Vaginal microbiome and its implications in preterm birth

Article information

Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2025;68(6):449-457
Publication date (electronic) : 2025 September 17
doi : https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.25085
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ewha Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, Korea
2Biowave W, Seoul, Korea
Corresponding author: Suenie Park, PhD, Biowave W, 1071 Anyangcheon-ro, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul 07985, Korea, E-mail: sueniepark@biowavew.com, https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4873-4568
Corresponding author: Young Ju Kim, MD, PhD, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ewha Medical Research Institute, College of Medicine, Ewha Womans University, 1071 Anyangcheon-ro, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul 07985, Korea, E-mail: kkyj@ewha.ac.kr, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3153-3008
Young Ju Kim has been an Editorial Board of Obstetrics & Gynecology Science; however, she is not involved in the peer reviewer selection, evaluation, or decision process of this article. Otherwise, no other potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.
Received 2023 December 27; Revised 2025 July 16; Accepted 2025 September 3.

Abstract

Preterm birth (PTB), defined as birth occurring before 37 weeks of gestation, remains a major global public health challenge, affecting approximately 10% of pregnancies worldwide and contributing significantly to neonatal morbidity and mortality. Despite extensive research, the etiology of PTB is multifactorial and not yet fully understood, with ongoing debates regarding the contributions of inflammation, hormonal dysregulation, genetic predisposition, and environmental factors such as microbial dysbiosis. Recent studies have highlighted the role of the vaginal microbiome in pregnancy outcomes, particularly its association with PTB. This review consolidates current findings on the vaginal microbiome’s influence on PTB, addressing microbial dysbiosis as a key risk factor. Despite differences in ethnicity, gestational age at sample collection, and analytical methodologies, a common observation is that a decrease in Lactobacillus species is associated with an increased risk of PTB. These differences influence study outcomes by affecting variations in microbial composition, host immune regulation, genetic predisposition, and environmental influences. However, a consistently observed trend is that a Lactobacillus-dominant vaginal microbiome is generally associated with a lower risk of PTB across diverse populations. This review also discusses the limitations of existing research and suggests directions for future microbiome studies.

Introduction

Preterm birth (PTB), occurring in approximately 10% of pregnancies worldwide, remains a major contributor to neonatal morbidity and mortality [1]. Despite advancements in medical and scientific research, the precise mechanisms underlying PTB are not yet fully understood. Recent research has increasingly focused on the vaginal microbiome, recognizing its potential influence on pregnancy outcomes [2]. The field of bacteriology has transitioned from traditional culture-based techniques to metagenomic analyses, providing deeper insights into microbial ecosystems [3]. Since the initiation of the human microbiome project, substantial progress has been made in characterizing microbial communities across various human body sites, including the vagina [4]. However, studies on the vaginal microbiome and its association with PTB have yielded inconsistent findings across different populations, with variations observed in research outcomes [5]. These discrepancies may arise from variations in study methodologies, gestational age at sample collection, host immune responses, genetic predisposition, and environmental factors [6]. Addressing these challenges through standardized research protocols with using standard materials, longitudinal studies, larger multi-ethnic cohort analyses, and multi-omics studies will be crucial for a more comprehensive understanding of the vaginal microbiome’s role in pregnancy [6]. Therefore, this review aims to synthesize current knowledge, identify gaps in existing research, and propose future directions to enhance our understanding of the vaginal microbiome’s impact on PTB risk.

Spontaneous PTB (sPTB) and ascending infection

The risk factors for PTB include ethnicity, socioeconomic status, maternal weight, smoking, periodontal disease, and underlying health conditions [7]. As the prevalence of advanced maternal age and comorbidities increases, so does the incidence of PTB [8,9]. sPTB accounts for approximately 70–75% of all PTB cases [1,10]. Notably, intra-amniotic infections are observed in one-third of sPTB cases, with microbial profiles similar to those found in the lower genital tract, suggesting an ascending infection mechanism [11]. Elevated levels of inflammatory cytokines in amniotic fluid, cervicovaginal fluid (CVF), and maternal blood further support this hypothesis [1214]. Additionally, bacterial vaginosis (BV), characterized by reduced Lactobacillus dominance and increased anaerobic bacteria, has been identified as a significant risk factor for sPTB [15]. Advances in molecular diagnostic techniques, including 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) metagenomic sequencing, have enhanced our ability to detect diverse bacterial species in the vaginal microbiome, providing deeper insights into microbial contributions to PTB and potential biomarkers for early detection [3].

