ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Comparison of Three DNA Isolation Methods and Two Sequencing Techniques for the Study of the Human Microbiota.
Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03885648 (Association of Breast and Gut Microbiota Dysbiosis and the Risk of Breast Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Association of Breast and Gut Microbiota Dysbiosis and the Risk of Breast Cancer
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effect of sialidase inhibitors on a plaque community biofilm model.Access microbiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in women and the second leading cause of female death. Altered interactions between the host and the gut microbiota appear to play an influential role in carcinogenesis. Several studies have shown different signatures of the gut microbiota in patients with breast cancer compared to healthy women. Currently, there is disagreement regarding the different DNA isolation and sequencing methodologies for studies on the human microbiota, given that they can influence the interpretation of the results obtained. The goal of this work was to compare (1) three different DNA extraction strategies to minimize the impact of human DNA, and (2) two sequencing strategies (16S rRNA and shotgun) to identify discrepancies in microbiome results. We made use of breast tissue and fecal samples from both healthy women and breast cancer patients who participated in the MICROMA study (reference NCT03885648). DNA was isolated by means of mechanical lysis, trypsin, or saponin. The amount of eukaryotic DNA isolated using the trypsin and saponin methods was lower compared to the mechanical lysis method (mechanical lysis, 89.11 ± 2.32%; trypsin method, 82.63 ± 1.23%; saponin method, 80.53 ± 4.09%). In samples with a predominance of prokaryotic cells, such as feces, 16S rRNA sequencing was the most advantageous approach. For other tissues, which are expected to have a more complex microbial composition, the need for an in-depth evaluation of the multifactorial interaction between the various components of the microbiota makes shotgun sequencing the most appropriate method. As for the three extraction methods evaluated, when sequencing samples other than stool, the trypsin method is the most convenient. For fecal samples, where contamination by host DNA is low, no prior treatment is necessary.
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.