Evidence Hub

Microbiota Profile and Impact of Fusobacterium nucleatum in Colorectal Cancer Patients of Barretos Cancer Hospital

A. D. de Carvalho, Leandro de Mattos Pereira, J. Datorre, W. D. dos Santos, G. Berardinelli, Marcus de Medeiros Matsushita, M. Oliveira, R. Durães et al.

Frontiers in Oncology, 2019

59 citations

Abstract

Microbial diversity has been pointed out as a major factor in the development and progression of colorectal cancer (CRC). We sought to explore the richness and abundance of the microbial community of a series of colorectal tumor samples treated at Barretos Cancer Hospital, Brazil, through 16S rRNA sequencing. The presence and the impact of Fusobacterium nucleatum (Fn) DNA in CRC prognosis was further evaluated by qPCR in a series of 152 CRC cases. An enrichment for potentially oncogenic bacteria in CRC was observed, with Fusobacterium being the most abundant genus in the tumor tissue. In the validation dataset, Fn was detected in 35/152 (23.0%) of fresh-frozen tumor samples and in 6/57 (10.5%) of paired normal adjacent tissue, with higher levels in the tumor (p = 0.0033). Fn DNA in the tumor tissue was significantly associated with proximal tumors (p = 0.001), higher depth of invasion (p = 0.014), higher clinical stages (p = 0.033), poor differentiation (p = 0.011), MSI-positive status (p < 0.0001), BRAF mutated tumors (p < 0.0001), and the loss of expression of mismatch-repair proteins MLH1 (p < 0.0001), MSH2 (p = 0.003), and PMS2 (p < 0.0001). Moreover, the presence of Fn DNA in CRC tissue was also associated with a worse patient cancer-specific survival (69.9 vs. 82.2% in 5 years; p = 0.028) and overall survival (63.5 vs. 76.5%; p = 0.037). Here we report, for the first time, the association of F. nucleatum presence with important clinical and molecular features in a…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free