Cited by 804Gut microbiota and healthOral microbiology and periodontitis researchClostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research

Tumour-associated and non-tumour-associated microbiota in colorectal cancer

Open access
Flemer, Burkhardt, Lynch, Denise B, Brown, Jillian M R, Jeffery, Ian B, Ryan, Feargal J, Claesson, Marcus J, O'Riordain, Micheal, Shanahan, Fergus +1 more·2017·Gut

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: A signature that unifies the colorectal cancer (CRC) microbiota across multiple studies has not been identified. In addition to methodological variance, heterogeneity may be caused by both microbial and host response differences, which was addressed in this study. DESIGN: We prospectively studied the colonic microbiota and the expression of specific host response genes using faecal and mucosal samples ('ON' and 'OFF' the tumour, proximal and distal) from 59 patients undergoing surgery for CRC, 21 individuals with polyps and 56 healthy controls. Microbiota composition was determined by 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing; expression of host genes involved in CRC progression and immune response was quantified by real-time quantitative PCR. RESULTS: The microbiota of patients with CRC differed from that of controls, but alterations were not restricted to the cancerous tissue. Differences between distal and proximal cancers were detected and faecal microbiota only partially reflected mucosal microbiota in CRC. Patients with CRC can be stratified based on higher level structures of mucosal-associated bacterial co-abundance groups (CAGs) that resemble the previously formulated concept of enterotypes. Of these, Bacteroidetes Cluster 1 and Firmicutes Cluster 1 were in decreased abundance in CRC mucosa, whereas Bacteroidetes Cluster 2, Firmicutes Cluster 2, Pathogen Cluster and Prevotella Cluster showed increased abundance in CRC mucosa. CRC-associated CAGs were differentially correlated with the expression of host immunoinflammatory response genes. CONCLUSIONS: CRC-associated microbiota profiles differ from those in healthy subjects and are linked with distinct mucosal gene-expression profiles. Compositional alterations in the microbiota are not restricted to cancerous tissue and differ between distal and proximal cancers.

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 · 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-309595

Cites

37 of 37 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?

  • Compared with controls, colorectal cancer patients had lower abundances of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus spp. and other short-chain fatty acid-producing bacteria such as Clostridium, Roseburia, Lachnospiraceae, and Faecalibacterium prausnitzii.

    “several studies have shown that compared with controls, patients with CRC had lower abundances of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus spp,16, 18 and other SCFA-producing bacteria, such as the genera Clostridium and Roseburia, the family Lachnospiraceae, and Faecalibacterium prausnitzii.15, 35, 37, 45, 53, 129”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Flemer, B., Lynch, D. B., Brown, J. M. R., Jeffery, I. B., Ryan, F. J., Claesson, M. J., O'Riordain, M., Shanahan, F., & O'Toole, P. W.
Affiliations
University College Cork (IE)
Venue
Gut
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2016-03-18
Volume
66
Issue
4
Pages
633-643
ISSN
  • 0017-5749 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3288
OpenAlex
W2307660471
Cited by
804
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 54 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 88 · 2023: 114 · 2022: 114 · 2021: 101 · 2020: 92 · 2019: 72 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 46 · 2016: 6
FWCI
31.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Gut (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Cork Open Research Archive (University College Cork, Ireland) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Science Foundation Ireland (11/SIRG/B2162, SFI/12/RC/, 12/RC/2273, 12/RC/, SFI/12/RC/2273.)
  • APC Microbiome Institute (SFI/12/RC/2273)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Health Sciences › Dentistry › Periodontics › Oral microbiology and periodontitis research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Clostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens research
Keywords
colorectal cancer, gut microbiota, colonic mucosa, fecal microbiota, enterotypes, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, Prevotella, colorectal polyps, tumor microenvironment
MeSH terms
Bacillota, Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antigens, Bacterial, Colon, Colonic Neoplasms, Colonic Polyps, Feces, Female, Humans, Intestinal Mucosa, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Rectal Neoplasms, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Gene Expression, Case-Control Studies, Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor 1, Prevotella, Interleukin-17, Bacteroidetes, Interleukin-23, Chemokine CXCL1, Chemokine CCL20

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