Vaginal microbiota during pregnancy

The vaginal microbiome undergoes dynamic changes throughout life, influenced by hormonal fluctuations, immune responses, sexual activity, and pregnancy [16]. During pregnancy, the vaginal microbiome typically stabilizes with reduced diversity, and Lactobacillus species including Lactobacillus crispatus (L. crispatus), Lactobacillus iners (L. iners), Lactobacillus jensenii (L. jensenii), and Lactobacillus gasseri (L. gasseri), become predominant [17]. These bacteria play a crucial role in maintaining a low vaginal pH through the secretion of lactic acid and hydrogen peroxide, which inhibit the growth of pathogenic microorganisms and help prevent infections [18,19].

Vaginal microbiota can be categorized into distinct community state types (CSTs) based on dominant bacterial species. CST I, II, III, and V are characterized by a dominance of different Lactobacillus species, whereas CST IV, associated with BV, consists of diverse anaerobes such as Gardnerella vaginalis (G. vaginalis), Prevotella (Prevotella spp.), and Atopobium vaginae (A. vaginae) [20]. An imbalance in this microbial composition-termed vaginal dysbiosis-has been linked to an increased risk of PTB [2123]. A normal vaginal microbiome with the dominance of Lactobacillus species, maintains low microbial diversity and an acidic pH (approximately 3.5–4.5) by producing lactic acid. In contrast, depletion of Lactobacillus allows for an overgrowth of anaerobes such as G. vaginalis and Prevotella spp., which contribute to mucus degradation, biofilm formation, and inflammation, leading to elevated vaginal pH, production of pro-inflammatory metabolites, and increased susceptibility to infections and adverse pregnancy outcomes, including PTB [24].

The composition of the vaginal microbiome undergoes distinct changes across trimesters. In the first trimester, microbial diversity tends to be higher, with transitional microbial states observed. By the second trimester, the microbiome generally becomes more stable and Lactobacillus dominance increases, particularly L. crispatus and L. jensenii, which contribute to a protective environment through the production of lactic acid and hydrogen peroxide [25,26]. In the third trimester, the microbial community remains relatively stable in most cases, but dysbiotic shifts in late pregnancy have been linked to an increased risk of PTB [19,20,2730]. Understanding trimester-specific microbial shifts and their influence on host immunity is crucial for identifying PTB biomarkers and developing preventive strategies. Late pregnancy dysbiosis, driven by microbial and immune interactions, has been linked to increased PTB risk.

Microbial diversity and composition in PTB

Across different populations, studies have identified consistent patterns in the association between vaginal microbiota and PTB risk. Research on Asian cohorts, along with comparisons to African, American, and White populations, suggests that Lactobacillus-dominant microbiota generally confer protection against PTB, whereas anaerobe-dominant microbiota are linked to increased PTB risk. A shared finding across studies is that CST I, II, III, and V, characterized by dominance of L. crispatus, L. jensenii, and L. gasseri, are associated with term births, whereas CST IV, dominated by G. vaginalis, A. vaginae, and Prevotella spp., is correlated with a higher PTB risk (Fig. 1). These observations highlight the importance of maintaining microbial stability during pregnancy and the potential for targeted interventions that promote a Lactobacillus-dominant vaginal environment (Table 1) [3134]. To compile the studies summarized in Table 1, we conducted a narrative selection of relevant cohort studies that investigated the relationship between the vaginal microbiome and PTB, with a particular focus on their potential use in predicting PTB risk. Studies were included based on the presence of key terms such as “vaginal microbiome”, “PTB”, “prediction”, and preference was given to large-scale cohort studies that enrolled diverse racial or ethnic populations.

Fig. 1

Vaginal microbiome and preterm birth. PTB, preterm birth.

Summary of vaginal microbiome studies investigating sssociations with preterm birth risk

Despite these commonalities, variations in study findings arise due to differences in study design, including sampling methods, sequencing techniques, and gestational age at sample collection. Some studies report L. iners as a transitional species that may either support a stable vaginal environment or contribute to dysbiosis, depending on host immune responses. Additionally, the composition of vaginal microbiota and its association with PTB differ slightly among ethnic groups, potentially due to genetic predisposition, dietary habits, and environmental exposures. These factors contribute to variations in PTB risk even within the same CST classification [32,35,36].

