Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38217684›Full record

SynthesisClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2024

Changes in the fecal microbiota of breast cancer patients based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Biqing Luan, Fei Ge, Xingjia Lu, Zhiqiang Li, Hong Zhang, Jingxuan Wu, Qizhi Yang, Liang Chen, Wenzhu Zhang, Wenlin Chen

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Breast Cancer: Extracellular Matrix and Microbiome Interactions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
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

10 authors.

Biqing Luan *Department of Breast Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Fei Ge *Department of Breast Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Xingjia LuDepartment of Breast Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Zhiqiang LiDepartment of Breast Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Hong ZhangDepartment of Breast Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Jingxuan WuDepartment of Breast Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Qizhi YangDepartment of Breast Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Liang ChenDepartment of Breast Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Wenzhu ZhangDepartment of Breast Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China.
Wenlin ChenThird Department of Breast Surgery, Third Affiliated Hospital, Kunming Medical University, Kunming, China. chenwenlin1@hotmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8986-4064

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 82060538National Natural Science Foundation of China 82060543
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeBreast cancer (BC) is a devastating disease for women. Microbial influences may be involved in the development and progression of breast cancer. This study aimed to investigate the difference in intestinal flora abundance between breast cancer patients and healthy controls (HC) based on previous 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene sequencing results, which have been scattered and inconsistent in previous studies. MATERIALS AND

methodsIn agreement with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), we searched for pertinent literature in Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases from build until February 1, 2023. Relative abundance, diversity of intestinal microflora by level, microbial composition, community structure, diversity index, and other related data were extracted. We used a fixed or random effects model for data analysis. We also conducted funnel plot analysis, sensitivity analysis, Egger's, and Begg's tests to assess the bias risk.

resultsA total of ten studies involving 734 BC patients were enrolled. It was pointed out that there were significant differences in the Chao index between BC and HC in these studies [SMD = - 175.44 (95% CI - 246.50 to - 104.39)]. The relative abundance of Prevotellaceae [SMD = - 0.27 (95% CI - 0.39 to - 0.15)] and Bacteroides [SMD = 0.36 (95% CI 0.23-0.49)] was significantly different. In the included articles, the relative abundance of Prevotellaceae, Ruminococcus, Roseburia inulinivorans, and Faecalibacterium prausnitzii decreased in BC. Accordingly, the relative richness of Erysipelotrichaceae was high in BC.

conclusionsThis observational meta-analysis revealed that the changes in gut microbiota were correlated with BC, and the changes in some primary fecal microbiota might affect the beginning of breast cancer.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFecesGastrointestinal MicrobiomeFemaleHumansRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 16SBreast cancerChangesFecal microbiotaMeta-analysisSystematic review

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.