ArticleCancer medicine2024
Gut microbial subtypes and clinicopathological value for colorectal cancer.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative microbiome analysis of paired mucosal and fecal samples in Korean colorectal cancer patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Gut microbial subtypes and clinicopathological value for colorectal cancer.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
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
backgroundGut bacteria are related to colorectal cancer (CRC) and its clinicopathologic characteristics.
objectiveTo develop gut bacterial subtypes and explore potential microbial targets for CRC.
methodsStool samples from 914 volunteers (376 CRCs, 363 advanced adenomas, and 175 normal controls) were included for 16S rRNA sequencing. Unsupervised learning was used to generate gut microbial subtypes. Gut bacterial community composition and clustering effects were plotted. Differences of gut bacterial abundance were analyzed. Then, the association of CRC-associated bacteria with subtypes and the association of gut bacteria with clinical information were assessed. The CatBoost models based on gut differential bacteria were constructed to identify the diseases including CRC and advanced adenoma (AA).
resultsFour gut microbial subtypes (A, B, C, D) were finally obtained via unsupervised learning. The characteristic bacteria of each subtype were Escherichia-Shigella in subtype A, Streptococcus in subtype B, Blautia in subtype C, and Bacteroides in subtype D. Clinical information (e.g., free fatty acids and total cholesterol) and CRC pathological information (e.g., tumor depth) varied among gut microbial subtypes. Bacilli, Lactobacillales, etc., were positively correlated with subtype B. Positive correlation of Blautia, Lachnospiraceae, etc., with subtype C and negative correlation of Coriobacteriia, Coriobacteriales, etc., with subtype D were found. Finally, the predictive ability of CatBoost models for CRC identification was improved based on gut microbial subtypes.
conclusionGut microbial subtypes provide characteristic gut bacteria and are expected to contribute to the diagnosis of CRC.
Indexed as
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.