Furthermore, vaginal dysbiosis has been associated not only with PTB but also with conditions such as preterm prelabor rupture of membranes and intrauterine infections, suggesting that microbial imbalances have broader clinical implications. The inconsistencies observed across studies underscore the need for standardized methodologies and larger multi-ethnic cohort studies. Future research should integrate microbiome profiling with host immune and genetic factors to clarify the complex interactions contributing to PTB risk. A deeper understanding of these relationships will facilitate the development of more precise predictive models and targeted interventions for at-risk pregnancies.

PTB and prediction of PTB

Several methods are currently used to predict PTB, including microscopy, culture, and polymerase chain reaction-based tests [22,37,38]. The development of metagenomic sequencing has enabled comprehensive analysis of microbial communities, offering new avenues for PTB prediction [39]. Recent research has introduced non-invasive PTB prediction models that integrate CVF microbiome data with blood biomarkers and cervical length measurements [38,40]. Studies have explored various machine learning-based approaches, microbial biomarker panels combined with cytokine profiling, and metagenomic sequencing-based predictive models [4143]. These models have demonstrated sensitivity ranging from 79% to 88% and specificity from 78% to 85%, highlighting their potential for improving PTB risk assessment [44]. Additionally, emerging computational techniques such as deep learning and neural networks are being investigated to enhance prediction accuracy by identifying complex microbial signatures [41,4446]. However, despite these advancements, challenges remain in ensuring the reproducibility and generalizability of these models across diverse clinical settings, necessitating further validation through large-scale multi-ethnic cohort studies. Compared to conventional markers such as fetal fibronectin and phosphorylated insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1, which have reported sensitivities of approximately 56–64% and specificities of 75–85%, microbiome-based prediction models have demonstrated improved accuracy, with sensitivity ranging from 79% to 88% and specificity from 78% to 85% [47,48]. These findings suggest that integrating vaginal microbiome analysis with clinical factors such as cervical length and inflammatory biomarkers could enhance PTB risk assessment and early intervention strategies.

The association between BV and PTB has been well established in the literature [49]. In fact, due to this known relationship, it has been proposed that the Nugent scoring system should be incorporated into routine antenatal care [49]. The Nugent score is a standardized diagnostic method used to assess the vaginal microbiota based on Gram-stained vaginal smears. It evaluates the relative abundance of three bacterial morphotypes: large Gram-positive rods (Lactobacillus spp.), small Gram-variable rods (G. vaginalis and Bacteroides spp.), and curved Gram-variable rods (Mobiluncus spp.). Scores range from 0–10, with 0–3 indicating normal flora, 4–6 suggesting intermediate microbiota, and 7–10 consistent with BV. Despite the limitations of the scoring system, this has also shown a correlation with microbial diversity and dysbiosis in studies utilizing metagenomic approaches [50,51]. Given that PTB is a multifactorial syndrome, identifying vaginal dysbiosis as a contributing etiology may open new possibilities for precision-based prevention and management strategies aimed at reducing PTB risk.

Therapeutic approaches targeting the vaginal microbiome

Given the established link between vaginal microbiota composition and PTB, numerous therapeutic strategies have been investigated to restore and maintain a healthy microbial environment. Antibiotics have traditionally been used to treat BV, a condition associated with increased PTB risk due to its anaerobe-dominated microbiota. However, antibiotic treatments have shown inconsistent effects on reducing PTB incidence and carry concerns about promoting resistance and potentially disrupting beneficial microbial communities [52].

As a result, increasing attention has shifted toward probiotic and live biotherapeutic product interventions aimed at re-establishing a Lactobacillus-dominant microbiota [5355]. Oral probiotics have produced variable outcomes in clinical trials, while vaginally administered L. crispatus has demonstrated more promising results, including reduction in BV recurrence and improved microbial stability [56,57].

Ongoing clinical trials are exploring the efficacy of different probiotic strains, routes of administration, dosages, and treatment durations in reducing PTB risk [58]. Although these alternative strategies are still under evaluation, they represent promising avenues for safe and targeted modulation of the vaginal microbiota during pregnancy [55,58]. Robust, placebo-controlled trials and mechanistic studies are needed to determine optimal therapeutic protocols and assess long-term maternal and neonatal outcomes [59]. However, based on the current evidence, in the short term, it is expected that early detection of vaginal dysbiosis-using either next-generation sequencing (NGS) or traditional methods such as the Nugent score-may allow for the identification of high-risk individuals and enable personalized treatment with probiotics or antibiotics to help prevent the occurrence of PTB.

