio-Mejía, Exsal Manuel Albores-Méndez, Blanca Rosalba Pardo-Pacheco, Verónica Fernández-Sánchez, Ana María Balboa-Verduzco, Cecilia Adame, Eleazar Lara-Padilla, and et al. 2026. "Microbiota–Gut–Brain Axis Disruption, Neuroinflammation, and Potential Antioxidant-Based Treatments in Metabolic Diseases" Antioxidants 15, no. 4: 522. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox15040522

APA Style

Carro-Rodríguez, J., Ibáñez-Cervantes, G., Cárdenas-Rodríguez, N., Ignacio-Mejía, I., Albores-Méndez, E. M., Pardo-Pacheco, B. R., Fernández-Sánchez, V., Balboa-Verduzco, A. M., Adame, C., Lara-Padilla, E., Mancilla-Ramírez, J., Medina-Santillán, R., Montoya-Olvera, M., Cortes-Algara, A. L., Gómez-Manzo, S., Hernández-Ochoa, B., Moya-Amaya, H., & Bandala, C. (2026). Microbiota–Gut–Brain Axis Disruption, Neuroinflammation, and Potential Antioxidant-Based Treatments in Metabolic Diseases. Antioxidants, 15(4), 522. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox15040522

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop