ArticleOncotarget2016
Association of oncogenic bacteria with colorectal cancer in South China.
Article in Oncotarget, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
53 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systemic review of the role of enterotoxic Bacteroides fragilis in colorectal cancer.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Pooled it
- A systematic review of microbial markers for risk prediction of colorectal neoplasia.British journal of cancer · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Diagnostic Performance of IntestinalChinese medical journal · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Intratumoral microbiota in colorectal cancer: roles, therapeutic potential, and challenges.Journal of advanced research · 2026Review
- An anaerobic pathogen rewires host metabolism to fuel oxidative growth in the inflamed gut.Cell · 2026Article
- Fusobacterium nucleatum is enriched in invasive biofilms in colorectal cancer.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Article
- Intratumoural pksEBioMedicine · 2025Article
- Tumor microbiome: roles in tumor initiation, progression, and therapy.Molecular biomedicine · 2025Review
- Potential Pathogens Associated with Colorectal Cancer.Current pharmaceutical biotechnology · 2025Review
- Article
- Enrichment of Bacteroides fragilis and enterotoxigenic Bacteroides fragilis in CpG island methylator phenotype-high colorectal carcinoma.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2024Article
- Intratumoral presence of the genotoxic gut bacteria pksBritish journal of cancer · 2024Article
- Gut microbiota characteristics of colorectal cancer patients in Hubei, China, and differences with cohorts from other Chinese regions.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Association ofHeliyon · 2023Article
- Correlation of gut microbiota with leukopenia after chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer.BMC microbiology · 2023Article
- Evaluation of enterotoxigenic Bacteroides fragilis correlation with the expression of cellular signaling pathway genes in Iranian patients with colorectal cancer.Infectious agents and cancer · 2023Article
- Understanding the mechanisms and translational implications of the microbiome for cancer therapy innovation.Nature cancer · 2023Review
- Cross-Kingdom Interaction of miRNAs and Gut Microbiota with Non-Invasive Diagnostic and Therapeutic Implications in Colorectal Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To quantify Fusobacterium spp., Enterococcus faecalis (E.faecalis), Enterotoxigenic Bacteroides fragilis (ETBF), and Enteropathogenic Escherichia coli in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and their possible association with CRC clinicopathogical features, we collected the resected tumors and adjacent normal tissues (N) from 97 CRC patients. 48 age- and sex-matched healthy controls (HC) were also recruited. Real-time PCR was used for bacterial quantification. The median abundance ofFusobacterium spp.(p < 0.001, vs. N; p < 0.01,vs. HC), E.faecalis (p < 0.05, vs. N; p < 0.01, vs. HC) and ETBF (p < 0.001, vs. N; p < 0.05,vs. HC) in tumor tissues was significantly higher than that detected in normal tissue and HC. E.faecalis was detected in 95.88% of tumors and 93.81% of adjacent tissues. Fusobacterium spp. was detected in 72.16% of tumors and 67.01% of adjacent tissues. The combined E.faecalis and Fusobacterium spp. were detected in 70.10% of tumors and 36.08% of adjacent normal tissues. All four bacteria were detected in 33.72% and 22.09% of paired tumor and adjacent normal tissues, respectively. E.faecalis and Fusobacterium spp. are enriched in both tumor and adjacent tissue of CRC patients when compared to HC, suggesting that it is possible to be previously undetected changes in the pathohistologically normal colon tissue in the proximity of the tumor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.