Future directions

Despite significant progress in microbiome research, several limitations continue to impede a complete understanding of its role in PTB. One major challenge is the difficulty in elucidating the precise mode of action by which specific microbiota influence pregnancy outcomes. The complex and dynamic interactions between microbial communities and the host immune system remain incompletely characterized [21]. Moreover, the potential interplay between the vaginal and gut microbiomes during pregnancy is an emerging area of interest, with early evidence suggesting that the gut microbiome may influence systemic immune responses that in turn affect vaginal microbial stability and pregnancy outcomes [60]. Diet, a major modulator of the gut microbiome, may thus exert indirect influence on the vaginal microbiota, offering a potential avenue for dietary interventions to prevent dysbiosis and adverse pregnancy outcomes [61]. Understanding this cross-talk may open new avenues for integrative maternal health strategies. Furthermore, NGS data, particularly from 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing or Shotgun metagenomic sequencing lack standardization in terms of sampling techniques, analytical pipelines, and bioinformatic processing, which hampers reproducibility and comparability across studies [38,62]. Inter-individual variability and geographic or ethnic influences further complicate the interpretation of results [63].

Future research should prioritize efforts to standardize NGS protocols and analytical frameworks, enabling cross-study harmonization and meta-analyses. Integrating multi-omics approaches, including proteomics, metabolomics, and transcriptomics, will be critical to elucidating host-microbe interactions and their role in pregnancy outcomes [64]. Investigating the immunological impact of vaginal microbiota through cytokine profiling and host gene expression studies will enhance our understanding of PTB pathogenesis [65]. In parallel, shotgun metagenomic sequencing [66], coupled with functional metagenomics and single-cell analysis, offers a high-resolution alternative to traditional sequencing, enabling detailed characterization of microbial communities and their functions [67]. As research advances, refining predictive models, developing targeted interventions, and validating findings through large-scale longitudinal studies will be essential to improving maternal and neonatal outcomes.

In light of emerging evidence, preventive strategies targeting the vaginal microbiota have gained increasing attention. While antibiotics have traditionally been used to treat abnormal microbiota, such as BV, their effectiveness in reducing PTB remains inconsistent and raises concerns about antibiotic resistance and disruption of beneficial microbes [49]. Recent clinical trials have explored probiotic therapy using Lactobacillus species, either orally or intravaginally administered, as a non-antibiotic approach to restore a healthy vaginal environment and reduce BV recurrence [53,58]. Moreover, studies investigating screening for dysbiosis during pregnancy, particularly among high-risk populations, suggest that early identification followed by targeted intervention could be a promising strategy for reducing the risk of PTB. Further large-scale, randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the optimal timing, route, and composition of probiotic or antimicrobial interventions for microbiome-based PTB prevention.

Conclusion

The vaginal microbiome plays a critical role in the risk and prevention of PTB. While Lactobacillus-dominant communities are generally protective, dysbiosis marked by anaerobic overgrowth increases susceptibility to PTB. Despite variations across studies, the consistent association between microbial composition and PTB underscores the need for continued investigation. Ongoing efforts to standardize methodologies and integrate multi-omics data will be essential in advancing microbial diagnostics and therapeutic strategies. The vaginal microbiome remains a promising frontier in improving maternal and neonatal health outcomes.

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article is review article based on previously published studies. No new studies with human participants or animals were conducted by the authors. Therefore, ethical approval was not required.

Patient consent

This review did not involve the collection of new data from individual patients. Thus, patient consent was not required.

Funding information

This research was supported by a grant of the Korea Health Technology R&D Project through the Korea Health Industry Development Institute (KHIDI), funded by the Ministry of Health & Welfare, Republic of Korea (grant number: RS-2023-00266554).

