| Literature DB >> 33996615 |
Yu-Kun Zhang1, Qian Zhang2, Yu-Liuming Wang1, Wei-Yuan Zhang1, Han-Qing Hu1, Hong-Yu Wu1, Xiang-Zong Sheng1, Kang-Jia Luo1, Hao Zhang1, Meng Wang2, Rui Huang1, Gui-Yu Wang1,2.
Abstract
Intestinal microbiota is gaining increasing interest from researchers, and a series of studies proved that gut bacteria plays a significant role in various malignancies, especially in colorectal cancer (CRC). In this study, a cohort of 34 CRC patients (average age=65 years old), 26 young volunteers (below 30 years old), and 26 old volunteers (over 60 years old) was enrolled. 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing was used to explore fecal bacteria diversity. The operational taxonomic unit (OTU) clustering analysis and NMDS (non-metric multidimensional scaling) analysis were used to separate different groups. Cluster of ortholog genes (COG) functional annotation and Kyoto encyclopedia of genes and genomes (KEGG) were used to detect enriched pathways among three groups. Community separations were observed among the three groups of this cohort. Clostridia, Actinobacteria, Bifidobacterium, and Fusobacteria were the most enriched bacteria in the young group, old group, and CRC group respectively. Also, in the young, old, and CRC group, the ratio of Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes was increased sequentially despite no statistical differences. Further, COG showed that transcription, cell wall/membrane/envelope biogenesis, inorganic ion transport and metabolism, and signal transduction mechanisms were differentially expressed among three groups. KEGG pathways associated with ABC transporters, amino sugar and nucleotide sugar metabolism, arginine and proline metabolism, and aminoacyl-tRNA biosynthesis also showed statistical differences among the three groups. These results indicated that the intestinal bacterial community varied as age changed and was related to CRC, and we discussed that specific bacteria enriched in the young and old group may exert a protective function, while bacteria enriched in the CRC group may promote tumorigenesis.Entities:
Keywords: 16S rRNA; Illumina Miseq sequencing; cancer biomarker; colorectal cancer; gut microbiota
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33996615 PMCID: PMC8121496 DOI: 10.3389/fcimb.2021.606490
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cell Infect Microbiol ISSN: 2235-2988 Impact factor: 5.293
Demographic characteristics of the three groups.
| Characteristics | Young volunteers | Old volunteers | CRC patients |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Males | 19(73%) | 14(54%) | 28(82%) |
| Females | 7(27%) | 12(46%) | 6(18%) |
|
| |||
| Median | 23 | 66 | 63 |
| Range | 21-26 | 60-89 | 28-81 |
|
| |||
| Median | 21.55 | 23.57 | 23.11 |
| Range | 17.3-25.7 | 16.53-34.01 | 16.33-32.87 |
|
| |||
| I | 3(8.85%) | ||
| II | 15(44.1%) | ||
| III | 13(38.2) | ||
| IV | 3(8.85%) | ||
|
| |||
| Adenocarcinoma | 30(88.2%) | ||
| Mucinous adenocarcinoma | 4(11.3%) |
BMI, (Body Mass Index).
Figure 1The difference of Shannon (A) and Simpson (B) index among three groups; the bigger the Shannon index is, the more diverse the sample is, while the Simpson index is the opposite. (Y, young volunteers; O, old volunteers; C, CRC patients). n.s, no significance.
Figure 2The community difference among the three groups. (A) Points of different colors or shapes represent samples of different groups. The closer the two sample points are, the more similar the species composition of the two samples is. Horizontal and vertical coordinates represent relative distances and have no practical significance. The stress number can verify the merits and demerits of Nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) analysis results. It is generally believed that stress < 0.2 can be expressed by the two-dimensional dot pattern of NMDS, and our grouping scheme has a certain explanatory meaning on the phylum level. (B) The scale of X and Y axis is relative distance, which has no practical significance. Comp1 and Comp2 respectively represent the suspected influencing factors that deviate the microbial composition of the three groups of samples. (Y, young volunteers; O, old volunteers; C, CRC patients).
Figure 3(A) the relative abundance of the Fusobacterium among the three groups. (B) the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio among the three groups. n.s, no significance.
Figure 4The LDA score obtained by linear regression analysis (LDA), The threshold of linear discriminant analysis score was set as 3, the larger the LDA score is, the greater differences among three groups are. (Y, young volunteers; O, old volunteers; C, CRC patients).
Taxa differentially represented in the gut microbiomes of the three groups.
| Taxa | Young group (%) | Old group (%) | CRC group (%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
|
| 61.56 ± 18.99 | 45.53 ± 19.03 | 48.85 ± 18.53 | 0.002988 |
|
| 3.75 ± 4.667 | 5.172 ± 7.796 | 2.015 ± 2.754 | 0.04445 |
|
| 0.2109 ± 0.6064 | 0.2629 ± 0.5455 | 1.57 ± 6.375 | 0.001633 |
|
| ||||
|
| 50.42 ± 20.5 | 34.78 ± 21.22 | 31.15 ± 19.33 | 0.00151 |
|
| 3.75 ± 4.667 | 5.172 ± 7.796 | 2.015 ± 2.754 | 0.04445 |
|
| 0.2109 ± 0.6064 | 0.2629 ± 0.5455 | 1.57 ± 6.375 | 0.001633 |
|
| 0.01481 ± 0.06517 | 0.001152 ± 0.005069 | 0.0273 ± 0.1156 | 0.03095 |
|
| 0.02418 ± 0.04222 | 0.002303 ± 0.007181 | 0.006793 ± 0.01038 | <0.001 |
|
| ||||
|
| 50.42 ± 20.5 | 34.78 ± 21.22 | 31.14 ± 19.33 | 0.001497 |
|
| 2.209 ± 3.584 | 2.837 ± 5.602 | 1.225 ± 2.464 | 0.02087 |
|
| 0.2109 ± 0.6064 | 0.2629 ± 0.5455 | 1.57 ± 6.375 | 0.001633 |
|
| 0.005593 ± 0.0067 | 0.04146 ± 0.08009 | 0.2883 ± 0.8524 | 0.004154 |
|
| ||||
|
| 27.87 ± 15.53 | 16.41 ± 11.44 | 16.06 ± 12.34 | 0.003683 |
|
| 20.72 ± 14.26 | 15.45 ± 14.24 | 10.28 ± 9.682 | 0.005064 |
|
| 2.209 ± 3.584 | 2.837 ± 5.602 | 1.225 ± 2.464 | 0.02087 |
|
| ||||
|
| 7.981 ± 7.474 | 4.987 ± 7.052 | 3.996 ± 5.404 | 0.023 |
|
| 2.208 ± 3.583 | 2.82 ± 5.592 | 1.223 ± 2.463 | 0.02175 |
|
| 6.448 ± 8.051 | 3.277 ± 3.678 | 2.895 ± 5.211 | <0.001 |
|
| 5.883 ± 7.674 | 1.873 ± 2.434 | 1.258 ± 2.217 | 0.003082 |
Significant differences among three groups based on the acquired species abundance data by Kruskal-Wallis test.
Figure 5The function prediction of the three groups. (A) The differences of Cluster of Ortholog Genes (COG) function. (B) The abundance differences of the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway. (0.01 < P ≤ 0.05 marked as *, 0.001 < P ≤ 0.01 marked as **P ≤ 0.001 marked as***). (Y, young volunteers; O, old volunteers; C, CRC patients).