ArticleCancers2022
Meta-Analysis and Validation of a Colorectal Cancer Risk Prediction Model Using Deep Sequenced Fecal Metagenomes.
Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbiome signatures for detection of colorectal lesions in population-based FIT screening.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Microbiota disparities in stool, oral swabs, and saliva between control and early-onset colorectal neoplasia groups: an exploratory analysis.Frontiers in microbiomes · 2026Article
- Phenotypic characterization and complete genome of a tumorigenic pathobiont Escherichia coli LI60C3.Gut pathogens · 2025Article
- Pooled analysis of 3,741 stool metagenomes from 18 cohorts for cross-stage and strain-level reproducible microbial biomarkers of colorectal cancer.Nature medicine · 2025Article
- Gut microbiome in colorectal cancer: metagenomics from bench to bedside.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2025Review
- Diet Impacts on Gene Expression in Healthy Colon Tissue: Insights from the BarcUVa-Seq Study.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Comparison between 16S rRNA and shotgun sequencing in colorectal cancer, advanced colorectal lesions, and healthy human gut microbiota.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- Article
- Performance of a Shotgun Prediction Model for Colorectal Cancer When Using 16S rRNA Sequencing Data.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Identifying fecal microbiota signatures of colorectal cancer in a Vietnamese cohort.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The gut microbiome is a potential modifiable risk factor for colorectal cancer (CRC). We re-analyzed all eight previously published stool sequencing data and conducted an MWAS meta-analysis. We used cross-validated LASSO predictive models to identify a microbiome signature for predicting the risk of CRC and precancerous lesions. These models were validated in a new study, Colorectal Cancer Screening (COLSCREEN), including 156 participants that were recruited in a CRC screening context. The MWAS meta-analysis identified 95 bacterial species that were statistically significantly associated with CRC (FDR < 0.05). The LASSO CRC predictive model obtained an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (aROC) of 0.81 (95%CI: 0.78−0.83) and the validation in the COLSCREEN dataset was 0.75 (95%CI: 0.66−0.84). This model selected a total of 32 species. The aROC of this CRC-trained model to predict precancerous lesions was 0.52 (95%CI: 0.41−0.63). We have identified a signature of 32 bacterial species that have a good predictive accuracy to identify CRC but not precancerous lesions, suggesting that the identified microbes that were enriched or depleted in CRC are merely a consequence of the tumor. Further studies should focus on CRC as well as precancerous lesions with the intent to implement a microbiome signature in CRC screening programs.
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.