References

1. Goldenberg RL, Culhane JF, Iams JD, Romero R. Epidemiology and causes of preterm birth. Lancet 2008;371:75–84.
2. Bayar E, Bennett PR, Chan D, Sykes L, MacIntyre DA. The pregnancy microbiome and preterm birth. Semin Immunopathol 2020;42:487–99.
3. Yoo JY, Rho M, You YA, Kwon EJ, Kim MH, Kym S, et al. 16S rRNA gene-based metagenomic analysis reveals differences in bacteria-derived extracellular vesicles in the urine of pregnant and non-pregnant women. Exp Mol Med 2016;48:e208.
4. Integrative HMP. (iHMP) Research Network Consortium. The integrative human microbiome project. Nature 2019;569:641–8.
5. Kulshrestha S, Narad P, Singh B, Pai SS, Vijayaraghavan P, Tandon A, et al. Biomarker identification for preterm birth susceptibility: vaginal microbiome meta-analysis using systems biology and machine learning approaches. Am J Reprod Immunol 2024;92:e13905.
6. Da Silva AS, Anwar S, Park S, Park S, Goodfellow L, Sergaki C. The untapped potential of vaginal microbiome diagnostics for improving women's health. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2025;15:1595182.
7. Koullali B, Oudijk MA, Nijman TA, Mol BW, Pajkrt E. Risk assessment and management to prevent preterm birth. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2016;21:80–8.
8. Ananth CV, Friedman AM, Goldenberg RL, Wright JD, Vintzileos AM. Association between temporal changes in neonatal mortality and spontaneous and clinician-initiated deliveries in the United States, 2006–2013. JAMA Pediatr 2018;172:949–57.
9. Newnham JP, Kemp MW, White SW, Arrese CA, Hart RJ, Keelan JA. Applying precision public health to prevent preterm birth. Front Public Health 2017;5:66.
10. Chan RL. Biochemical markers of spontaneous preterm birth in asymptomatic women. Biomed Res Int 2014;2014:164081.
11. Jefferson KK. The bacterial etiology of preterm birth. Adv Appl Microbiol 2012;80:1–22.
12. Park S, You YA, Yun H, Choi SJ, Hwang HS, Choi SK, et al. Cervicovaginal fluid cytokines as predictive markers of preterm birth in symptomatic women. Obstet Gynecol Sci 2020;63:455–63.
13. Romero R, Dey SK, Fisher SJ. Preterm labor: one syndrome, many causes. Science 2014;345:760–5.
14. Bennett PR, Brown RG, MacIntyre DA. Vaginal microbiome in preterm rupture of membranes. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2020;47:503–21.
15. Martius J, Eschenbach DA. The role of bacterial vaginosis as a cause of amniotic fluid infection, chorioamnionitis and prematurity-a review. Arch Gynecol Obstet 1990;247:1–13.
16. Bagga R, Arora P. Genital micro-organisms in pregnancy. Front Public Health 2020;8:225.
17. Talukdar D, Sarkar M, Ahrodia T, Kumar S, De D, Nath S, et al. Previse preterm birth in early pregnancy through vaginal microbiome signatures using metagenomics and dipstick assays. iScience 2024;27:111238.
18. Amabebe E, Anumba DOC. The vaginal microenvironment: the physiologic role of lactobacilli. Front Med (Lausanne) 2018;5:181.
19. Dominguez-Bello MG. Gestational shaping of the maternal vaginal microbiome. Nat Med 2019;25:882–3.
20. DiGiulio DB, Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Costello EK, Lyell DJ, Robaczewska A, et al. Temporal and spatial variation of the human microbiota during pregnancy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2015;112:11060–5.
21. Fettweis JM, Serrano MG, Brooks JP, Edwards DJ, Girerd PH, Parikh HI, et al. The vaginal microbiome and preterm birth. Nat Med 2019;25:1012–21.
22. Park S, Oh D, Heo H, Lee G, Kim SM, Ansari A, et al. Prediction of preterm birth based on machine learning using bacterial risk score in cervicovaginal fluid. Am J Reprod Immunol 2021;86:e13435.
23. Vinturache AE, Gyamfi-Bannerman C, Hwang J, Mysorekar IU, Jacobsson B. Maternal microbiome - a pathway to preterm birth. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med 2016;21:94–9.
24. Ferrante M, Oliveri Conti G, Pulvirenti E, Favara C, Fiore M, Cristaldi A. The vaginal microbiota and preterm birth: a systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2025;311:114007.
25. Mitchell C, Fredricks D, Agnew K, Hitti J. Hydrogen peroxide-producing lactobacilli are associated with lower levels of vaginal interleukin-1β, independent of bacterial vaginosis. Sex Transm Dis 2015;42:358–63.
26. Miko E, Barakonyi A. The role of hydrogen-peroxide (H2O2) produced by vaginal microbiota in female reproductive health. Antioxidants (Basel) 2023;12:1055.
