ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2020
A Significant Question in Cancer Risk and Therapy: Are Antibiotics Positive or Negative Effectors? Current Answers and Possible Alternatives.
Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Broad-Spectrum Antibiotics Attenuate the Chemotherapeutic Efficacy of Doxorubicin in MDA-MB-468 Breast Cancer Cells.International journal of breast cancer · 2026Article
- Mitochondrial bioenergetics and networks in melanoma: an update.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2025Review
- Review
- Gut dysbiosis mediates the association between antibiotic exposure and chronic disease.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Antibiotic therapy is associated with an increased incidence of cancer.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Emerging Evidence of the Gut Microbiome in Chemotherapy: A Clinical Review.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- Phage Therapy, Lysin Therapy, and Antibiotics: A Trio Due to Come.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Cancer is predominantly considered as an environmental disease caused by genetic or epigenetic alterations induced by exposure to extrinsic (e.g., carcinogens, pollutants, radiation) or intrinsic (e.g., metabolic, immune or genetic deficiencies). Over-exposure to antibiotics, which is favored by unregulated access as well as inappropriate prescriptions by physicians, is known to have led to serious health problems such as the rise of antibiotic resistance, in particular in poorly developed countries. In this review, the attention is focused on evaluating the effects of antibiotic exposure on cancer risk and on the outcome of cancer therapeutic protocols, either directly acting as extrinsic promoters, or indirectly, through interactions with the human gut microbiota. The preponderant evidence derived from information reported over the last 10 years confirms that antibiotic exposure tends to increase cancer risk and, unfortunately, that it reduces the efficacy of various forms of cancer therapy (e.g., chemo-, radio-, and immunotherapy alone or in combination). Alternatives to the current patterns of antibiotic use, such as introducing new antibiotics, bacteriophages or enzybiotics, and implementing dysbiosis-reducing microbiota modulatory strategies in oncology, are discussed. The information is in the end considered from the perspective of the most recent findings on the tumor-specific and intracellular location of the tumor microbiota, and of the most recent theories proposed to explain cancer etiology on the notion of regression of the eukaryotic cells and systems to stages characterized for a lack of coordination among their components of prokaryotic origin, which is promoted by injuries caused by environmental insults.
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.