| Literature DB >> 31134034 |
Jing Cong1,2, Jingjuan Zhu1, Chuantao Zhang1, Tianjun Li1, Kewei Liu1, Dong Liu1,2, Na Zhou1,2, Man Jiang1,2, Helei Hou1,2, Xiaochun Zhang1,2.
Abstract
Intestinal microbiota is now widely known to play key roles in nutritional uptake, metabolism, and regulation of human immune responses. There are multiple studies assessing intestinal microbiota changes in response to chemotherapy. In this study, microbial phylogenetic molecular ecological networks (pMENs) were firstly used to study the effects of chemotherapy on the intestinal microbiota of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients. Based on the random network model, we demonstrated that overall network structures and properties were significantly changed by chemotherapy, especially in average path length, average clustering coefficient, average harmonic geodesic distance and modularity (P < 0.05). The taxa in the module tended to co-exclude rather than co-occur in CRC patient networks, indicating probably competition relationships. The co-exclude correlations were decreased by 37.3% from T0 to T5 in response to chemotherapy. Significantly negative correlations were observed in positive/negative OTU degree and tumor markers (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the topological roles of the OTUs (module hubs and connectors) were changed with the chemotherapy. For example, the OTU167, OTU8, and OTU9 from the genera Fusobacterium, Bacteroides, and Faecalibacterium, respectively, were identified as keystone taxa, which were defined as either "hubs" or OTUs with highest connectivity in the network. These OTUs were significantly correlated with tumor markers (P < 0.05), suggesting that they probably were influenced by chemotherapy. The pMENs constructed in this study predicted the potential effects of chemotherapy on intestinal microbial community co-occurrence interactions. The changes may have an effect on the therapeutic effects. However, larger clinical samples are required to identify the conclusion.Entities:
Keywords: chemotherapy; colorectal cancer; high-throughput sequencing; intestinal microbiota; phylogenetic molecular ecological networks
Year: 2019 PMID: 31134034 PMCID: PMC6524687 DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2019.01008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Microbiol ISSN: 1664-302X Impact factor: 5.640
Summary information of individuals in this study (Fecal sample’s demographic, clinical, and technical details).
| Group | Healthy volunteers | Colorectal cancers patients | Sample collection | Sequencing platform | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample size | 21 | 22 | NA | Prior to each treatment | Sequencing Platform: Illumina Hiseq PE250; Sequencing Target Depth: 5 GB; read length: 500 bp |
| Male/Female | 4/17 | 14/8 | 0.003 | ||
| Age, year, median | 54 (26–64) | 57 (34–73) | 0.098 | ||
| BMI, median | 23.2 | 23.4 | 0.913 |
Topological properties of the empirical molecular ecological networks (MENs) of intestinal microbial community from healthy individuals and colorectal cancer (CRC) patients during the different treatment stages and their associated random MENs.
| Sample | H | T0 | T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | T5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Empirical Network | No. of original OTUa | 655 | 778 | 727 | 793 | 814 | 788 | 758 |
| Network sizeb | 105 | 99 | 102 | 103 | 80 | 103 | 103 | |
| Total links | 110 | 238 | 228 | 239 | 173 | 210 | 231 | |
| Average degree | 2.095 | 4.808 | 4.471 | 4.641 | 4.325 | 4.078 | 4.485 | |
| Average path distance | 5.942d | 2.893d | 2.982d | 3.216d | 3.403d | 3.701d | 3.210d | |
| Average clustering coefficient | 0.07e | 0.191e | 0.209e | 0.175e | 0.140e | 0.119e | 0.240e | |
| Average harmonic geodesic distance | 4.165f | 2.488f | 2.539f | 2.759f | 2.717f | 3.022f | 2.668f | |
| Identical threshold | 0.660 | 0.660 | 0.660 | 0.660 | 0.660 | 0.660 | 0.660 | |
| R2 of power-law | 0.786 | 0.794 | 0.724 | 0.821 | 0.808 | 0.861 | 0.870 | |
| Modularity | 0.773g | 0.429g | 0.450g | 0.475g | 0.405g | 0.500g | 0.498g | |
| Random networksc | Average path distance | 5.584 ± 0.467 | 2.693 ± 0.045 | 2.705 ± 0.047 | 3.02 ± 0.052 | 2.883 ± 0.068 | 3.228 ± 0.069 | 3.022 ± 0.064 |
| Average clustering coefficient | 0.014 ± 0.010 | 0.209 ± 0.025 | 0.200 ± 0.024 | 0.101 ± 0.018 | 0.139 ± 0.022 | 0.077 ± 0.017 | 0.102 ± 0.018 | |
| Average harmonic geodesic distance | 4.318 ± 0.254 | 2.401 ± 0.026 | 2.415 ± 0.026 | 2.635 ± 0.031 | 2.509 ± 0.042 | 2.803 ± 0.043 | 2.647 ± 0.039 | |
| Modularity | 0.731 ± 0.015 | 0.355 ± 0.010 | 0.381 ± 0.010 | 0.393 ± 0.011 | 0.380 ± 0.011 | 0.434 ± 0.012 | 0.396 ± 0.011 | |
FIGURE 1Highly connected modules within intestinal networks of colorectal cancer patients in response to the five stages of chemotherapy. Node colors represent different major phyla; pie charts represent the composition of the modules with >1 phyla. A blue link indicates a positive relationship between two individual nodes, whereas a pink link indicates a negative relationship. The number in bracket means the ratio of negative links accounting for the total links.
FIGURE 2Z-P plot showing the classification of nodes to identify putative keystone species in healthy individuals and colorectal cancer patients in response to chemotherapy. Each symbol represents an OTU. Different colors represent different groups, namely, red for healthy individuals (H), green for CRC patients before the first treatment (T0), orange for CRC patients before the second treatment (T1), blue for CRC patients before the third treatment (T2), pink for CRC patients before the fourth treatment (T3), water blue for CRC patients before the fifth treatment (T4), and gray for CRC patients before the sixth treatment (T5). Module hubs have the nodes with Pi ≤ 0.62 and Zi > 2.5, connectors with Pi > 0.62 and Zi ≤ 2.5, and network hubs with Pi > 0.62 and Zi > 2.5, peripheral nodes with Pi ≤ 0.62 and Zi ≤ 2.5. There are 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, and 1 module hub in H, T0, T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively. There are 1, 2, 3, 1, and 1 network hub in T0, T1, T2, T3, and T5, respectively. There are 3, 18, 13, 13, 20, 10, and 16 connectors in H, T0, T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5, respectively.
The Spearman correlation of tumor markers and OTU degree.
| Tumor marker | OTU degree (r, | Negative OTU degree (r, | Positive OTU links (r, |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA242 | 0.09, 0.87 | 0.31, 0.54 | –0.43, 0.40 |
| CEA | 0.49, 0.33 | ||
| CA199 | 0.37, 0.47 | ||
| CA724 | –0.03, 0.96 | 0.09, 0.87 | –0.31, 0.54 |