| Literature DB >> 33227982 |
Pamela Vernocchi1, Tommaso Gili2, Federica Conte3, Federica Del Chierico1, Giorgia Conta4, Alfredo Miccheli5, Andrea Botticelli6,7, Paola Paci8, Guido Caldarelli9,10,11, Marianna Nuti12, Paolo Marchetti6,7,13, Lorenza Putignani14.
Abstract
Several studies in recent times have linked gut microbiome (GM) diversity to the pathogenesis of cancer and its role in disease progression through immune response, inflammation and metabolism modulation. This study focused on the use of network analysis and weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA) to identify the biological interaction between the gut ecosystem and its metabolites that could impact the immunotherapy response in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients undergoing second-line treatment with anti-PD1. Metabolomic data were merged with operational taxonomic units (OTUs) from 16S RNA-targeted metagenomics and classified by chemometric models. The traits considered for the analyses were: (i) condition: disease or control (CTRLs), and (ii) treatment: responder (R) or non-responder (NR). Network analysis indicated that indole and its derivatives, aldehydes and alcohols could play a signaling role in GM functionality. WGCNA generated, instead, strong correlations between short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) and a healthy GM. Furthermore, commensal bacteria such as Akkermansia muciniphila, Rikenellaceae, Bacteroides, Peptostreptococcaceae, Mogibacteriaceae and Clostridiaceae were found to be more abundant in CTRLs than in NSCLC patients. Our preliminary study demonstrates that the discovery of microbiota-linked biomarkers could provide an indication on the road towards personalized management of NSCLC patients.Entities:
Keywords: anti-PD1 immune checkpoint inhibitor; betweenness centrality; clustering coefficient; communities; gut microbiome; metabolite; network analysis; non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); operational taxonomic unit (OTU); weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA)
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33227982 PMCID: PMC7699235 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21228730
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Weighted Gene Co-expression Network Analysis (WGCNA). (a) Clustering dendrogram of samples. Sample clustering was conducted to detect outliers. All samples were located in the clusters and passed the cut-off thresholds. The horizontal bars represent how the traits (i.e., condition and response to treatment) relate to the sample dendrogram: white (low value) represents controls (CTRLs) and non-responder (NR) for condition and treatment traits, respectively; red (high value) represents case and responder (R) for condition and treatment traits, respectively; gray means missing entry. (b) Calculation and selection of optimal soft-thresholding rule. Influence of different powers on the scale independence (left) and on the mean connectivity (right). The red arrow indicates the selected soft-thresholding power. (c) Barplot. The bars represent the size of each WGCNA-detected module and were colored according to the corresponding module labels. (d) Weighted correlation network. In the network, the WGCNA-detected modules were highlighted with a colored circle according to the corresponding module labels. Nodes in the network are colored according to the corresponding module labels. (e) Pie charts. Pie charts represent the percentages and numbers of operational taxonomic units (OTUs) and metabolites falling in each WGCNA-detected module. (f) Module–traits associations. In the heatmap, each row corresponds to a module eigengene (ME) and each column to a trait. Each cell contains the corresponding correlation and p-value. The table is color-coded by correlation according to the color legend. (g) Distribution of features (OTUs and metabolites) identified at the end of the data processing, in the WGCNA-detected modules.
Figure 2Z scores across subjects (NSCLC = 1–11, CTRLs = 12–19) calculated for the selected elements of the two groups (OTUs and metabolites). At the end of the filtration procedure, forty-four compounds were identified and included in the analysis. Data from patients and controls were merged and cross-correlated. The solid red line helps to separate the two groups (NSCLC and CTRLs).
Figure 3(a) The matrix obtained by cross-correlating OTUs and metabolites across subjects was thresholded according to statistical significance (p < 0.05) and False Discovery Rate (FDR)-corrected for multiple comparisons. Only positive correlations were found to be statistically significant and subsequently associated with the edges, giving place to the weighted adjacency matrix, i.e., the network. (b) The distribution of features within the network: green—OTUs, pink—metabolites. Numbers within the nodes identify features according to the order shown aside the weighted adjacency matrix. The network was divided into two main components: a big one and a triplet (nodes 14, 15, 40). (c) Communities founded by the Louvain algorithm in the network. Colors were used only for distinguishing the different communities, which, in turn, represents the affinity of species according to their covariance across subjects. (d) Degree and betweenness centrality calculated in the network. The size of each node is proportional to its betweenness, while the color code (from white to dark green) refers to the magnitude of the degree centrality (from low degree to high degree). (e) Clustering coefficient and betweenness centrality calculated in the network. The size of each node is proportional to its betweenness centrality, while the color code (from white to dark blue) refers to the magnitude of the clustering coefficient (from low clustering to high clustering coefficient). Legend Panel b–e. (1) Coriobacteriaceae; (2) Bacteroides caccae; (3) Bacteroides uniformis; (4) Rikenellaceae; (5) Akkermansia muciniphila; (6) Collinsella aerofaciens; (7) Roseburia faecis; (8) Peptostreptococcaceae; (9) Mogibacteriaceae; (10) Methanobrevibacter; (11) Ruminococcus bromii; (12) Atopobium; (13) Bifidobacterium pseudolongum; (14) Desulfitobacter; (15) Comamonas; (16) 1-Hexanol; (17) 1-Pentanol; (18) 2.3-Butanedione; (19) 2-Butanone; (20) 2-Butenal; (21) 2-Heptanone; (22) 2-Hexanone; (23) 2-Octanone; (24) 3-Carene; (25) 6-Methyl-3.5-heptadiene-2-one; (26) 6-Methyl-5-hepten-2-one; (27) Acetoin; (28) Acetone; (29) Anethole; (30) Benzaldehyde; (31) Benzeneacetaldehyde; (32) Butanal, 3-methyl-; (33) Butyric acid; (34) Caryophyllene; (35) Butanoic acid ethyl ester; (36) g-Terpinene; (37) Heptane, 3.4-dimethyl-; (38) Indole; (39) Indole, 3-methyl-; (40) Methyl Isobutyl Ketone; (41) p-cresol; (42) Pentanoic acid; (43) Phenol; (44) Pyridine.