| Literature DB >> 34753420 |
Hui-Ching Lau1,2, Chi-Yao Hsueh1,2, Hongli Gong3,4,5, Ji Sun6, Hui-Ying Huang1,2, Ming Zhang1,2, Liang Zhou7,8,9.
Abstract
AIMS: To analyze changes in oropharynx microbiota composition after receiving induced chemotherapy followed by surgery for hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (HPSCC) patients.Entities:
Keywords: 16S rRNA sequencing; Fusobacterium; Hypopharyngeal carcinoma; Induced chemotherapy
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34753420 PMCID: PMC8577011 DOI: 10.1186/s12866-021-02362-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Microbiol ISSN: 1471-2180 Impact factor: 3.605
Fig. 1Flow chart
Demographic data of HPSCC and control group
| HPSCC | control group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.144 | |||
| Male / Female | 25/3 | 24/6 | |
| 0.137 | |||
| ≤ 60Y / > 60Y | 19/19 | 21/9 | |
| 0.231 | |||
| No / Yes | 24/14 | 23/7 | |
| 0.580 | |||
| No / Yes | 36/2 | 30/0 | |
| 0.090 | |||
| No / Yes | 6/32 | 10/20 | |
| No / Yes | 8/30 | 20/10 |
Two-tailed p-value under Pearson or Exact chi-square test. * p < 0.05 means statistical significance with bold marker; Abbreviations: HTN hypertension, DM diabetes mellitus
Fig. 2Alpha diversity and Beta diversity of HPSCC and CG compared. Alpha diversity is based on A Ace index shown in violin plot, illustrating lower richness of microbiota (p = 0.0083); B Shannon index shown in violin plot, illustrating the lower evenness of microbiota in HPSCC group, compared to CG (p < 0.0001); C Observed species index shown in violin plot, illustrating the lower evenness of microbiota in HPSCC group, compared to CG (p = 0.0049). Beta diversity was used to evaluate the similarity between groups and its measurements were as follows: D PCoA with weighted UniFrac in HPSCC presented statistical difference compared to CG. (Adonis analysis: R2 = 0.1136; p = 0.001) E NMDS in HPSCC presented a statistical difference compared to CG. (Anosim analysis: R2 = 0.0945; p = 0.006)
Demographic data of patient with IC and nIC
| IC group | nIC group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.552 | |||
| Male / Female | 10/0 | 25/3 | |
| 0.713 | |||
| ≤ 60Y / > 60Y | 4/6 | 15/13 | |
| 0.127 | |||
| No / Yes | 4/6 | 20/8 | |
| 0.462 | |||
| No / Yes | 9/1 | 27/1 | |
| 0.936 | |||
| No / Yes | 1/9 | 5/23 | |
| 0.584 | |||
| No / Yes | 1/9 | 7/21 | |
| 0.069 | |||
| Pyriform sinus | 6 | 20 | |
| Posterior pharyngeal | 4 | 3 | |
| Postcricoid region | 0 | 5 | |
| TLTP | 3 | 0 | |
| TLPP | 3 | 15 | |
| PLPP | 4 | 13 | |
| 0.556 | |||
| No | 0 | 3 | |
| One side | 5 | 12 | |
| Two sides | 5 | 13 | |
| 0.719 | |||
| T1-2 | 6 | 14 | |
| T3-4 | 4 | 14 | |
| 0.079 | |||
| N0 | 0 | 9 | |
| N+ | 10 | 19 | |
| 0.082 | |||
| Early stage (stage I/II) | 0 | 8 | |
| Advanced stage (stage III/IV) | 10 | 20 | |
| 0.750 | |||
| ≤ 4 cm | 8 | 21 | |
| > 4 cm | 2 | 7 | |
| 0.736 | |||
| ≤ 3 cm | 7 | 16 | |
| > 3 cm | 3 | 12 |
Two-tailed p-value under Pearson or Exact chi-square test. *p<0.05 means statistical significance with bold marker
Abbreviations: TLTP total laryngectomy with total pharyngectomy, TLPP total laryngectomy with partial pharyngectomy, PLPP partial laryngectomy with partial pharyngectomy, HTN hypertension, DM diabetes mellitus
Fig. 3Alpha diversity and Beta diversity of IC, nIC and CG compared. Alpha diversity is based on A Shannon index shown in violin plot. Only nIC groups presented lower evenness of microbiota than CG (p < 0.0001). B Ace index is shown in violin plot. Only nIC groups presented lower richness of microbiota than CG (p = 0.0068). Beta diversity was used to evaluate the similarity between groups and its measurements were as follows: C PCoA with weighted UniFrac was measured using Adonis analysis, reflecting the abundance of OPM microbiota in both IC and nIC groups to be profoundly different compared to CG. (Adonis in IC-CG: R2 = 0.183; p = 0.032; in nIC-CG: R2 = 0.1625; p = 0.001) D NMDS was measured through Anosim analysis reflecting the abundance of OPM microbiota in nIC group to be profoundly different compared to CG (Anosim: R2 = 0.1481; p = 0.001). E Taxa were enriched in IC group (Red), nIC group (green) and CG (Blue) groups, indicated with LDA scores (LDA = 3), respectively. F A cladogram represents the OPM microbiota in IC, nIC and CG. Taxa enriched in IC (Red) and CG (Blue). The brightness of each dot was proportional to its effect size
Fig. 4Beta diversity of IC and post-IC group were measured through A PCoA with weighted UniFrac, reflecting the abundance of OPM microbiota in both post-IC groups to be profoundly different compared to IC group (Adonis analysis: R2 = 0.2154; p = 0.005) B NMDS was measured through Anosim analysis, reflecting the abundance of OPM microbiota in post-IC group to be profoundly different compared to IG group. (Anosim: R2 = 0.5221; p = 0.001); Beta-diversity of nIC and post-nIC group were measured through C PCoA with weighted UniFrac, reflecting that the abundance of OPM microbiota in both post-nIC group to be profoundly different compared to nIC group (Adonis analysis: R2 = 0.1314; p = 0.001); D NMDS was measured through Anosim analysis reflecting the abundance of OPM microbiota in nIC group to be profoundly different compared to CG. (Anosim: R2 = 0.317; p = 0.001)
Fig. 5Student’s t-test. A Analyze the different microbial communities (genus level) in post-IC group, compared to IC group. B Analyze the different microbial communities (genus level) in post-nIC group, compared to nIC group. p < 0.05 means statistical difference
Fig. 6Microbiota composition stratified through early stage and advanced stage TNM. A heatmap plot to discriminate significantly varied OPM microbiota in genus level. B Three genera were found through Student’s t-test, which were Fusobacterium, Actinomyces, and Parvimonas. C Taxa enriched during early-stage group (Red) and advanced-stage group (Blue) were indicated with LDA scores, respectively. D A cladogram represents the OPM microbiota during early-stage versus advanced stage TNM. Taxa enriched in early stage (Red) and advance stage groups (Blue). The brightness of each dot is proportional to its effect size. * p < 0.05; The abundance of genus Fusobacterium gDNA was verified through qPCR analysis in comparison with E HPSCC and post-HPSCC group and F early stage and advanced stage group