Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35435458›Full record

ArticleApplied microbiology and biotechnology2022

Identification of tissue-specific microbial profile of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma by full-length 16S rDNA sequencing.

Weitao Shen, Derong Tang, Ping Wan, Zhenyan Peng, Mingjun Sun, Xinxin Guo, Ran Liu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Neutrophil Killing ofJournal of innate immunity · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Esophageal microflora in esophageal diseases.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Weitao ShenKey Laboratory of Environment Medicine Engineering, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210009, China.
Derong TangDepartment of Thoracic Surgery, The Affiliated Huaian No. 1 People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Huaian, 223300, Jiangsu, China.
Ping WanKey Laboratory of Environment Medicine Engineering, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210009, China.
Zhenyan PengKey Laboratory of Environment Medicine Engineering, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210009, China.
Mingjun SunKey Laboratory of Environment Medicine Engineering, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210009, China.
Xinxin GuoKey Laboratory of Environment Medicine Engineering, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210009, China.
Ran LiuKey Laboratory of Environment Medicine Engineering, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210009, China. ranliu@seu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8150-6799
Southeast University · CNHuaian First People’s Hospital · CNSoutheast University · BD

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It was previously believed that the microbial community in the esophagus was relatively stable, but it has been reported that different esophageal diseases have different microbial community characteristics. In this study, we recruited patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and collected 51 pairs of tumor and adjacent non-tumor tissues for full-length 16S rDNAsequencing and qPCR to compare the differences in microbial community structure. The results of sequencing in 19 pairs of tissues showed that Proteobacteria, Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Deinococcus-Thermus, and Actinobacteria were the main bacteria in tumor and adjacent non-tumor tissues. At the genus level, the bacteria with the highest relative proportion in tumor and adjacent non-tumor tissues were Streptococcus and Labrys, respectively. At the same time, it was observed that the complexity of microbial interactions in tumor tissues was weaker than that of adjacent non-tumor tissues. The results also found that the relative abundance of 24 taxa was statistically different between tumor and adjacent non-tumor tissues. The findings of qPCR in 32 pairs of tissues further evidence that the relative proportions of Blautia, Treponema, Lactobacillus murinus, Peptoanaerobacter stomatis, and Fusobacteria periodonticum were statistically different in tumor and adjacent non-tumor tissues. The findings of PIRCUSt2 indicated the lipopolysaccharide biosynthesis and biotin metabolism in the microbiome of cancer tissues are more significant. This study supplements the existing information on the structure, function, and interaction of microorganisms in the esophagus in situ and provides a direction for the further exploration of the relationship between esophageal in situ microorganisms and esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. KEY POINTS: • The structure of the microbial community in esophageal cancer tissue and adjacent non-tumor tissues at the phylum level is similar • Streptococcus and Labrys are the most important bacteria in esophageal tumor tissues and adjacent non-tumor tissues, respectively • Microbial interactions in tumor tissues are stronger than in adjacent non-tumor tissues.

Indexed as

Esophageal NeoplasmsEsophageal Squamous Cell CarcinomaMicrobiotaBacteriaDNA, RibosomalHumansProteobacteriaStreptococcusDNA, Ribosomal16S rDNA full-length sequencingEsophageal squamous cell carcinomaIn situ microorganismMicrobial profile

Identifiers

PMID35435458
OpenAlexW4224252949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.