ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2024
Comprehensive analysis of microbial content in whole-genome sequencing samples from The Cancer Genome Atlas project.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2024. 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In recent years, a growing number of publications have reported the presence of microbial species in human tumors and of mixtures of microbes that appear to be highly specific to different cancer types. Our recent re-analysis of data from three cancer types revealed that technical errors have caused erroneous reports of numerous microbial species found in sequencing data from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project. Here we have expanded our analysis to cover all 5,734 whole-genome sequencing (WGS) data sets currently available from TCGA, covering 25 distinct types of cancer. We analyzed the microbial content using updated computational methods and databases, and compared our results to those from two major recent studies that focused on bacteria, viruses, and fungi in cancer. Our results expand upon and reinforce our recent findings, which showed that the presence of microbes is far smaller than had been previously reported, and that many species identified in TCGA data are either not present at all, or are known contaminants rather than microbes residing within tumors. As part of this expanded analysis, and to help others avoid being misled by flawed data, we have released a dataset that contains detailed read counts for bacteria, viruses, archaea, and fungi detected in all 5,734 TCGA samples, which can serve as a public reference for future investigations.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.