Cargando…

Vaginal Microbiome Metagenome Inference Accuracy: Differential Measurement Error according to Community Composition

Several studies have compared metagenome inference performance in different human body sites; however, none specifically reported on the vaginal microbiome. Findings from other body sites cannot easily be generalized to the vaginal microbiome due to unique features of vaginal microbial ecology, and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Carter, Kayla A., Fodor, Anthony A., Balkus, Jennifer E., Zhang, Angela, Serrano, Myrna G., Buck, Gregory A., Engel, Stephanie M., Wu, Michael C., Sun, Shan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Society for Microbiology 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10134888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36975801
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/msystems.01003-22
_version_ 1785031847173947392
author Carter, Kayla A.
Fodor, Anthony A.
Balkus, Jennifer E.
Zhang, Angela
Serrano, Myrna G.
Buck, Gregory A.
Engel, Stephanie M.
Wu, Michael C.
Sun, Shan
author_facet Carter, Kayla A.
Fodor, Anthony A.
Balkus, Jennifer E.
Zhang, Angela
Serrano, Myrna G.
Buck, Gregory A.
Engel, Stephanie M.
Wu, Michael C.
Sun, Shan
author_sort Carter, Kayla A.
collection PubMed
description Several studies have compared metagenome inference performance in different human body sites; however, none specifically reported on the vaginal microbiome. Findings from other body sites cannot easily be generalized to the vaginal microbiome due to unique features of vaginal microbial ecology, and investigators seeking to use metagenome inference in vaginal microbiome research are “flying blind” with respect to potential bias these methods may introduce into analyses. We compared the performance of PICRUSt2 and Tax4Fun2 using paired 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing and whole-metagenome sequencing data from vaginal samples from 72 pregnant individuals enrolled in the Pregnancy, Infection, and Nutrition (PIN) cohort. Participants were selected from those with known birth outcomes and adequate 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing data in a case-control design. Cases experienced early preterm birth (<32 weeks of gestation), and controls experienced term birth (37 to 41 weeks of gestation). PICRUSt2 and Tax4Fun2 performed modestly overall (median Spearman correlation coefficients between observed and predicted KEGG ortholog [KO] relative abundances of 0.20 and 0.22, respectively). Both methods performed best among Lactobacillus crispatus-dominated vaginal microbiotas (median Spearman correlation coefficients of 0.24 and 0.25, respectively) and worst among Lactobacillus iners-dominated microbiotas (median Spearman correlation coefficients of 0.06 and 0.11, respectively). The same pattern was observed when evaluating correlations between univariable hypothesis test P values generated with observed and predicted metagenome data. Differential metagenome inference performance across vaginal microbiota community types can be considered differential measurement error, which often causes differential misclassification. As such, metagenome inference will introduce hard-to-predict bias (toward or away from the null) in vaginal microbiome research. IMPORTANCE Compared to taxonomic composition, the functional potential within a bacterial community is more relevant to establishing mechanistic understandings and causal relationships between the microbiome and health outcomes. Metagenome inference attempts to bridge the gap between 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing and whole-metagenome sequencing by predicting a microbiome’s gene content based on its taxonomic composition and annotated genome sequences of its members. Metagenome inference methods have been evaluated primarily among gut samples, where they appear to perform fairly well. Here, we show that metagenome inference performance is markedly worse for the vaginal microbiome and that performance varies across common vaginal microbiome community types. Because these community types are associated with sexual and reproductive outcomes, differential metagenome inference performance will bias vaginal microbiome studies, obscuring relationships of interest. Results from such studies should be interpreted with substantial caution and the understanding that they may over- or underestimate associations with metagenome content.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10134888
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher American Society for Microbiology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101348882023-04-28 Vaginal Microbiome Metagenome Inference Accuracy: Differential Measurement Error according to Community Composition Carter, Kayla A. Fodor, Anthony A. Balkus, Jennifer E. Zhang, Angela Serrano, Myrna G. Buck, Gregory A. Engel, Stephanie M. Wu, Michael C. Sun, Shan mSystems Research Article Several studies have compared metagenome inference performance in different human body sites; however, none specifically reported on the vaginal microbiome. Findings from other body sites cannot easily be generalized to the vaginal microbiome due to unique features of vaginal microbial ecology, and investigators seeking to use metagenome inference in vaginal microbiome research are “flying