| Literature DB >> 31678982 |
Bingqing Zhang1, Jingli Gu1, Junru Liu1, Beihui Huang1, Juan Li1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Increasing evidence has suggested that gut flora play an important role in tumor progression and prognosis. However, the relationship between fecal microbiota and hematologic malignancy requires further investigation. This study aimed to characterize the relationship of the fecal microbial community in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 40 MM patients and healthy controls (n=17) were retrospectively collected from the First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University between October 2018 and May 2019. The fecal samples were collected for 16S rRNA high-throughput sequencing for the fecal microbial community, as well as diversity and correlation analysis. Furthermore, 21 MM patients and their family members were selected for the matched pair analysis to confirm the fecal microbiota taxonomic changes by qRT-PCR assay. RESULTS Diversity analysis showed that diversity measured by Shannon index was lower in MM patients compared with healthy controls. At the phylum level, higher abundances of Proteobacteria but lower abundances of Actinobacteria were identified in the MM group in comparison with the healthy control group. At the genus level, the proportion of Bacteroides, Faecalibacterium, and Roseburia was significantly higher in the MM group. The matched pair analysis showed that Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Faecalibacterium were significantly more abundant in the MM group. Further analysis on prognostic risk factors revealed that the Faecalibacterium prausnitzii level was significantly correlated with ISS stage. CONCLUSIONS Our study highlights the imbalanced composition and diversity of the gastrointestinal microbiome in MM patients, which could be further used as a potential biomarker for MM risk screening, therapeutic strategies, and prognostic prediction.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31678982 PMCID: PMC6855177 DOI: 10.12659/MSM.919988
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Primer sequence for the target flora detecting.
| Target flora | Primer name | Sequence (5′-3′) | Annealing temperature (°C) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enco-F | AACCTACCCATCAGAGGG | 57 | |
| Enco-R | GACGTTCAGTTACTAACG | ||
|
| |||
| Lac-F | AGCAGTAGGGAATCTTCCA | 58 | |
| Lac-R | ATTYCACCGCTACACATG | ||
|
| |||
| CXI-F | ACGCTACTTGAGGAGGA | 58 | |
| CXI-R | GAGCCGTAGCCTTTCACT | ||
|
| |||
| Pfra-F | GATGGCCTCGCGTCCGATTAG | 58 | |
| Pfra-R | CCGAAGACCTTCTTCCTCC | ||
|
| |||
| Psd-F | CAAAACTACTGAGCTAGAGTACG | 60 | |
| Psd-R | TAAGATCTCAAGGATCCCAACGGCT | ||
|
| |||
| Ps2-F | CCTGACCATCCGTCGCCACAAC | 79 | |
| Ps2-R | CGCAGCAGGATGCCACGCC | ||
|
| |||
| Gp-F | GAYGACGTCAARTCMTCATGC | 69 | |
| Gp-R | AGGAGGTGATCCAACCGCA | ||
|
| |||
| Gn-F | AYGACGTCAAGTCMTCATGG | 52 | |
| Gn-R | AGGAGGTGATCCAACCGCA | ||
Target gene length and copy number of each standard sample (1 μL).
| Target flora | Target segment length (bp) | Initial copy number (1×1011) |
|---|---|---|
| 357 | 1.54 | |
| 341 | 3.29 | |
| 135 | 6.90 | |
| 198 | 5.09 | |
| 205 | 3.52 | |
| 295 | 2.65 | |
| Gram-positive bacteria | 354 | 2.80 |
| Gram-negative bacteria | 334 | 2.62 |
Standard curve equation of each target flora.
| Target flora | Standard curve equation | R2 |
|---|---|---|
| Y=−3.871X+37.950 | 0.992 | |
| Y=−3.939X+38.501 | 0.986 | |
| Y=−3.130X+35.783 | 0.978 | |
| Y=−3.460X+33.788 | 0.997 | |
| Y=−3.098X+32.045 | 0.955 | |
| Y=−3.743X+36.322 | 0.996 | |
| Gram-positive bacteria | Y=−3.687X+35.916 | 0.995 |
| Gram-negative bacteria | Y=−3.240X+31.931 | 0.997 |
Baseline data of subjects.
| MM (n=40) | Healthy control (n=17) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 56.53±9.31 | 50.18±12.17 | 0.141 |
| Gender (M/F) | 21/19 | 7/10 | 0.434 |
| BMI | 23.02±3.22 | 23.08±1.87 | 0.942 |
| Albumin (g/L) | 33.17±7.00 | – | |
| Creatinine (umol/L) | 105.93±65.87 | – | |
| ISS | I–II (21) | ||
| Subtype | IgG-κ (10) |
Alpha diversity index in each group.
| Healthy controls (n=17) | MM (n=40) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| OUT value | 201.76±62.07 | 184.1±55.82 | 0.295 |
| Chao1 Index | 233.79±64.55 | 216.24±60.81 | 0.332 |
| Shannon Index | 3.25±0.53 | 2.86±0.33 | 0.01 |
| OUT rate | 0.999 | 0.999 | 0.243 |
Figure 1Beta diversity of the gut microbiota in each group using PCoA analysis.
