Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33268597›Full record

SynthesisJCI insight2020

Meta-analysis of the gut microbiota in predicting response to cancer immunotherapy in metastatic melanoma.

Angelo Limeta, Boyang Ji, Max Levin, Francesco Gatto, Jens Nielsen

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JCI insight, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 101 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
101citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

101 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 174 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

41 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Angelo LimetaDepartment of Biology and Biological Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Boyang JiDepartment of Biology and Biological Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Max LevinWallenberg Laboratory for Cardiovascular Research, Department of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, and.
Francesco GattoDepartment of Biology and Biological Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Jens NielsenDepartment of Biology and Biological Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Chalmers University of Technology · SENovo Nordisk Foundation · DKSahlgrenska University Hospital · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUNDIdentifying factors conferring responses to therapy in cancer is critical to select the best treatment for patients. For immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI) therapy, mounting evidence suggests that the gut microbiome can determine patient treatment outcomes. However, the extent to which gut microbial features are applicable across different patient cohorts has not been extensively explored.METHODSWe performed a meta-analysis of 4 published shotgun metagenomic studies (Ntot = 130 patients) investigating differential microbiome composition and imputed metabolic function between responders and nonresponders to ICI.RESULTSOur analysis identified both known microbial features enriched in responders, such as Faecalibacterium as the prevailing taxa, as well as additional features, including overrepresentation of Barnesiella intestinihominis and the components of vitamin B metabolism. A classifier designed to predict responders based on these features identified responders in an independent cohort of 27 patients with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.625 (95% CI: 0.348-0.899) and was predictive of prognosis (HR = 0.35, P = 0.081).CONCLUSIONThese results suggest the existence of a fecal microbiome signature inherent across responders that may be exploited for diagnostic or therapeutic purposes.FUNDINGThis work was funded by the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, BioGaia AB, and Cancerfonden.

Indexed as

Area Under CurveBiomarkers, PharmacologicalFecesGastrointestinal MicrobiomeHumansImmunotherapyMelanomaMetagenomeMicrobiotaPrognosisTreatment OutcomeBiomarkers, PharmacologicalBioinformaticsCancer immunotherapyMelanomaMicrobiologyOncology

Identifiers

PMID33268597
PMCPMC7714408
OpenAlexW3106917142

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.