27. Romero R, Hassan SS, Gajer P, Tarca AL, Fadrosh DW, Nikita L, et al. The composition and stability of the vaginal microbiota of normal pregnant women is different from that of non-pregnant women. Microbiome 2014;2:4.
28. Fox C, Eichelberger K. Maternal microbiome and pregnancy outcomes. Fertil Steril 2015;104:1358–63.
29. Chu DM, Seferovic M, Pace RM, Aagaard KM. The microbiome in preterm birth. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2018;52:103–13.
30. Oliver A, LaMere B, Weihe C, Wandro S, Lindsay KL, Wadhwa PD, et al. Cervicovaginal microbiome composition is associated with metabolic profiles in healthy pregnancy. mBio 2020;11:e01851–20.
31. Kan H, He Y, Li Q, Mu Y, Dong Y, Fan W, et al. Differential effect of vaginal microbiota on spontaneous preterm birth among Chinese pregnant women. Biomed Res Int 2022;2022:3536108.
32. Kumar S, Kumari N, Talukdar D, Kothidar A, Sarkar M, Mehta O, et al. The vaginal microbial signatures of preterm birth delivery in Indian women. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021;11:622474.
33. Freitas AC, Bocking A, Hill JE, Money DM. Increased richness and diversity of the vaginal microbiota and spontaneous preterm birth. Microbiome 2018;6:117.
34. Park S, You YA, Kim YH, Kwon E, Ansari A, Kim SM, et al. Ureaplasma and Prevotella colonization with Lactobacillus abundance during pregnancy facilitates term birth. Sci Rep 2022;12:10148.
35. Son KA, Kim M, Kim YM, Kim SH, Choi SJ, Oh SY, et al. Prevalence of vaginal microorganisms among pregnant women according to trimester and association with preterm birth. Obstet Gynecol Sci 2018;61:38–47.
36. Dunlop AL, Satten GA, Hu YJ, Knight AK, Hill CC, Wright ML, et al. Vaginal microbiome composition in early pregnancy and risk of spontaneous preterm and early term birth among African American women. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021;11:641005.
37. Payne MS, Newnham JP, Doherty DA, Furfaro LL, Pendal NL, Loh DE, et al. A specific bacterial DNA signature in the vagina of Australian women in midpregnancy predicts high risk of spontaneous preterm birth (the Predict1000 study). Am J Obstet Gynecol 2021;224:206.e1–23.
38. Payne MS, Ireland DJ, Watts R, Nathan EA, Furfaro LL, Kemp MW, et al. Ureaplasma parvum genotype, combined vaginal colonisation with Candida albicans, and spontaneous preterm birth in an Australian cohort of pregnant women. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2016;16:312.
39. Huang C, Gin C, Fettweis J, Foxman B, Gelaye B, MacIntyre DA, et al. Meta-analysis reveals the vaginal microbiome is a better predictor of earlier than later preterm birth. BMC Biol 2023;21:199.
40. Lamont RF, Richardson LS, Boniface JJ, Cobo T, Exner MM, Christensen IB, et al. Commentary on a combined approach to the problem of developing biomarkers for the prediction of spontaneous preterm labor that leads to preterm birth. Placenta 2020;98:13–23.
41. Golob JL, Oskotsky TT, Tang AS, Roldan A, Chung V, Ha CWY, et al. Microbiome preterm birth DREAM challenge: crowdsourcing machine learning approaches to advance preterm birth research. Cell Rep Med 2024;5:101350.
42. Kumar M, Murugesan S, Singh P, Saadaoui M, Elhag DA, Terranegra A, et al. Vaginal microbiota and cytokine levels predict preterm delivery in Asian women. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2021;11:639665.
43. Hyman RW, Fukushima M, Jiang H, Fung E, Rand L, Johnson B, et al. Diversity of the vaginal microbiome correlates with preterm birth. Reprod Sci 2014;21:32–40.
44. Park S, Moon J, Kang N, Kim YH, You YA, Kwon E, et al. Predicting preterm birth through vaginal microbiota, cervical length, and WBC using a machine learning model. Front Microbiol 2022;13:912853.
45. Della Rosa PA, Miglioli C, Caglioni M, Tiberio F, Mosser KHH, Vignotto E, et al. A hierarchical procedure to select intrauterine and extrauterine factors for methodological validation of preterm birth risk estimation. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2021;21:306.
46. Urushiyama D, Ohnishi E, Suda W, Kurakazu M, Kiyoshima C, Hirakawa T, et al. Vaginal microbiome as a tool for prediction of chorioamnionitis in preterm labor: a pilot study. Sci Rep 2021;11:18971.
47. Heng YJ, Liong S, Permezel M, Rice GE, Di Quinzio MK, Georgiou HM. Human cervicovaginal fluid biomarkers to predict term and preterm labor. Front Physiol 2015;6:151.
48. Conde-Agudelo A, Papageorghiou AT, Kennedy SH, Villar J. Novel biomarkers for the prediction of the spontaneous preterm birth phenotype: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJOG 2011;118:1042–54.
