ArticleBMC medicine2025
Distinct airway mycobiome signature in patients with pulmonary hypertension and subgroups.
Article in BMC medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Crosstalk between the microbiome and the mucosal immunoglobulin A system in the lung, in health and disease.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
- Hypoxic microenvironment and pulmonary hypertension.Respiratory research · 2025Review
- Gut Microbiome in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension-An Emerging Frontier.Infectious disease reports · 2025Review
- Distinct airway mycobiome signature in patients with pulmonary hypertension and subgroups.BMC medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe association between lung microbiome and pulmonary hypertension (PH) remain unknown. This study aims to define the airway mycobiome signature and its potential correlation with clinical parameters of PH.
methodsOverall, 244 patients with PH and 120 healthy controls (CON) were recruited from three independent centers. The PH group was divided into subgroups not using antibiotics or corticosteroids (non-ANT/CORT), and those using ANT, CORT, or ANT + CORT within 1 month, and clinical classification (Groups 1, 3, and 4), World Health Organization functional class (I-IV), and disease severity based on mean pulmonary artery pressure or pulmonary vascular resistance levels for in-depth comparison.
resultsDistinct airway mycobiome profiles were observed in PH, CON, and PH subgroups. Linear discriminant analysis effect size analysis showed increased Purpureocillium, Issatchenkia, and Cyberlindnera and decreased Peroneutypa, Simplicillium, and Metarhizium in patients with PH (non-ANT/CORT, ANT, CORT, and ANT + CORT) than in CON. Receiver operating characteristic analysis indicated a strong prediction of the two fungal genera sets in distinguishing PH and its subgroups from CON. The two major fungal phyla, Ascomycota and Basidiomycota, correlated differently with major clinical factors. Increased connections among the top fungal phyla or genera were observed in the PH than in the CON group. Dominant enrichment (Purpureocillium, Issatchenkia, and Cyberlindnera) and diminishment (Peroneutypa, Simplicillium, and Metarhizium) of fungal genera consistently and strongly predicted PH without being influenced by different PH subgroups.
conclusionsThis study provides the first description of the unique airway mycobiome signature in PH and among different PH subgroups.
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.