Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29642940›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2018

Multi-cohort analysis of colorectal cancer metagenome identified altered bacteria across populations and universal bacterial markers.

Zhenwei Dai, Olabisi Oluwabukola Coker, Geicho Nakatsu, William K K Wu, Liuyang Zhao, Zigui Chen, Francis K L Chan, Karsten Kristiansen, Joseph J Y Sung, Sunny Hei Wong and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiome, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 316 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
316citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

316 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. FecalInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

256 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Zhenwei DaiInstitute of Digestive Disease and Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Olabisi Oluwabukola CokerInstitute of Digestive Disease and Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Geicho NakatsuInstitute of Digestive Disease and Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
William K K WuInstitute of Digestive Disease and Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Liuyang ZhaoInstitute of Digestive Disease and Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Zigui ChenDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Francis K L ChanInstitute of Digestive Disease and Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Karsten KristiansenLaboratory of Genomics and Molecular Biomedicine, Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Joseph J Y SungInstitute of Digestive Disease and Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong.
Sunny Hei WongInstitute of Digestive Disease and Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong. wonghei@cuhk.edu.hk.ORCID 0000-0002-3354-9310
Jun YuInstitute of Digestive Disease and Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, State Key Laboratory of Digestive Disease, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Sciences, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong. junyu@cuhk.edu.hk.

Funding

135 Program Project China 2016YFC1303200973 Program China 2013CB531401National Key Technology R&D Program 2014BAI09B05RGC-GRF 766613, 14106145, 14111216
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlterations of gut microbiota are associated with colorectal cancer (CRC) in different populations and several bacterial species were found to contribute to the tumorigenesis. The potential use of gut microbes as markers for early diagnosis has also been reported. However, cohort specific noises may distort the structure of microbial dysbiosis in CRC and lead to inconsistent results among studies. In this regard, our study targeted at exploring changes in gut microbiota that are universal across populations at species level.

resultsBased on the combined analysis of 526 metagenomic samples from Chinese, Austrian, American, and German and French cohorts, seven CRC-enriched bacteria (Bacteroides fragilis, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Porphyromonas asaccharolytica, Parvimonas micra, Prevotella intermedia, Alistipes finegoldii, and Thermanaerovibrio acidaminovorans) have been identified across populations. The seven enriched bacterial markers classified cases from controls with an area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.80 across the different populations. Abundance correlation analysis demonstrated that CRC-enriched and CRC-depleted bacteria respectively formed their own mutualistic networks, in which the latter was disjointed in CRC. The CRC-enriched bacteria have been found to be correlated with lipopolysaccharide and energy biosynthetic pathways.

conclusionsOur study identified potential diagnostic bacterial markers that are robust across populations, indicating their potential universal use for non-invasive CRC diagnosis. We also elucidated the ecological networks and functional capacities of CRC-associated microbiota.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeMetagenomeMetagenomicsAgedBacteriaCell Transformation, NeoplasticColorectal NeoplasmsComputational BiologyFemaleGene OntologyHumansMaleMiddle AgedColorectal cancerDiagnostic markerEcologyMicrobiota

Identifiers

PMID29642940
PMCPMC5896039

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.