SynthesisAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2025
Systematic Review: The Relationship Between the Faecal Microbiome and Colorectal Neoplasia in Shotgun Metagenomic Studies.
Synthesis in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 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.
- Clinical applications of gut microbiome for non-invasive diagnosis of colorectal neoplasia.Journal of gastroenterology · 2026Article
- The Association Between Gut Microbiome and Cachexia in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review.Cancers · 2026Review
- Microbiome signatures for detection of colorectal lesions in population-based FIT screening.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Exploring Risk Factors and Sex Differences in Colorectal Cancer: Insights from Current Evidence.Cells · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe human gut microbiome is of academic and clinical interest. Associations between certain organisms and colorectal neoplasia have been reported, but findings have limited reproducibility in different populations.
methodsWe performed a systematic review of whole metagenome shotgun sequencing studies using faecal samples from patients with colorectal neoplasia and control populations. Searches were performed on 30th June 2023. We identified 26 studies, reporting on 22 study populations (13 from Asia, five from Europe and four from North America). Study size ranged from 14 to 971 individuals (mean 170).
resultsSome reproducible data were identified, such as the significant enrichment of Fusobacterium nucleatum and Parvimonas micra in colorectal cancer patients compared to controls (in 10 and nine studies, respectively). However, 21 out of 26 studies scored poorly on quality appraisal, specifically surrounding selection of cases and controls. Definitions of controls varied; some studies used individuals with normal endoscopic investigations, some used 'healthy' individuals where no colonoscopy was performed, and one used those with non-neoplastic findings (haemorrhoids). There was even less reproducibility of data in studies where individuals with colorectal polyps were compared to controls, possibly because of heterogeneity in these patient groupings as a variety of definitions for 'polyp cases' were used.
conclusionsHeterogeneity and potential for bias indicates that findings should be interpreted with caution. Standardised protocols to ensure robust methodology and allow pooling of large-scale data are required before these findings can be used in clinical practice (PROSPERO: CRD42023431977).
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.