49. Mohanty T, Doke PP, Khuroo SR. Effect of bacterial vaginosis on preterm birth: a meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2023;308:1247–55.
50. Ansari A, Son D, Hur YM, Park S, You YA, Kim SM, et al. Lactobacillus probiotics improve vaginal dysbiosis in asymptomatic women. Nutrients 2023;15:1862.
51. Abou Chacra L, Fenollar F, Diop K. Bacterial vaginosis: what do we currently know? Front Cell Infect Microbiol 2022;11:672429.
52. Brocklehurst P, Gordon A, Heatley E, Milan SJ. Antibiotics for treating bacterial vaginosis in pregnancy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;2013:CD000262.
53. Ma S, Wang W, Su Y, Sun W, Ma L. Antibiotics therapy combined with probiotics administered intravaginally for the treatment of bacterial vaginosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Open Med (Wars) 2023;18:20230644.
54. Nurainiwati SA, Ma’roef M, Pravitasari DN, Putra PYP. Effectivity and efficacy probiotics for bacterial vaginosis treatments: meta-analysis. Infect Dis Model 2022;7:597–604.
55. Corbett GA, Corcoran S, Feehily C, Soldati B, Rafferty A, MacIntyre DA, et al. Preterm-birth-prevention with Lactobacillus crispatus oral probiotics: protocol for a double blinded randomised placebo-controlled trial (the PrePOP study). Contemp Clin Trials 2025;149:107776.
56. Armstrong E, Hemmerling A, Miller S, Burke KE, Newmann SJ, Morris SR, et al. Sustained effect of LACTIN-V (Lactobacillus crispatus CTV-05) on genital immunology following standard bacterial vaginosis treatment: results from a randomised, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Microbe 2022;3:e435–42.
57. Cohen CR, Wierzbicki MR, French AL, Morris S, Newmann S, Reno H, et al. Randomized trial of lactin-V to prevent recurrence of bacterial vaginosis. N Engl J Med 2020;382:1906–15.
58. Bayar E, MacIntyre DA, Sykes L, Mountain K, Parks TP, Lee PP, et al. Safety, tolerability, and acceptability of Lactobacillus crispatus CTV-05 (LACTIN-V) in pregnant women at high-risk of preterm birth. Benef Microbes 2023;14:45–56.
59. Jarde A, Lewis-Mikhael AM, Moayyedi P, Stearns JC, Collins SM, Beyene J, et al. Pregnancy outcomes in women taking probiotics or prebiotics: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2018;18:14.
60. Fudaba M, Kamiya T, Tachibana D, Koyama M, Ohtani N. Bioinformatics analysis of oral, vaginal, and rectal microbial profiles during pregnancy: a pilot study on the bacterial co-residence in pregnant women. Microorganisms 2021;9:1027.
61. Lu X, Shi Z, Jiang L, Zhang S. Maternal gut microbiota in the health of mothers and offspring: from the perspective of immunology. Front Immunol 2024;15:1362784.
62. Sinha R, Abu-Ali G, Vogtmann E, Fodor AA, Ren B, Amir A, et al. Assessment of variation in microbial community amplicon sequencing by the microbiome quality control (MBQC) project consortium. Nat Biotechnol 2017;35:1077–86.
63. Sun S, Serrano MG, Fettweis JM, Basta P, Rosen E, Ludwig K, et al. Race, the vaginal microbiome, and spontaneous preterm birth. mSystems 2022;7:e0001722.
64. Liao J, Shenhav L, Urban JA, Serrano M, Zhu B, Buck GA, et al. Microdiversity of the vaginal microbiome is associated with preterm birth. bioRxiv 2023;14:4997.
65. France M, Alizadeh M, Brown S, Ma B, Ravel J. Towards a deeper understanding of the vaginal microbiota. Nat Microbiol 2022;7:367–78.
66. Feehily C, Crosby D, Walsh CJ, Lawton EM, Higgins S, McAuliffe FM, et al. Shotgun sequencing of the vaginal microbiome reveals both a species and functional potential signature of preterm birth. NPJ Biofilms Microbiomes 2020;6:50.
67. Wensel CR, Pluznick JL, Salzberg SL, Sears CL. Next-generation sequencing: insights to advance clinical investigations of the microbiome. J Clin Invest 2022;132:e154944.
68. Goodfellow L, Verwijs MC, Care A, Sharp A, Ivandic J, Poljak B, et al. Vaginal bacterial load in the second trimester is associated with early preterm birth recurrence: a nested case-control study. BJOG 2021;128:2061–72.
69. Chang DH, Shin J, Rhee MS, Park KR, Cho BK, Lee SK, et al. Vaginal microbiota profiles of native Korean women and associations with high-risk pregnancy. J Microbiol Biotechnol 2020;30:248–58.
70. Shi Y, Tanimura K, Sasagawa Y, Yamada H. Vaginal microbiota associated with preterm delivery. J Infect Chemother 2020;26:1134–8.
71. Tabatabaei N, Eren AM, Barreiro LB, Yotova V, Dumaine A, Allard C, et al. Vaginal microbiome in early pregnancy and subsequent risk of spontaneous preterm birth: a case-control study. BJOG 2019;126:349–58.

