Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35553675›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2022

The healthy female microbiome across body sites: effect of hormonal contraceptives and the menstrual cycle.

Maria Christine Krog, Luisa W Hugerth, Emma Fransson, Zahra Bashir, Anders Nyboe Andersen, Gabriella Edfeldt, Lars Engstrand, Ina Schuppe-Koistinen, Henriette Svarre Nielsen

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 88 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
88citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
17.6field-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

88 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 138 citations in OpenAlex.

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

28 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria Christine KrogThe Recurrent Pregnancy Loss Unit, The Capital Region, Rigshospitalet and Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-2110-0479
Luisa W HugerthCentre for Translational Microbiome Research, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology (MTC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-5432-1764
Emma FranssonCentre for Translational Microbiome Research, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology (MTC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-9010-8522
Zahra BashirThe Recurrent Pregnancy Loss Unit, The Capital Region, Rigshospitalet and Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-2497-282X
Anders Nyboe AndersenThe Fertility Department Section 4071, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Gabriella EdfeldtCentre for Translational Microbiome Research, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology (MTC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-0366-5588
Lars EngstrandCentre for Translational Microbiome Research, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology (MTC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-7713-2373
Ina Schuppe-KoistinenCentre for Translational Microbiome Research, Department of Microbiology, Tumor and Cell Biology (MTC), Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-1423-3089
Henriette Svarre NielsenThe Recurrent Pregnancy Loss Unit, The Capital Region, Rigshospitalet and Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-2106-8103
Hvidovre Hospital · DKScience for Life Laboratory · SEKarolinska Institutet · SECopenhagen University Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionHow does hormonal contraceptive use and menstrual cycle phase affect the female microbiome across different body sites? SUMMARY ANSWER: The menstrual cycle phase, but not hormonal contraceptive use, is associated with the vaginal and oral but not the gut microbiome composition in healthy young women. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Women with low vaginal levels of Lactobacillus crispatus are at increased risk of pre-term birth, fertility treatment failure, sexually transmitted infections and gynaecological cancers. Little is known about the effect of hormonal fluctuations on other body site's microbiomes as well as the interplay between them. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This study includes a cohort of 160 healthy young Danish women using three different contraceptive regimens: non-hormonal methods (n = 54), combined oral contraceptive (COC, n = 52) or levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS, n = 54). Samples were collected from four body sites during the menstrual cycle (menses, follicular and luteal phases) at Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Denmark. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,

methodsThe oral, vaginal, rectal and faecal microbiomes were characterized by shotgun sequencing. Microbial diversity and community distance measures were compared between study groups, menstrual phase timepoints and body sites. All participants answered an extensive questionnaire on current health, lifestyle and sex life. Confounding factors such as smoking, BMI and diet were analysed by PERMANOVA. Plasma oestradiol and progesterone levels are correlated with microbiome composition. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The use of COC and LNG-IUS was not associated with the microbiome composition or diversity. However, increased diversity in the vaginal microbiome was observed during menses, followed by a subsequent expansion of Lactobacillus spp. during the follicular and luteal phases which correlated with measured serum oestradiol levels (r = 0.11, P < 0.001). During menses, 89 women (58%) had a dysbiotic vaginal microbiome with <60% Lactobacillus spp. This declined to 49 (32%) in the follicular phase (P < 0.001) and 44 (29%) in the luteal phase (P < 0.001). During menses, bacterial richness and diversity in saliva reached its lowest point while no differences were observed in the faecal microbiome. The microbiome in different body sites was on average more similar within the same individual than between individuals, despite phase or hormonal treatment. Only the vagina presented a clear cluster structure with dominance of either L. crispatus, Lactobacillus iners, Gardnerella vaginalis or Prevotella spp. LARGE SCALE DATA: The microbiome samples analysed in this study were submitted to the European Nucleotide Archive under project number PRJEB37731, samples ERS4421369-ERS4422941. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The cohort is homogenous which limits extrapolation of the effects of ethnicity and socio-economic status on the microbiome. We only present three defined timepoints across the menstrual phase and miss potential important day to day fluctuations. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsThe use of hormonal contraception did not significantly associate with the microbiome composition in the vagina, faeces, rectum or saliva in healthy young women. This is a welcome finding considering the widespread and prolonged use of these highly efficient contraceptive methods. The menstrual cycle is, however, a major confounding factor for the vaginal microbiome. As such, the time point in the menstrual cycle should be considered when analysing the microbiome of women of reproductive age, since stratifying by vaginal dysbiosis status during menstruation could be misleading. This is the first study to confirm by direct measurements of oestradiol, a correlation with the presence of L. crispatus, adding evidence of a possible hormonal mechanism for the maintenance of this desirable microbe. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This work was partly funded by the Ferring Pharmaceuticals through a research collaboration with The Centre for Translational Microbiome Research (CTMR) at the Karolinska Institutet (L.W.H., E.F., G.E. and I.S.-K.). Ferring Pharmaceuticals also funded the infrastructure to obtain the clinical samples at Copenhagen University Hospital ([#MiHSN01], M.C.K., Z.B., and H.S.N.). This work was also supported by funding from Rigshospitalet's Research Funds ([#E-22614-01 and #E-22614-02] to M.C.K.) and Oda and Hans Svenningsen's Foundation ([#F-22614-08] to H.S.N.). M.C.K., L.W.H., E.F., Z.B., G.E., L.E., I.S.-K. and H.S.N., are partially funded by Ferring Pharmaceuticals, which also provided funds for the collection and processing of the samples analysed in this study. H.S.N.'s research is further supported by Freya Biosciences and the BioInnovation Institute. H.S.N. has received honoraria from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Merck A/S, Astra-Zeneca, Cook Medical and Ibsa Nordic. A.N.A. reports no competing interests.

Indexed as

Contraceptive AgentsMicrobiotaEstradiolFemaleHumansMenstrual CyclePharmaceutical PreparationsContraceptive AgentsEstradiolPharmaceutical Preparationshormonal contraceptivesmenstrual cyclemicrobiomeshotgun sequencingwomens reproductive health

Identifiers

PMID35553675
PMCPMC9247429
OpenAlexW4226044348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.