ArticleThe Pan African medical journal2022
Molecular characterization of gut microbial structure and diversity associated with colorectal cancer patients in Egypt.
Article in The Pan African medical journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is the oral pathogen, Porphyromona gingivalis, associated to colorectal cancer?: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Periodontitis and Oral Pathogens in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Long-read 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing reveals microbial characteristics in patients with colorectal adenomas and carcinoma lesions in Egypt.Gut pathogens · 2025Article
- A Scoping Review Evaluating the Current State of Gut Microbiota Research in Africa.Microorganisms · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: a large number of microbes colonizing the gut are highly diverse and complex in their structure, as this complex structure of gut microbiota acts as an indicator of a diseased state. Recently, there is a need for improved biomarkers for colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenoma. Among the CRC associated organisms, bacteria are the most common causes of serious disease and deaths. To understand the dynamic interaction among bacteria colonizing the gut, different approaches have been implicated. Methods: in this study, faecal microbial markers were evaluated for detecting CRC. As most of these organisms are anaerobic, different molecular tools are of great values for rapid detection of these bacteria. Samples from Tumor Hospital were screened for the presence of different pathogens by both usual polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and a real-time assay. Results: in a total of 34 samples, by PCR method, bifidobacterium, fusobacterium and Escherichia coli (E. coli) were mainly identified in almost all samples. However, a clear variation in bacterial composition could be observed in Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia and Peptostreptococcus magnus, where positive results could be detected only in diseased samples. In addition, E. faecium and E. saphenum were mainly identified in diseased samples. In contrast, providencia could be detected mainly in control samples. In realtime assay, the relative abundance was higher for fusobacterium and bifidobacterium markers in CRC patients compared to control samples. However, such increased in abundance has never been observed in both fusobacterium and bifidobacterium in the same sample. Conclusion: these results demonstrated increased abundance of fusobacterium or bifidobacterium can be considered as a sign for impairment or a diseased condition and the possibility of use of the faecal microbiotain CRC patients as a marker for detecting the disease.
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.