Figure 2(A) Histogram of species distribution for each sample at the phylum level. The sample with the beginning of A indicates the MM group; the sample with the beginning of B indicates the control group. (B) Comparison of IM between the MM group and healthy control at the phylum level.
Phylum-level comparison of IM between MM patients and healthy controls.
| Target flora phylum | Healthy controls (%, n=17) | MM (%, n=40) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 51.09±13.57 | 53.41±6.76 | 0.472 | |
| 35.13±13.83 | 31.51±10.49 | 0.358 | |
| 6.41±3.91 | 10.43±5.52 | 0.021 | |
| 5.31±10.20 | 3.99±8.73 | 0.669 | |
| 1.83±3.02 | 0.48±0.75 | 0.035 | |
| 0.06±1.74 | 0.16±0.52 | 0.492 | |
| 0.15±0.39 | 0.00±0.00 | 0.063 |
Figure 3Taxonomic differences were detected based on OTUs between MM group and healthy controls. (A) Linear discriminative analysis (LDA) effect size (LEfSe) analysis between healthy controls and MM patients. (B) Cladogram showing differentially abundant taxonomic clades with an LDA score >2.0 among patients and controls.
Differential analysis on genus between MM and healthy controls.
| Genus | Healthy control (n=17) | MM (n=40) | P value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | ||
| 3.10E-01 | 4.67E-02 | 4.17E-01 | 2.05E-02 | 0.046 | |
| 3.10E-02 | 6.29E-03 | 5.72E-02 | 9.40E-03 | 0.029 | |
| 1.09E-02 | 3.69E-03 | 2.41E-02 | 5.25E-03 | 0.047 | |
| 5.74E-04 | 2.09E-04 | 4.37E-03 | 2.61E-03 | 0.084 | |
| 3.59E-03 | 1.10E-03 | 1.40E-03 | 4.00E-04 | 0.09 | |
| 6.25E-05 | 3.98E-05 | 1.36E-03 | 8.40E-04 | 0.037 | |
| 0.00E+00 | 0.00E+00 | 1.03E-03 | 1.03E-03 | <0.001 | |
| 6.68E-06 | 3.96E-06 | 3.47E-04 | 3.06E-04 | 0.029 | |
| 0.00E+00 | 0.00E+00 | 4.09E-05 | 4.02E-05 | 0.097 | |
| 1.00E-05 | 4.36E-06 | 3.64E-05 | 1.29E-05 | 0.075 | |
| 0.00E+00 | 0.00E+00 | 2.27E-05 | 2.27E-05 | <0.001 | |
IM detection in MM patients and their family members using qRT-PCR.
| Target flora | Healthy controls (n=21) | MM (n=21) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.89±1.64 | 1.33±1.25 | 0.331 | |
| 2.86±0.82 | 3.30±1.27 | 0.178 | |
| 2.54±1.52 | 2.84±1.16 | 0.507 | |
| 4.49±1.52 | 4.98±1.57 | 0.032 | |
| −0.17±1.21 | 0.36±1.44 | 0.334 | |
| 1.49±1.36 | 2.77±1.37 | 0.043 | |
| Gram-positive bacteria | 6.07±1.00 | 5.84±2.07 | 0.731 |
| Gram-negative bacteria | 4.03±1.18 | 4.23±1.87 | 0.628 |
MM comparison with metabolic genes in healthy controls.
| Class 1 | Class 2 | MM (%) | Healthy controls (%) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Environmental information processing | Signal transduction | 2.85±0.35 | 2.50±0.17 | 0.0054 |
| Metabolism | Metabolism of terpenoids and polyketides | 1.86±0.06 | 1.94±0.05 | 0.0072 |
| Cellular processes | Cell growth and death | 0.67±0.06 | 0.73±0.05 | 0.0423 |
The Clostridium leptum levels in MM patients with different prognostic risk factors.
| Risk factors | Expression | P values | |
|---|---|---|---|
| (Log 10 of copies/0.4g) | |||
| ISS stage | I–II (21) | 4.80±1.11 | 0.025 |
| III (19) | 5.49±0.76 | ||
| Extramedullary infiltration | +16 | 5.05±1.05 | 0.704 |
| −24 | 5.17±1.01 | ||
| LDH level | >232U/L (13) | 5.07±1.23 | 0.835 |
| <232U/L (27) | 5.15±0.93 | ||
| 13q- | +14 | 5.45±0.92 | 0.084 |
| −24 | 4.83±1.08 | ||
| 17p- | +6 | 4.97±1.04 | 0.784 |
| −32 | 5.10±1.06 | ||
| 1q21 | +15 | 5.28±0.71 | 0.347 |
| −23 | 4.95±1.21 | ||
| t (11;14) | 0 | – | - |
| −38 | 5.08±1.04 | ||
| t (4;14) | +8 | 5.51±0.74 | 0.184 |
| −30 | 4.96±1.09 |
Figure 4(A, B) Correlation analysis between the level of Clostridium leptum with ISS stage and creatinine levels.
Figure 5(A, B) Differential analysis of KEGG metabolic pathway between MM and healthy controls.