ArticleNature medicine2024
Microbiome confounders and quantitative profiling challenge predicted microbial targets in colorectal cancer development.
Article in Nature medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 96 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
96 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Gut microbiota-associated predictors as biomarkers of neoadjuvant treatment response in rectal cancer-a systematic review.British journal of cancer · 2026Pooled it
- Cooking methods affect advanced glycation end products and lipid profiles: A randomized cross-over study in healthy subjects.Cell reports. Medicine · 2025Trial
- Pangenome analysis reveals both niche-specific "specialists" and microbial "side hustlers" in colorectal cancer microbiomes.Gut microbes · 2026Article
- Article
- Deconfounded, quantitative microbiome profiling identifies robust multiple sclerosis markers and clinical covariate associations.Gut microbes · 2026Article
- The "oral-gut axis" transmission of microorganisms in colorectal cancer: Insights fromVirulence · 2026Review
- Gut microbiota signatures and machine learning-based candidate feature prioritization in advanced colorectal cancer.Archives of microbiology · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Signaling Pathways, Clinical Features, Screening, Diagnosis, and Management.MedComm · 2026Review
- Decoding the cancer microbiome: multi-omics, AI, and translational opportunities.Genome biology · 2026Review
- Microbial Signals in Cancer: Dissecting Host-Microbiota-Tumor Interactions and Potential Therapeutic Strategy.MedComm · 2026Review
- Integrative multicohort analysis reveals consistent sex differences in gut microbiota of multiple sclerosis patients.mSystems · 2026Article
- Emerging trends in the global burden of colorectal cancer.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2026Review
- Dissecting the Ecological Structure of Health and Disease in the Global Gut Microbiome.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Clinical applications of gut microbiome for non-invasive diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia.Journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- Microbiome signatures for detection of colorectal lesions in population-based FIT screening.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Prostate Cancer at the Microbial Crossroads: Illuminating a New Frontier in Precision Medicine.The world journal of men's health · 2026Review
- Gut microbiota dysbiosis in intensive care unit patients with acute kidney injury: insights from 16S sequencing and mediation analysis.BMC nephrology · 2026Article
- Targeting the Human Gut Microbiota-Between Conventional Therapy and Precision Genetic Engineering.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Article
- Harnessing the microbiome for cancer therapy.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2026Review
36 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite substantial progress in cancer microbiome research, recognized confounders and advances in absolute microbiome quantification remain underused; this raises concerns regarding potential spurious associations. Here we study the fecal microbiota of 589 patients at different colorectal cancer (CRC) stages and compare observations with up to 15 published studies (4,439 patients and controls total). Using quantitative microbiome profiling based on 16S ribosomal RNA amplicon sequencing, combined with rigorous confounder control, we identified transit time, fecal calprotectin (intestinal inflammation) and body mass index as primary microbial covariates, superseding variance explained by CRC diagnostic groups. Well-established microbiome CRC targets, such as Fusobacterium nucleatum, did not significantly associate with CRC diagnostic groups (healthy, adenoma and carcinoma) when controlling for these covariates. In contrast, the associations of Anaerococcus vaginalis, Dialister pneumosintes, Parvimonas micra, Peptostreptococcus anaerobius, Porphyromonas asaccharolytica and Prevotella intermedia remained robust, highlighting their future target potential. Finally, control individuals (age 22-80 years, mean 57.7 years, standard deviation 11.3) meeting criteria for colonoscopy (for example, through a positive fecal immunochemical test) but without colonic lesions are enriched for the dysbiotic Bacteroides2 enterotype, emphasizing uncertainties in defining healthy controls in cancer microbiome research. Together, these results indicate the importance of quantitative microbiome profiling and covariate control for biomarker identification in CRC microbiome studies.
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.