ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2024
Explainable artificial intelligence for microbiome data analysis in colorectal cancer biomarker identification.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gut microbial alterations and functional shifts in patients with hypertriglyceridemia: insights from a northwestern Chinese metagenomic study.International microbiology : the official journal of the Spanish Society for Microbiology · 2026Article
- Review
- Decoding the cancer microbiome: multi-omics, AI, and translational opportunities.Genome biology · 2026Review
- Microbiome in Gastrointestinal Tumors: Implications in Oncogenesis and Therapeutic Response : Microbiome in Gastrointestinal Tumors.Current oncology reports · 2026Review
- Review
- A systematic review of artificial intelligence and machine learning for gut microbiome-based CRC screening.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Review
- Review
- Microbiota-host interaction in colorectal cancer: emerging computational technology, multi-omics integration, and mechanisms.Cancer biology & medicine · 2026Review
- Multi-layer gut microbiome variation in type 2 diabetes despite preserved higher-order community structure.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Oral dysbiosis: methodological evolution, the mobile resistome and the future of machine learning in dentistry.Journal of oral microbiology · 2026Review
- Gastrointestinal microbiota and inflammasomes interplay in health and disease: a gut feeling.Gut · 2025Review
- Personalized colorectal cancer risk assessment through explainable AI and Gut microbiome profiling.Gut microbes · 2025Article
- Integrative pan-cancer analysis of intratumoral microbial communities for biomarker discovery and diagnostic modeling.Journal of translational medicine · 2025Article
- Systems biology and microbiome innovations for personalized diabetic retinopathy management.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2025Review
- Harnessing gut microbiota for colorectal cancer therapy: from clinical insights to therapeutic innovations.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Review
- MicroAIbiome: Decoding Cancer Types from Microbial Profiles Using Explainable Machine Learning.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- A Comprehensive Oncological Biomarker Framework Guiding Precision Medicine.Biomolecules · 2025Review
- Gut microbiota and tuberculosis.iMeta · 2025Review
- The Enteric Microbiome in Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer: A Comprehensive Review of Its Role as a Biomarker of Disease.Clinical and translational gastroenterology · 2025Review
- 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
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a type of tumor caused by the uncontrolled growth of cells in the mucosa lining the last part of the intestine. Emerging evidence underscores an association between CRC and gut microbiome dysbiosis. The high mortality rate of this cancer has made it necessary to develop new early diagnostic methods. Machine learning (ML) techniques can represent a solution to evaluate the interaction between intestinal microbiota and host physiology. Through explained artificial intelligence (XAI) it is possible to evaluate the individual contributions of microbial taxonomic markers for each subject. Our work also implements the Shapley Method Additive Explanations (SHAP) algorithm to identify for each subject which parameters are important in the context of CRC. Results: The proposed study aimed to implement an explainable artificial intelligence framework using both gut microbiota data and demographic information from subjects to classify a cohort of control subjects from those with CRC. Our analysis revealed an association between gut microbiota and this disease. We compared three machine learning algorithms, and the Random Forest (RF) algorithm emerged as the best classifier, with a precision of 0.729 ± 0.038 and an area under the Precision-Recall curve of 0.668 ± 0.016. Additionally, SHAP analysis highlighted the most crucial variables in the model's decision-making, facilitating the identification of specific bacteria linked to CRC. Our results confirmed the role of certain bacteria, such as Discussion: These findings emphasizes the potential of leveraging gut microbiota data within an explainable AI framework for CRC classification. The significant association observed aligns with existing knowledge. The precision exhibited by the RF algorithm reinforces its suitability for such classification tasks. The SHAP analysis not only enhanced interpretability but identified specific bacteria crucial in CRC determination. This approach opens avenues for targeted interventions based on microbial signatures. Further exploration is warranted to deepen our understanding of the intricate interplay between microbiota and health, providing insights for refined diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.
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.