Cargando…
Different Characteristics in Gut Microbiome between Advanced Adenoma Patients and Colorectal Cancer Patients by Metagenomic Analysis
The occurrence and development of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenoma (AA) are closely related to the gut microbiome, and AA has a high cancerization progression rate to CRC. Current studies have revealed that bacteriological analysis cannot identify CRC from AA. The objective was to explor...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
American Society for Microbiology
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9769752/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36453905 http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.01593-22 |
Sumario: | The occurrence and development of colorectal cancer (CRC) and advanced adenoma (AA) are closely related to the gut microbiome, and AA has a high cancerization progression rate to CRC. Current studies have revealed that bacteriological analysis cannot identify CRC from AA. The objective was to explore microbial targets that could identify CRC and AA from a microecological perspective and to figure out the best way to identify CRC based on fecal microbes. The metagenomic sequencing data were used to describe the gut microbiome profile and analyze the differences between microbial abundance and microbial single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) characteristics in AA and CRC patients. It was found that there were no significant differences in the diversity between the two groups. The abundance of bacteria (e.g., Firmicutes, Clostridia, and Blautia), fungi (Hypocreales), archaea (Methanosarcina, Methanoculleus, and Methanolacinia), and viruses (Alphacoronavirus, Sinsheimervirus, and Gammaretrovirus) differed between AA and CRC patients. Multiple machine-learning algorithms were used to establish prediction models, aiming to identify CRC and AA. The accuracy of the random forest (RF) model based on the gut microbiome was 86.54%. Nevertheless, the accuracy of SNP was 92.31% in identifying CRC from AA. In conclusion, using microbial SNP was the best method to identify CRC, it was superior to using the gut microbiome, and it could provide new targets for CRC screening. IMPORTANCE There are differences in characteristic microorganisms between AA and CRC. However, current studies have indicated that bacteriological analysis cannot identify CC from AA, and thus, we wondered if there were some other targets that could be used to identify CRC from AA in the gut microbiome. The differences of SNPs in the gut microbiota of intraindividuals were significantly smaller than those of interindividuals. In addition, compared with intestinal microbes, SNP was less affected by time with certain stability. It was discovered that microbial SNP was better than the gut microbiome for identifying CRC from AA. Therefore, screening characteristic microbial SNP could provide a new research direction for identifying CRC from AA. |
---|