ArticleBMC cancer2023
Identifying important microbial and genomic biomarkers for differentiating right- versus left-sided colorectal cancer using random forest models.
Article in BMC cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- The application of random forest-based models in prognostication of gastrointestinal tract malignancies: a systematic review.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Pooled it
- DNA methylation signatures of sporadic colorectal cancer with microsatellite instability.Epigenetics · 2026Article
- Prevalence aware feature selection improves biomarker identification in microbiome studies.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Metabolism-Driven Modulation by the Human Microbiota: Implications for Cancer Therapy and Emerging Strategies.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- Unveiling hidden players: the role of intratumoral microbiota in gastrointestinal cancer dynamics.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Review
- Recent advances and challenges in colorectal cancer: From molecular research to treatment.World journal of gastroenterology · 2025Review
- Does side matter? Deciphering mechanisms that underpin side-dependent pathogenesis and therapy response in colorectal cancer.Molecular cancer · 2025Review
- Mucosal Microbiome Markers of Complete Pathologic Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy in Rectal Carcinoma.Cancer research communications · 2025Article
- Clinical Validation of a Machine Learning-Based Biomarker Signature to Predict Response to Cytotoxic Chemotherapy Alone or Combined with Targeted Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Study Protocol and Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- pyRforest: a comprehensive R package for genomic data analysis featuring scikit-learn Random Forests in R.Briefings in functional genomics · 2025Article
- Microbiota as diagnostic biomarkers: advancing early cancer detection and personalized therapeutic approaches through microbiome profiling.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Gut Microbiome and Metabolite Characteristics Associated With Different Clinical Stages in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.Cancer management and research · 2025Article
- Topological embedding and directional feature importance in ensemble classifiers for multi-class classification.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024Article
- Intratumoral microbiota in colorectal cancer: focus on specific distribution and potential mechanisms.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2024Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) is a heterogeneous disease, with subtypes that have different clinical behaviours and subsequent prognoses. There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that right-sided colorectal cancer (RCC) and left-sided colorectal cancer (LCC) also differ in treatment success and patient outcomes. Biomarkers that differentiate between RCC and LCC are not well-established. Here, we apply random forest (RF) machine learning methods to identify genomic or microbial biomarkers that differentiate RCC and LCC.
methodsRNA-seq expression data for 58,677 coding and non-coding human genes and count data for 28,557 human unmapped reads were obtained from 308 patient CRC tumour samples. We created three RF models for datasets of human genes-only, microbes-only, and genes-and-microbes combined. We used a permutation test to identify features of significant importance. Finally, we used differential expression (DE) and paired Wilcoxon-rank sum tests to associate features with a particular side.
resultsRF model accuracy scores were 90%, 70%, and 87% with area under curve (AUC) of 0.9, 0.76, and 0.89 for the human genomic, microbial, and combined feature sets, respectively. 15 features were identified as significant in the model of genes-only, 54 microbes in the model of microbes-only, and 28 genes and 18 microbes in the model with genes-and-microbes combined. PRAC1 expression was the most important feature for differentiating RCC and LCC in the genes-only model, with HOXB13, SPAG16, HOXC4, and RNLS also playing a role. Ruminococcus gnavus and Clostridium acetireducens were the most important in the microbial-only model. MYOM3, HOXC4, Coprococcus eutactus, PRAC1, lncRNA AC012531.25, Ruminococcus gnavus, RNLS, HOXC6, SPAG16 and Fusobacterium nucleatum were most important in the combined model.
conclusionsMany of the identified genes and microbes among all models have previously established associations with CRC. However, the ability of RF models to account for inter-feature relationships within the underlying decision trees may yield a more sensitive and biologically interconnected set of genomic and microbial biomarkers.
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.