Article information Continued

Fig. 1

Vaginal microbiome and preterm birth. PTB, preterm birth.

Table 1

Summary of vaginal microbiome studies investigating sssociations with preterm birth risk

No. Study Ethnicity Sampling time Candidate microbiota (term birth) Candidate microbiota (preterm birth)
1 Kan et al. [31] (2022) Chinese Early second trimester L. crispatus, L. gasseri, L. jensenii Streptococcus, Proteobacteria, L. paragasseri/gasseri
2 Park et al. [34] (2022) Korean 15–36 weeks L. crispatus, L. gasseri, G. vaginalis Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron, Bacteroides fragilis, U. parvum, Prevotella bivia
3 Dunlop et al. [36] (2021) African American 8–14 weeks Non-iners Lactobacillus-dominant (CST I, II, V) CST III (L. iners-dominant), CST IV (high microbial diversity)
4 Kumar et al. [32] (2021) Indian Across all three trimesters L. gasseri L. iners, Megasphaera spp., G. vaginalis, Sneathia sanguinegens
5 Payne et al. [37] (2021) Australian (predominantly White, 74.3%) 12–23 weeks L. crispatus, L. gasseri, L. jensenii G. vaginalis (clade 4), L. iners, U. parvum
6 Goodfellow et al. [68] (2021) UK-based high-risk cohort 15–22 weeks Lactobacillus-dominated (except L. iners) High bacterial load (L. iners, anaerobes)
7 Kumar et al. [42] (2021) Asian (Karen and Burman) First trimester L. crispatus, Finegoldia Prevotella buccalis
8 Chang et al. [69] (2020) Korean 16–20 weeks L. crispatus L. iners, CST IV (diverse anaerobes)
9 Shi et al. [70] (2020) Irish (high-risk vs. low-risk group) Mid-pregnancy L. crispatus CST IV (G. vaginalis, A. vaginae)
10 Freitas et al. [33] (2018) Canadian 11–16 weeks L. crispatus, L. gasseri, L. jensenii G. vaginalis (subgroups A, B, C), Mollicutes
11 Tabatabaei et al. [71] (2019) White European First trimester (8+0 weeks to 13+6 weeks) High Lactobacillus presence, bifidobacterium G. vaginalis, A. vaginae and veillonellaceae bacterium (CST IV)
12 Son et al. [35] (2018) Multi-ethnic (African-American, non-African-American) 16–20 weeks Lactobacillus-dominant (CST I, II, III, V) CST IV (anaerobes, dysbiosis)
13 DiGiulio et al. [20] (2015) Canada Quebec (likely diverse) Early pregnancy L. gasseri, L. johnsonii, L. crispatus CST IV (BV-related microbiota)

L. crispatus, Lactobacillus crispatus; L. gasseri, Lactobacillus gasseri; L. jensenii, Lactobacillus jensenii; L. paragasseri, Lactobacillus paragasseri; G. vaginalis, Gardnerella vaginalis; U. parvum, Ureaplasma parvum; CST, community state types; L. iners, Lactobacillus iners; Megasphaera spp., Megasphaera species; A. vaginae, Atopobium vaginae; L. johnsonii, Lactobacillus johnsonii; BV, bacterial vaginosis.