ReviewNature cancer2026
Setting higher standards for reports of microbial species in human cancers.
Review in Nature cancer, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Decoding the cancer microbiome: multi-omics, AI, and translational opportunities.Genome biology · 2026Review
- Article
- Interkingdom microbiome physiology in colorectal cancer: barrier dysfunction, immune-metabolic signaling, and therapeutic resistance.Frontiers in physiology · 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The presence of microbiota in human tumors has been reported widely based on bioinformatic analyses of DNA sequencing datasets; however, the source of microbial sequences in atypical anatomical sites is challenging to validate, as these could derive from sampling, storage, handling and processing of samples, similar to what has been described in studies of ancient DNA. Contamination of microbial reference genomes can also be a source of microbial signals, causing misclassification of human reads. Here, we overview the required quality controls and validation approaches and summarize optimal practices to improve the rigor and standards of tumor 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.