ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2024
Oral microbiota distinguishes patients with osteosarcoma from healthy controls.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tongue-coating microbiome as a predictor of solid tumors: an updated scoping review of clinical studies.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2026Article
- Metabolites and Immune Cells Mediated the Causal Relationship Between the Gut Microbiota and Osteosarcoma: A Mendelian Randomization Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Genetically predicted plasma metabolites mediate the causal relationship between gut microbiota and osteosarcoma.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Tumor microbiome: roles in tumor initiation, progression, and therapy.Molecular biomedicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The human microbiota plays a key role in cancer diagnosis, pathogenesis, and treatment. However, osteosarcoma-associated oral microbiota alterations have not yet been unraveled. The aim of this study was to explore the characteristics of oral microbiota in osteosarcoma patients compared to healthy controls, and to identify potential microbiota as a diagnostic tool for osteosarcoma. Methods: The oral microbiota was analyzed in osteosarcoma patients (n = 45) and matched healthy controls (n = 90) using 16S rRNA MiSeq sequencing technology. Results: The microbial richness and diversity of the tongue coat were increased in osteosarcoma patients as estimated by the abundance-based coverage estimator indices, the Chao, and observed operational taxonomy units (OTUs). Principal component analysis delineated that the oral microbial community was significant differences between osteosarcoma patients and healthy controls. 14 genera including Rothia, Halomonas, Rhodococcus, and Granulicatella were remarkably reduced, whereas Alloprevotella, Prevotella, Selenomonas, and Campylobacter were enriched in osteosarcoma. Eventually, the optimal four OTUs were identified to construct a microbial classifier by the random forest model via a fivefold cross-validation, which achieved an area under the curve of 99.44% in the training group (30 osteosarcoma patients versus 60 healthy controls) and 87.33% in the test group (15 osteosarcoma patients versus 30 healthy controls), respectively. Notably, oral microbial markers validated strong diagnostic potential distinguishing osteosarcoma patients from healthy controls. Conclusion: This study comprehensively characterizes the oral microbiota in osteosarcoma and reveals the potential efficacy of oral microbiota-targeted biomarkers as a noninvasive biological diagnostic tool for osteosarcoma.
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.