Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37365438›Full record

SynthesisNature reviews. Clinical oncology2023

Gut OncoMicrobiome Signatures (GOMS) as next-generation biomarkers for cancer immunotherapy.

Andrew Maltez Thomas, Marine Fidelle, Bertrand Routy, Guido Kroemer, Jennifer A Wargo, Nicola Segata, Laurence Zitvogel

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
26.5field-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

89 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 115 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Clinical potential of the gut microbiome in oncology: a scoping review of treatment response, toxicity and biomarker development.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

29 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Andrew Maltez Thomas *Department CIBIO, University of Trento, Trento, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5789-3354
Marine Fidelle *Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France.ORCID 0000-0002-5589-9688
Bertrand Routy *Centre de Recherche du Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CRCHUM), Montréal, Quebec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1955-9149
Guido KroemerCentre de Recherche des Cordeliers, INSERM U1138, Equipe labellisée - Ligue Nationale contre le cancer, Université de Paris, Institut Universitaire de France, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-9334-4405
Jennifer A WargoDepartment of Genomic Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3438-7576
Nicola SegataDepartment CIBIO, University of Trento, Trento, Italy.
Laurence ZitvogelGustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Villejuif, France. laurence.zitvogel@gustaveroussy.fr.ORCID 0000-0003-1596-0998
Inserm · FRUniversity of Trento · ITCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal · CAThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · US

Funding

Exploiting Public Metagenomic Data to Uncover Cancer-Microbiome RelationshipsR01CA230551 · NCI · GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND HEALTH POLICY · PI Levi Waldron · 2020 to 2026
$3.9M
(PQ10) Enhancing responses to immune checkpoint blockade in melanoma via modulation of the microbiomeR01CA219896 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI WARGO, JENNIFER A. · 2018 to 2022
$2.2M
Exploiting public metagenomic data to uncover cancer-microbiome relationshipsU01CA230551 · NCI · GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH AND HEALTH POLICY · PI WALDRON, LEVI · 2019 to 2019
$464k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA219896NCI NIH HHS R01 CA230551NCI NIH HHS U01 CA230551
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oncogenesis is associated with intestinal dysbiosis, and stool shotgun metagenomic sequencing in individuals with this condition might constitute a non-invasive approach for the early diagnosis of several cancer types. The prognostic relevance of antibiotic intake and gut microbiota composition urged investigators to develop tools for the detection of intestinal dysbiosis to enable patient stratification and microbiota-centred clinical interventions. Moreover, since the advent of immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in oncology, the identification of biomarkers for predicting their efficacy before starting treatment has been an unmet medical need. Many previous studies addressing this question, including a meta-analysis described herein, have led to the description of Gut OncoMicrobiome Signatures (GOMS). In this Review, we discuss how patients with cancer across various subtypes share several GOMS with individuals with seemingly unrelated chronic inflammatory disorders who, in turn, tend to have GOMS different from those of healthy individuals. We discuss findings from the aforementioned meta-analysis of GOMS patterns associated with clinical benefit from or resistance to ICIs across different cancer types (in 808 patients), with a focus on metabolic and immunological surrogate markers of intestinal dysbiosis, and propose practical guidelines to incorporate GOMS in decision-making for prospective clinical trials in immuno-oncology.

Indexed as

DysbiosisNeoplasmsBiomarkersHumansImmunotherapyProspective StudiesBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID37365438
PMCPMC11258874
OpenAlexW4382020994

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.