Cited by 1,373Gut microbiota and healthClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens researchColorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies

Meta-analysis of fecal metagenomes reveals global microbial signatures that are specific for colorectal cancer

Open access
Wirbel, Jakob, Pyl, Paul Theodor, Kartal, Ece, Zych, Konrad, Kashani, Alireza, Milanese, Alessio, Fleck, Jonas S., Voigt, Anita Y. +27 more·2019·Nature Medicine

Abstract

Association studies have linked microbiome alterations with many human diseases. However, they have not always reported consistent results, thereby necessitating cross-study comparisons. Here, a meta-analysis of eight geographically and technically diverse fecal shotgun metagenomic studies of colorectal cancer (CRC, n = 768), which was controlled for several confounders, identified a core set of 29 species significantly enriched in CRC metagenomes (false discovery rate (FDR) < 1 × 10−5). CRC signatures derived from single studies maintained their accuracy in other studies. By training on multiple studies, we improved detection accuracy and disease specificity for CRC. Functional analysis of CRC metagenomes revealed enriched protein and mucin catabolism genes and depleted carbohydrate degradation genes. Moreover, we inferred elevated production of secondary bile acids from CRC metagenomes, suggesting a metabolic link between cancer-associated gut microbes and a fat- and meat-rich diet. Through extensive validations, this meta-analysis firmly establishes globally generalizable, predictive taxonomic and functional microbiome CRC signatures as a basis for future diagnostics. Cross-study analysis defines fecal microbial species associated with colorectal cancer.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41591-019-0406-6

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The lack of solid cross-study reproducible microbial biomarkers of ICI response is not attributable to analytical choices, as applying the same meta-analysis methods in colorectal cancer confirmed strong and consistent biomarkers across cohorts.

    “The lack of solid cross-study reproducible microbial biomarkers of ICI response is not attributable to analytical choices, as applying the same meta-analysis methods in the context of colorectal cancer confirmed the strong and consistent biomarkers across cohorts described elsewhere13,14.”
  • CRC gut microbiome signature identified using supervised machine learning and meta-analysis included Solobacterium moorei, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Parvimonas micra, Peptostreptococcus stomatis, Peptostreptococcus anaerobius, and Gemella morbillorum.

    “This signature, identified using both supervised machine learning and a meta-analysis, included the bacterial species Solobacterium moorei, Fusobacterium nucleatum, Parvimonas micra, Peptostreptococcus stomatis, Peptostreptococcus anaerobius and Gemella morbillorum”
  • Several taxonomic features associated with sequence variants of cutC were enriched in colorectal cancer patients, including Hungatella hathewayi, Clostridium asparagiforme, Klebsiella oxytoca, and Escherichia coli.

    “Several taxonomic features associated with sequence variants of cutC were also found to be enriched in patients with CRC, including Hungatella hathewayi, Clostridium asparagiforme, Klebsiella oxytoca, and E coli.”
  • A meta-analysis of fecal metagenomes found that colorectal cancer patients had higher levels of two bacterial genes regulating trimethylamine synthesis, cutC and cutD.

    “A meta-analysis of metagenomes of fecal samples146 found patients with CRC to have higher levels of 2 bacterial genes that regulate TMA synthesis: choline TMA-lyase (cutC) and choline TMA-lyase-activating enzyme (cutD).”
  • The bai operon, which encodes 7α-dehydroxylation in Clostridium spp. needed for secondary bile acid synthesis, was enriched in fecal metagenomes from colorectal cancer patients.

    “Moreover, the bai operon, encoding 7α-dehydroxylation in Clostridium spp. required for synthesis of secondary bile acids, was found to be enriched in metagenomes of fecal samples from patients with CRC.146”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 85 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wirbel, J., Pyl, P. T., Kartal, E., Zych, K., Kashani, A., Milanese, A., Fleck, J. S., Voigt, A. Y., Palleja, A., Ponnudurai, R., Sunagawa, S., Coelho, L. P., Schrotz-King, P., Vogtmann, E., Habermann, N., Niméus, E., Thomas, A. M., Manghi, P., Gandini, S., Serrano, D., Mizutani, S., Shiroma, H., Shiba, S., Shibata, T., Yachida, S., Yamada, T., Waldron, L., Naccarati, A., Segata, N., Sinha, R., Ulrich, C. M., Brenner, H., Arumugam, M., Bork, P., & Zeller, G.
Affiliations
  • European Molecular Biology Laboratory (DE)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
  • Shanghai Medical College of Fudan University (CN)
  • National Cancer Institute (US)
  • Lund University (SE)
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • University of Trento (IT)
  • European Institute of Oncology (IT)
  • Tokyo Institute of Technology (JP)
  • National Cancer Center Research Institute (JP)
  • Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo (JP)
  • City University of New York (US)
  • Italian institute for Genomic Medicine (IT)
  • University of Utah (US)
  • German Cancer Research Center (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Arumugam, Manimozhiyan
  • Zeller, Georg
Venue
Nature Medicine
Published
2019-04
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
679-689
ISSN
  • 1078-8956 (ISSN-L)
  • 1546-170X
OpenAlex
W2927453907
Cited by
1,373
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 214 · 2025: 215 · 2024: 224 · 2023: 189 · 2022: 176 · 2021: 169 · 2020: 143 · 2019: 41 · 2016: 1
FWCI
11.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Southern Denmark Research Portal (University of Southern Denmark) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Iris (University of Trento) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • MDC Repository (Max-Delbrueck-Center for Molecular Medicine) (submittedVersion)
  • QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • The Mouseion at the JAXlibrary (Jackson Laboratory) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
  • Huntsman Cancer Foundation
  • Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich
  • Novo Nordisk
  • Helmut Horten Stiftung
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (16H06279, 18K15800)
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA189184, R01CA207371, ZIACP010198, P30CA042014, U01CA206110)
  • H2020 European Research Council (669830, 716575)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Clostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
Keywords
colorectal cancer, gut microbiota, fecal metagenome, microbial signatures, cross-study comparison, protein degradation, carbohydrate degradation, secondary bile acids, cancer diagnosis
MeSH terms
Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Adenoma, Aged, Feces, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Biological, Species Specificity, Biomarkers, Tumor, Colorectal Neoplasms, Reproducibility of Results, Cohort Studies, Databases, Genetic, Metagenome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review