| Literature DB >> 33167991 |
Mohammad Tahseen Al Bataineh1,2, Nihar Ranjan Dash3, Mohammed Elkhazendar3, Dua'a Mohammad Hasan Alnusairat3, Islam Mohammad Ismail Darwish3, Mohamed Saleh Al-Hajjaj3,4, Qutayba Hamid5,6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Heavy tobacco smoking, a hallmark feature of lung cancer, is drastically predominant in Middle Eastern populations. The precise links between nicotine dependence and the functional contribution of the oral microbiota remain unknown in these populations.Entities:
Keywords: Fagerström test; Nicotine dependence; Oral microbiota; Shotgun metagenomics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33167991 PMCID: PMC7653996 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-020-02579-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Demographics of Study Cohort
| Characteristics | Smokers | Non-smokers | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| (n = 55) | (n = 50) | ||
| Age, years | 30.40 (9.508, 21–62) | 30.30 (11.196, 21–60) | 0.961a |
| Mean (SD, range) | |||
| Gender (M%, F%) | 92.7%, 7.3% | 90.0%, 10.0% | 0.618b |
| Ethnicity (%) | |||
| MENA | 78.20% | 76.00% | 0.798b |
| Asians | 20.00% | 20.00% | |
| Africans | 1.80% | 4.00% | |
BMI (Kg/m2) Mean, (IQR) | 24.97, (21.22–28.91) | 24.92, (21.99–27.52) | 0.948a |
| Prescribed probiotics use (yes%) | 0.00% | 0.00% | – |
| Exercise (yes%) | 61.10% | 72.00% | 0.24b |
| Animal exposure (yes%) | 14.50% | 20.00% | 0.459b |
| Antibiotics use (past 3 months) (yes%) | 0% | 0.00% | – |
| Family history | |||
| Cancer | 12.70% | 6.00% | 0.241b |
| HTN | 41.80% | 30.00% | 0.208b |
| Diabetes | 50.90% | 30.00% | 0.03b |
| Asthma | 5.50% | 2.00% | 0.356b |
| Household Smoker (yes%) | 61.80% | 30.00% | 0.001b |
| Family Smoker (yes%) | 65.50% | 36.00% | 0.003b |
Smoking Duration Mean (SD, range) | 11.80 (8.065, 5–40) | ||
| FTND | 4.82 (2.427, 1–10) | ||
| Mean (SD, range) | |||
| Low dependence | 18.2% | ||
| Low to moderate dependence | 32.7% | ||
| Moderate dependence | 32.7% | ||
| High dependence | 16.4% | ||
aIndependent t-test
bChi-squared test
Fig. 1Differentially abundant taxa between smokers and non-smokers group. Panel shows relative abundance of normalized counts for the top 10 taxa. Results were calculated by negative binomial models (DESEq2 R package) of the form ∼group for differential abundance testing of taxonomic and subsystem level 3 features. P values were calculated with Likelihood Ratio Tests method. All of the above comparison are significant. Smoker and non-smoker corresponding abundance are colored in blue and red, respectively
Fig. 2Differentially abundant taxa based on FNTD nicotine dependence score. Panel shows relative abundance of normalized counts for the top 10 taxa. Results were calculated by negative binomial models (DESEq2 R package) of the form ∼group for differential abundance testing of taxonomic and subsystem level 3 features. P values were calculated with Likelihood Ratio Tests method. All of the above comparison are significant. Nicotine dependence FTND scores; low, low to moderate, moderate, and high are colored in red, green, blue and pink, respectively
Fig. 3Differentially abundant gene functions of smokers vs. non-smokers group. Panel shows relative abundance of normalized counts for functional genes using SEED hierarchical categorization. All of the above comparison are significant. Smoker and non-smoker corresponding abundance are colored in blue and red, respectively
Fig. 4Differentially abundant gene functions based on FNTD nicotine dependence score. Panel shows relative abundance of normalized counts for functional genes using SEED hierarchical categorization. All of the above comparison are significant. Smoking dependence, low, low to moderate, moderate, and high are colored in red, green, blue and pink, respectively