| Literature DB >> 31370796 |
Yulian Chen1,2,3, Zubei Hong1,2,3, Wenjing Wang1,2,3, Liying Gu1,2,3, Hua Gao1,2,3, Lihua Qiu4,5,6, Wen Di7,8,9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In this study, the association between high-risk human papillomavirus (hrHPV) infection and the vaginal microbiome in pregnant women was evaluated in Chinese cohorts.Entities:
Keywords: High-risk human papillomavirus; Pregnancy; Vaginal microbiome
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31370796 PMCID: PMC6669982 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-019-4279-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Fig. 1Vaginal bacterial richness and diversity in four groups. a Chao index; b Shannon index; Student’s t-test was used to compare differences between two groups; data are presented as the mean ± SD; ***: p ≤ 0.001; **: 0.001 < p < 0.01; *: p < 0.05
Fig. 2Unweighted UniFrac principal coordinates analysis (PCoA) plot comparing sample distribution for the different groups
Fig. 3Relative abundance counts of Firmicutes (a), Actinobacteria (b), Bacteroidetes (c) and Proteobacteria (d), which were found to be the most abundant phyla across all samples. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare differences in the abundance of each phylum between two groups. ***: p ≤ 0.001; **: 0.001 < p < 0.01; *: p < 0.05
Fig. 4Relative abundance counts of Lactobacillus (a), Bifidobacterium (b), Gardnerella (c), Anaerococcus (d), Megasphaera (e), Sneathia (f), Prevotella (g) and Streptococcus (h), which were found to be the most abundant genera across all samples. The Wilcoxon test was used to compare differences in the abundance of each phylum between two groups. ***: p ≤ 0.001; **: 0.001 < p < 0.01; *: p < 0.05
Fig. 5The unique taxa and microbiomarkers for different groups. Shown is a histogram of LDA scores computed for features differentially abundant in the four groups
Fig. 6Heat map of the relative abundance of the 31 most abundant bacterial taxa found in the vaginal bacterial communities of all participants in the study. Ward linkage clustering was used to cluster samples based on their Jensen-Shannon distance. Identified CSTs are labeled as I, II, III, IV and V, according to a previous naming convention
The distribution of community state types (CSTs) in different groups
| PN | PHR | NPN | NPHR | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CST I | 24 (50.00) | 22 (57.90) | 8 (26.70) | 10 (52.60) |
| CST II | 2 (4.20) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| CST III | 10 (20.80) | 7 (18.40) | 18 (60.00) | 3 (15.80) |
| CST IV | 7 (14.60) | 9 (23.70) | 4 (13.30) | 6 (31.60) |
| CST V | 5 (10.40) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
Fig. 7Redundancy analysis of correlations between different specific genera and HPV infection or pregnancy