ArticleScientific reports2026
Analysis of unmapped RNA-seq data from cancer spatial transcriptome toward characterizing cancer microbiome.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Spatial characterization of microbial-like signals in tumor tissues remains challenging, particularly in direct Visium data, where microbial reads are sparse and may not be fully retained in standard count matrices. Here, we present an extended unmapped-read analysis as a proof-of-concept workflow for summarizing microbial-like 16S rRNA signals in four direct Visium specimens from colorectal cancer (CRC), oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), and head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSC). The workflow uses a custom reference containing four selected 16S rRNA sequences and computes a per-spot mismatch ratio to quantify sequence-level dissimilarity relative to each reference. Compared with PathSeq, the workflow yielded different spatial signal patterns and mismatch summaries across the analyzed specimens. Among the four tested references, the CRC specimen showed lower mismatch ratios relative to the E. coli reference than the other analyzed specimens, an observation compatible with the intestinal context but not definitive evidence of species-level presence or evolutionary proximity. Given the small sample set, restricted reference panel, and lack of dedicated negative controls, these findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating. This study provides a complementary proof-of-concept framework for exploring microbial-like signals in direct Visium data.
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.