Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35196323›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2022

Multi-omics data integration reveals metabolome as the top predictor of the cervicovaginal microenvironment.

Nicholas A Bokulich, Paweł Łaniewski, Anja Adamov, Dana M Chase, J Gregory Caporaso, Melissa M Herbst-Kralovetz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
10.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Nicholas A BokulichLaboratory of Food Systems Biotechnology, Institute of Food, Nutrition, and Health, ETH Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-1784-8935
Paweł ŁaniewskiDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine-Phoenix, University of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, United States of America.
Anja AdamovLaboratory of Food Systems Biotechnology, Institute of Food, Nutrition, and Health, ETH Zürich, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-7506-1583
Dana M ChaseArizona Oncology, Phoenix, Arizona, United States of America.
J Gregory CaporasoCenter for Applied Microbiome Science, Pathogen and Microbiome Institute, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8865-1670
Melissa M Herbst-KralovetzDepartment of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine-Phoenix, University of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8540-5917
ETH Zurich · CHUniversity of Arizona · USArizona Oncology · USNorthern Arizona University · US

Funding

Training/Career Development and Education Core and PlansU54CA143925 · NCI · NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY · PI Jason A Wilder · 2009 to 2026
$27.5M
Uranium as an Environmental Risk Factor for Cancer Among the NavajoU54CA143924 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA · PI Jennifer Wright Bea · 2009 to 2026
$26.7M
Advanced Development of Informatics Technologies for Cancer Research and Management (U24 Clinical Trial Optional)U24CA248454 · NCI · NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY · PI CAPORASO, JAMES GREGORY · 2020 to 2024
$3.7M
NCI NIH HHS U24 CA248454NCI NIH HHS U54 CA143924NCI NIH HHS U54 CA143925
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Emerging evidence suggests that host-microbe interaction in the cervicovaginal microenvironment contributes to cervical carcinogenesis, yet dissecting these complex interactions is challenging. Herein, we performed an integrated analysis of multiple "omics" datasets to develop predictive models of the cervicovaginal microenvironment and identify characteristic features of vaginal microbiome, genital inflammation and disease status. Microbiomes, vaginal pH, immunoproteomes and metabolomes were measured in cervicovaginal specimens collected from a cohort (n = 72) of Arizonan women with or without cervical neoplasm. Multi-omics integration methods, including neural networks (mmvec) and Random Forest supervised learning, were utilized to explore potential interactions and develop predictive models. Our integrated analyses revealed that immune and cancer biomarker concentrations were reliably predicted by Random Forest regressors trained on microbial and metabolic features, suggesting close correspondence between the vaginal microbiome, metabolome, and genital inflammation involved in cervical carcinogenesis. Furthermore, we show that features of the microbiome and host microenvironment, including metabolites, microbial taxa, and immune biomarkers are predictive of genital inflammation status, but only weakly to moderately predictive of cervical neoplastic disease status. Different feature classes were important for prediction of different phenotypes. Lipids (e.g. sphingolipids and long-chain unsaturated fatty acids) were strong predictors of genital inflammation, whereas predictions of vaginal microbiota and vaginal pH relied mostly on alterations in amino acid metabolism. Finally, we identified key immune biomarkers associated with the vaginal microbiota composition and vaginal pH (MIF), as well as genital inflammation (IL-6, IL-10, MIP-1α).

Indexed as

MetabolomeMicrobiotaBiomarkers, TumorCarcinogenesisFemaleHumansInflammationTumor MicroenvironmentVaginaBiomarkers, Tumor

Identifiers

PMID35196323
PMCPMC8901057
OpenAlexW4212974503

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.