## 3 Results
### Participant Characteristics
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Parameters**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Baseline—6 Weeks**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Baseline—12 Weeks**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**6 Weeks—12 Weeks**} \\ \cline{2-9}  & **L.** & **Placebo (N = 26)** & **_p-Value_** & **\(\begin{array}{c}L.** \\ _paracasei_ \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **Placebo (N = 26)** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **_p-Value_** \\ **(N = 26)** \\ \end{tabular}  & \begin{tabular}{c} **_L.** \\ _paracasei_ \\ \end{tabular}  & \ \begin{tabular}{c} **_p-Value_** \\ **(N = 26)** \\ \end{tabular}  &
\begin{tabular}{c} **_L. After 6 weeks of _L. paracasei_, the supplementation group and the placebo group showed a significant difference in their propionic acid and LPS with 95% CI, using Gaussian regression analysis to control the independent variables, including sex, age, height, body weight, smoking, alcohol drinking, diabetes status, and the baseline of the dependent variables. The increases in propionic acid were observed with a coefficient of 3.85 (95% CI: 1.07 to 6.63). There were no significantly different LDL-C, FBS, MDA, TNF-\(\alpha\), and L/M ratio trends, but there were decreasing trends at 6 weeks in the _L. paracasei_ supplementation group when compared with the placebo group. There were increasing trends in the following parameters: TAC, GSH, lactic acid, acetic acid, butyric acid, IL-10 and IgA. However, there were no significant differences in the placebo group at 6 weeks of treatment. A summary of the Gaussian regression at 6 weeks of therapy for the _L. paracasei_ group is provided in Table 4. The LPS load was significantly (\(p\) = 0.015) varied after the probiotic intervention. Moreover, after 12 weeks, the _L. paracasei_ supplementation group and placebo group showed significantly different TCH, TGs, HDL-C, TAC, propionic acid, TNF-\(\alpha\), and LPS levels with 95% CI using Gaussian regression analysis. TCH, TGs, LPS, and TNF-\(\alpha\) showed decreases with a coefficient of \(-\)14.41 (95% CI: \(-\)28.5 to \(-\)0.31), \(-\)28.19 (95% CI: \(-\)54.0 to \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Parameter** & **Coefficient** & **95\% CI** & \(p\)**-Value** \\ \hline Total cholesterol (mg/dL) & \(-\)6.18 & (\(-\)21.60 to 9.23) & 0.422 \\ Triglycerides (mg/dL) & \(-\)10.02 & (\(-\)32.82 to 12.77) & 0.380 \\ HDL-cholesterol (mg/dL) & \(-\)0.98 & (\(-\)5.39 to 3.42) & 0.655 \\ LDL-cholesterol (mg/dL) & 3.15 & (\(-\)11.99 to 18.28) & 0.677 \\ FBS (mg/dL) & \(-\)5.78 & (\(-\)13.82 to 2.25) & 0.154 \\ TAC (\(\mu\)mol/mL) & 3.77 & (\(-\)3.91 to 11.44) & 0.327 \\ MDA (\(\mu\)mol/mL) & \(-\)0.03 & (\(-\)0.08 to 0.02) & 0.295 \\ GSH (\(\mu\)g/mL) & 8.98 & (\(-\)11.18 to 29.13) & 0.373 \\ Lact acid (\(\mu\)mol/g) & 1.23 & (\(-\)0.35 to 2.81) & 0.124 \\ Acetic acid (\(\mu\)mol/g) & 0.28 & (\(-\)0.90 to 1.47) & 0.629 \\ Butyric acid (\(\mu\)mol/g) & 0.69 & (\(-\)0.89 to 2.27) & 0.384 \\ Propionic acid (\(\mu\)mol/g) & 3.85 & (\(1.07\) to 6.63) & 0.008 * \\ IL-10 (pg/mL) & 30.98 & (\(-\)104.94 to 166.89) & 0.212 \\ IFN-Y (pg/mL) & \(-\)0.43 & (\(-\)34.51 to 42.66) & 0.983 \\ TNF-\(\alpha\) (pg/mL) & \(-\)2.68 & (\(-\)9.44 to 4.08) & 0.380 \\ LPS (pg/mL) & \(-\)16.49 & (\(-\)29.63 to \(-\)3.36) & 0.015 * \\ IgA (ng/mL) & 6.66 & (\(-\)59.90 to 73.22) & 0.841 \\ L/M ratio & \(-\)0.01 & (\(-\)0.02 to 0.01) & 0.519 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Compared with the placebo group at week 6. The \(p\)-value was at a 95% confidence interval. * = significant difference (p less than 0.05); HDL = High-Density Lipoprotein; IDB = Low-Density Lipoprotein; FBS = Fasting Blood Sugar; TAC = Total Antioxidant Capacity; MDA = Malondialdehydedehyde; GSH = Glutathione Reduced; IL = Interleukin; IFN-\(\gamma\) = Interferon gamma; TNF-\(\alpha\) = Tumor Necrosis Factor alpha; LPS = Lipopolysaccharidecharide; IgA = Immunoglobulin A; L/M = Lactulose/Mannitol Ratio.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Gaussian regression analysis summary at week 6 of treatment for the _L. paracasei_ group.