ReviewJournal of thoracic disease2023
Narrative review: respiratory tract microbiome and never smoking lung cancer.
Review in Journal of thoracic disease, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Signals in Peripheral Blood: Tracking Redox Status and DNA Damage Response During the Progression of Multiple Myeloma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- A real-world evidence of sputum microbiota alterations and their association with oncogenomic changes and response to targeted therapies in patients with lung cancer.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Impact of RNA extraction on respiratory microbiome analysis using third-generation sequencing.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- The impact of environmental factors on respiratory tract microbiome and respiratory system diseases.European journal of medical research · 2025Review
- Causal influence of gut microbiota on small cell lung cancer: a Mendelian randomization study.The clinical respiratory journal · 2024Article
- Structural and Functional Alterations of Microbiome in Upper and Lower Respiratory Tract in Patients With NSCLC.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objective: The lung microbiome was previously thought to be a sterile environment where only gaseous exchange takes place, but recent studies have shown the presence of microbiota in the lung. This review investigates the current literature on the effects of an environmental driven dysbiosis on the healthy oral and respiratory microbiome and its relationship to lung cancer risk in never-smokers. Methods: An online electronic search was performed on PubMed of all English-language literature using combinations of the following keywords: "lung cancer", "dysbiosis", "non-smokers", "oral microbiome", and "respiratory microbiome". All population-based studies reporting results on oral and/or respiratory microbiome in adults were considered for our narrative review. Key Content and Findings: Metagenomic analyses have been performed on isolated samples from healthy participants and compared to samples from those with lung cancer. Research shows that a decrease in alpha diversity of microbes in the oral microbiome is associated with increased risk of lung cancer, along with differences in beta diversity in the sputum of lung cancer cases and healthy controls. Further, several studies have observed that significant changes in the abundance of genera such as increased abundance of Conclusions: These findings suggest potential carcinogenic processes such as increased inflammation associated with changes in flora. Additionally, studies showed that increase in certain taxa such as
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.