blind” with respect to potential bias these methods may introduce into analyses. We compared the performance of PICRUSt2 and Tax4Fun2 using paired 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing and whole-metagenome sequencing data from vaginal samples from 72 pregnant individuals enrolled in the Pregnancy, Infection, and Nutrition (PIN) cohort. Participants were selected from those with known birth outcomes and adequate 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing data in a case-control design. Cases experienced early preterm birth (<32 weeks of gestation), and controls experienced term birth (37 to 41 weeks of gestation). PICRUSt2 and Tax4Fun2 performed modestly overall (median Spearman correlation coefficients between observed and predicted KEGG ortholog [KO] relative abundances of 0.20 and 0.22, respectively). Both methods performed best among Lactobacillus crispatus-dominated vaginal microbiotas (median Spearman correlation coefficients of 0.24 and 0.25, respectively) and worst among Lactobacillus iners-dominated microbiotas (median Spearman correlation coefficients of 0.06 and 0.11, respectively). The same pattern was observed when evaluating correlations between univariable hypothesis test P values generated with observed and predicted metagenome data. Differential metagenome inference performance across vaginal microbiota community types can be considered differential measurement error, which often causes differential misclassification. As such, metagenome inference will introduce hard-to-predict bias (toward or away from the null) in vaginal microbiome research. IMPORTANCE Compared to taxonomic composition, the functional potential within a bacterial community is more relevant to establishing mechanistic understandings and causal relationships between the microbiome and health outcomes. Metagenome inference attempts to bridge the gap between 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing and whole-metagenome sequencing by predicting a microbiome’s gene content based on its taxonomic composition and annotated genome sequences of its members. Metagenome inference methods have been evaluated primarily among gut samples, where they appear to perform fairly well. Here, we show that metagenome inference performance is markedly worse for the vaginal microbiome and that performance varies across common vaginal microbiome community types. Because these community types are associated with sexual and reproductive outcomes, differential metagenome inference performance will bias vaginal microbiome studies, obscuring relationships of interest. Results from such studies should be interpreted with substantial caution and the understanding that they may over- or underestimate associations with metagenome content. American Society for Microbiology 2023-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10134888/ /pubmed/36975801 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/msystems.01003-22 Text en Copyright © 2023 Carter et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research Article
Carter, Kayla A.
Fodor, Anthony A.
Balkus, Jennifer E.
Zhang, Angela
Serrano, Myrna G.
Buck, Gregory A.
Engel, Stephanie M.
Wu, Michael C.
Sun, Shan
Vaginal Microbiome Metagenome Inference Accuracy: Differential Measurement Error according to Community Composition
title Vaginal Microbiome Metagenome Inference Accuracy: Differential Measurement Error according to Community Composition
title_full Vaginal Microbiome Metagenome Inference Accuracy: Differential Measurement Error according to Community Composition
title_fullStr Vaginal Microbiome Metagenome Inference Accuracy: Differential Measurement Error according to Community Composition
title_full_unstemmed Vaginal Microbiome Metagenome Inference Accuracy: Differential Measurement Error according to Community Composition
title_short Vaginal Microbiome Metagenome Inference Accuracy: Differential Measurement Error according to Community Composition
title_sort vaginal microbiome metagenome inference accuracy: differential measurement error according to community composition
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10134888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36975801
http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/msystems.01003-22
work_keys_str_mv AT carterkaylaa vaginalmicrobiomemetagenomeinferenceaccuracydifferentialmeasurementerroraccordingtocommunitycomposition
AT fodoranthonya vaginalmicrobiomemetagenomeinferenceaccuracydifferentialmeasurementerroraccordingtocommunitycomposition
AT balkusjennifere vaginalmicrobiomemetagenomeinferenceaccuracydifferentialmeasurementerroraccordingtocommunitycomposition
AT zhangangela vaginalmicrobiomemetagenomeinferenceaccuracydifferentialmeasurementerroraccordingtocommunitycomposition
AT serranomyrnag vaginalmicrobiomemetagenomeinferenceaccuracydifferentialmeasurementerroraccordingtocommunitycomposition
AT buckgregorya vaginalmicrobiomemetagenomeinferenceaccuracydifferentialmeasurementerroraccordingtocommunitycomposition
AT engelstephaniem vaginalmicrobiomemetagenomeinferenceaccuracydifferentialmeasurementerroraccordingtocommunitycomposition
AT wumichaelc vaginalmicrobiomemetagenomeinferenceaccuracydifferentialmeasurementerroraccordingtocommunitycomposition
AT sunshan vaginalmicrobiomemetagenomeinferenceaccuracydifferentialmeasurementerroraccordingtocommunitycomposition