| Literature DB >> 32676460 |
Donghang Li1, Ruyuan He1, Guoqiang Hou2, Wei Ming2, Tao Fan1, Lei Chen1, Lin Zhang1, Wenyang Jiang1, Wei Wang1, Zilong Lu1, Haojie Feng1, Qing Geng1.
Abstract
Esophageal microbiota plays important roles in esophageal cancer. Esophagectomy, as the most important therapeutic way, contributes to changes of esophageal microbiome. However, there are few studies examining the esophageal microbiome and the metabolic changes before and after esophagectomy. The present study characterized the esophageal microbiome of 17 patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), 11 patients with esophagogastric junction (EGJ) cancer, 15 patients at 9-12 months after radical esophagectomy and 16 healthy controls (HC). 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing was used to evaluate the microbiome and predict the metabolic pathways. Our results showed that the microbial diversity was significantly lower in ESCC, EGJ and post-ESCC groups than that in the HC group. The abundance of Fusobacteria was higher (7.01 vs. 1.12%, P = 0.039) and the abundance of Actinobacteria (1.61 vs. 4.04%) was lower in the ESCC group than that in the HC group. We found significant differences in the abundance of Bacteroidetes (20.45 vs. 9.86%, P = 0.026), Fusobacteria (7.01 vs. 1.66%, P = 0.030) between ESCC and post-ESCC groups. The results of microbial composition analysis and PICRUSt demonstrated significant differences between ESCC and HC groups. The β diversity and PICRUSt suggested that the microbial composition and metabolic pathways were similar to HC group after esophagectomy. The monitoring of the esophagus microbiota may be an essential method to predict the recurrence of tumor.Entities:
Keywords: 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing; esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; esophagectomy; fusobacteria; microbiota
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32676460 PMCID: PMC7333312 DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2020.00268
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cell Infect Microbiol ISSN: 2235-2988 Impact factor: 5.293
Demographic characteristics of all individuals.
| Sex | |||||||
| Male, No. (%) | 8 (72.7) | 12 (70.6) | 10 (62.5) | 0.824 | 12 (70.6) | 9 (60.0) | 0.712 |
| Female, No. (%) | 3 (27.3) | 5 (29.4) | 6 (37.5) | 5 (29.4) | 6 (40.0) | ||
| Age, mean ± SD,y | 61.4 ± 6.2 | 61.2 ± 9.8 | 58.6 ± 9.8 | 0.896 | 61.2 ± 9.8 | 59.2 ± 4.3 | 0.344 |
| Alcohol intake, No. (%) | 3 (27.3) | 5 (29.4) | 3 (18.8) | 0.763 | 5 (29.4) | 4 (26.7) | >0.99 |
| Tobacco smoking | |||||||
| Never | 4 (36.3) | 6 (35.3) | 9 (56.2) | 0.76 | 6 (35.3) | 8 (53.4) | 0.216 |
| Current | 4 (36.3) | 7 (41.2) | 4 (25.0) | 7 (41.2) | 2 (13.3) | ||
| Former | 3 (27.3) | 4 (23.5) | 3 (18.8) | 4 (23.5) | 5 (33.3) | ||
| TNM stage | |||||||
| I | 1 | 2 | - | 0.863 | 2 | 2 | 0.988 |
| II | 5 | 9 | - | 9 | 8 | ||
| III | 5 | 6 | - | 6 | 5 | ||
EGJ, esophagogastric junction cancer; ESCC, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; HC, healthy control; post-ESCC, postoperative esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; SD, standard deviation; P, p-value. P.
Figure 1Comparison of α diversity and the relative abundance of taxa in the healthy patients and those of the EGJ, ESCC, and post-ESCC groups. Estimators of community richness [Sobs index, (A)] and diversity [Shannon index, (B)] in OTU levels. (C) Average relative abundance of taxa at the phylum level. (D) Average relative abundance of taxa at the genus level. OTU, operational taxonomic unit.
Figure 2Composition of the esophageal microbiomes of healthy patients and those with ESCC, and β diversity for the EGJ, ESCC, and HC groups. (A) Significant differences were observed between the microbiomes of the ESCC and HC groups. (B) Significant differences were observed between the microbiomes of the EGJ and HC groups. (C) PCoA based on unweighted UniFrac distances between the ESCC and HC groups. P-values were calculated by analysis of similarities (ANOSIM) *, 0.01 < p < 0.05; **, p < 0.01.
Figure 3Results of linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and effect size measurements (LEfSe) between the ESCC and HC groups. (A) Bar plot shows taxa with LDA score >3.0 from the order to the genus level. (B) LEfSe analysis shows the most abundant taxa from the phylum to the genus level between the ESCC and HC groups.
Figure 4Composition of the esophageal microbiomes and β diversity of the ESCC and post-ESCC groups. (A) PCoA based on weighted UniFrac distances between the ESCC and post-ESCC groups. P-values were calculated by analysis of similarities (ANOSIM). (B) Significant differences were observed between the microbiomes of the ESCC and post-ESCC groups. *P < 0.05.
Figure 5Results of linear discriminant analysis (LDA) and effect size measurements (LEfSe) between the ESCC and HC groups from the phylum to the genus level. (A) Bar plot shows results of taxa with LDA score >3.0. (B) LEfSe analysis shows the most differentially abundant taxa between the ESCC and post-ESCC groups.
Figure 6Hierarchical clustering analysis to identify different metabolic pathways. Heatmap of PICRUSt analysis demonstrating the enrichment or loss of metabolic pathways in the ESCC, HC, and post-ESCC groups.