Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37699008›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Integrating current analyses of the breast cancer microbiome.

Sidra Sohail, Michael B Burns

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Therapeutic potential of microbiome modulation in reproductive cancers.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sidra SohailDepartment of Biology Bioinformatics Program, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America.ORCID 0009-0002-1869-4285
Michael B BurnsDepartment of Biology Bioinformatics Program, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, United States of America.
Loyola University Chicago · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many cancer types have significant associations with their resident microbial communities-emerging evidence suggests that breast cancers also interact with the local tissue-associated microbiota. Microbiome research advances rapidly and analysis pipelines and databases are updated frequently. This dynamic environment makes comparative evaluations challenging. Here, we have integrated all publicly available studies related to breast cancer and the mammary microbiome in light of advances in this rapidly progressing field. Based on alpha diversity, beta diversity, proportional abundance, and statistical analyses, we observed differences between our modern analytical approaches and the original findings. We were able to classify and identify additional taxa across samples through abundance analyses and identify previously unidentified statistically significant taxa. In our updated analyses there were more taxa identified as statistically significant in comparison to the original studies' results. In the re-analysis for The Microbiome of Aseptically Collected Human Breast Tissue in Benign and Malignant Disease by Hieken et al., there were twelve statistically significant differentially abundant taxa identified in breast tissue microbiota in benign and invasive cancer disease states. In the re-analysis for The Microbiota of Breast Tissue and Its Association with Breast Cancer by Urbaniak et al., there were 18 taxa identified as statistically significant. In the re-analysis for Characterization of the microbiome of nipple aspirate fluid of breast cancer survivors by Chan et al., there were three genera identified as statistically significant in the skin and fluid samples. Our work has discovered that reanalyses are necessary for microbiome studies, especially older 16S studies. Through our re-analysis, we classified and identified more phyla and genera across studies, which supports the notion that reanalyses provide new insights to the microbiome field and help to assess robusticity of previously published findings by using new and updated tools and databases.

Indexed as

Cancer SurvivorsMicrobiotaNeoplasmsDatabases, FactualHumansResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID37699008
PMCPMC10497162
OpenAlexW4386647578

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.