Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37007104›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2023

Human gut, breast, and oral microbiome in breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

May Soe Thu, Korn Chotirosniramit, Tanawin Nopsopon, Nattiya Hirankarn, Krit Pongpirul

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
6.6field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Changes in the fecal microbiota of breast cancer patients based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. The emerging role of non-Gastroenterology report · 2026
    Review
  6. The dialogue between breast cancer and microorganisms.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Iranian journal of microbiology · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

May Soe ThuJoint Chulalongkorn University - University of Liverpool Ph.D. Programme in Biomedical Sciences and Biotechnology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Korn ChotirosniramitSchool of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Tanawin NopsoponSchool of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Nattiya HirankarnCenter of Excellence in Immunology and Immune-Mediated Diseases, Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Krit PongpirulDepartment of Infection Biology and Microbiomes, Faculty of Health and Life Science, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Chulalongkorn University · THJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity of Liverpool · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Dysbiosis characterises breast cancer through direct or indirect interference in a variety of biological pathways; therefore, specific microbial patterns and diversity may be a biomarker for the diagnosis and prognosis of breast cancer. However, there is still much to determine about the complex interplay of the gut microbiome and breast cancer. Objective: This study aims to evaluate microbial alteration in breast cancer patients compared with control subjects, to explore intestine microbial modification from a range of different breast cancer treatments, and to identify the impact of microbiome patterns on the same treatment-receiving breast cancer patients. Methods: A literature search was conducted using electronic databases such as PubMed, Embase, and the CENTRAL databases up to April 2021. The search was limited to adult women with breast cancer and the English language. The results were synthesised qualitatively and quantitatively using random-effects meta-analysis. Results: A total of 33 articles from 32 studies were included in the review, representing 19 case-control, eight cohorts, and five nonrandomised intervention researches. The gut and breast bacterial species were elevated in the cases of breast tumours, a significant increase in Conclusions: This systematic review elucidates the complex network of the microbiome, breast cancer, and therapeutic options, with the objective of providing a link for stronger research studies and towards personalised medicine to improve their quality of life.

Indexed as

breast cancerdysbiosisestrogengut microbiomemicrobial diversity

Identifiers

PMID37007104
PMCPMC10063924
OpenAlexW4327734685

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.