The Causal Role of Esophageal Cancer and Gut Microbiota: A Bidirectional Mendelian Randomization Study.

IF 3.3 Q1 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Wei Su, Han Chen, Die Hu, Bixing Ye, Weifeng Zhang, Guoxin Zhang, Xinmin Si, Xiaoying Zhou
{"title":"The Causal Role of Esophageal Cancer and Gut Microbiota: A Bidirectional Mendelian Randomization Study.","authors":"Wei Su, Han Chen, Die Hu, Bixing Ye, Weifeng Zhang, Guoxin Zhang, Xinmin Si, Xiaoying Zhou","doi":"10.1177/2515690X251324793","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Gut microbiota are reported to be associated with the incidence and prognosis of Esophageal cancer (EC) but their genetic association is unclear. We carried out a bidirectional MR analysis to assess the causal relationship between EC and gut microbiota from fecal samples.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The microbiome genome-wide association studies (GWAS) data of 18,340 individuals provided by MiBioGen consortium and the EC GWAS data (740 esophageal cancers cases and 372 016 controls) provided by UK Biobank were respectively utilized as exposure and/or outcome data. Reliable single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were obtained after rigorous screening. A bidirectional Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was conducted using the inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method. The sensitivity analyses including the MR-Egger method, weighted median, weighed mode and leave-one-out method were performed to examine the stability, heterogeneity and pleiotropy of the results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Forward MR analysis revealed the increase in abundance of the microbial trait by each standard deviation was associated with a higher risk of EC (<i>Coprobacter</i> (OR = 1.001,95%CI = 1.000-1.002, <i>P </i>= .0281, FDR = 0.0424); <i>Ruminococcus1</i>(OR = 1.001,95%CI = 1.000-1.002, <i>P </i>= .0318, FDR = 0.0424); <i>Senegalimassilia</i> (OR = 1.002,95%CI = 1.000-1.003, <i>P </i>= .0062, FDR = 0.0372); <i>Veillonella</i> (OR = 1.001,95%CI = 1.000-1.002, <i>P </i>= .0182, FDR = 0.0372)) or a lower risk of EC (<i>Eubacterium oxidoreducens</i> (OR = 0.999, 95%CI = 0.998-1.000, <i>P </i>= .0379, <i>FDR </i>= 00 433); <i>Lachnospira</i> (OR = 0.998,95%CI = 0.996-1.000, <i>P </i>= .0186, <i>FDR </i>= 0.0372); Romboutsia (OR = 0.999,95%CI = 0.998-1.000, <i>P </i>= .0482, FDR = 0.0482); <i>Turicibacter</i> (OR = 0.999,95%CI = 0.998-1.000, <i>P </i>= .0133, FDR = 0.0372)). Reverse MR analysis showed that genetic liability to EC was also causally linked toincreased susceptibility of changes in the gut microbiome (genera <i>Eggerthella</i> (Beta = 37.63,95%CI = 4.76-70.50, <i>P </i>= .0248, FDR = 0.0331); <i>Coprococcus 2</i> (Beta = 23.90,95%CI = 1.65-46.15, <i>P </i>= .0353, FDR = 0.0353); <i>Christensenellaceae R.7</i> (Beta = 22.75,95%CI = 4.22-41.28, <i>P </i>= .0161, FDR = 0.0322); <i>Intestinimonas</i> (Beta = -33.24,95%CI = -54.90-11.58, <i>P </i>= .0026, <i>FDR </i>= 0.0104)).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings supported a bidirectionally causal relationship between gut microbiota and EC, implying the potential role of gut microbiota in preventing the occurrence and development of EC.</p>","PeriodicalId":15714,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence-based Integrative Medicine","volume":"30 ","pages":"2515690X251324793"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11866380/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Evidence-based Integrative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2515690X251324793","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Gut microbiota are reported to be associated with the incidence and prognosis of Esophageal cancer (EC) but their genetic association is unclear. We carried out a bidirectional MR analysis to assess the causal relationship between EC and gut microbiota from fecal samples.

Methods: The microbiome genome-wide association studies (GWAS) data of 18,340 individuals provided by MiBioGen consortium and the EC GWAS data (740 esophageal cancers cases and 372 016 controls) provided by UK Biobank were respectively utilized as exposure and/or outcome data. Reliable single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were obtained after rigorous screening. A bidirectional Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was conducted using the inverse-variance weighted (IVW) method. The sensitivity analyses including the MR-Egger method, weighted median, weighed mode and leave-one-out method were performed to examine the stability, heterogeneity and pleiotropy of the results.

Results: Forward MR analysis revealed the increase in abundance of the microbial trait by each standard deviation was associated with a higher risk of EC (Coprobacter (OR = 1.001,95%CI = 1.000-1.002, P = .0281, FDR = 0.0424); Ruminococcus1(OR = 1.001,95%CI = 1.000-1.002, P = .0318, FDR = 0.0424); Senegalimassilia (OR = 1.002,95%CI = 1.000-1.003, P = .0062, FDR = 0.0372); Veillonella (OR = 1.001,95%CI = 1.000-1.002, P = .0182, FDR = 0.0372)) or a lower risk of EC (Eubacterium oxidoreducens (OR = 0.999, 95%CI = 0.998-1.000, P = .0379, FDR = 00 433); Lachnospira (OR = 0.998,95%CI = 0.996-1.000, P = .0186, FDR = 0.0372); Romboutsia (OR = 0.999,95%CI = 0.998-1.000, P = .0482, FDR = 0.0482); Turicibacter (OR = 0.999,95%CI = 0.998-1.000, P = .0133, FDR = 0.0372)). Reverse MR analysis showed that genetic liability to EC was also causally linked toincreased susceptibility of changes in the gut microbiome (genera Eggerthella (Beta = 37.63,95%CI = 4.76-70.50, P = .0248, FDR = 0.0331); Coprococcus 2 (Beta = 23.90,95%CI = 1.65-46.15, P = .0353, FDR = 0.0353); Christensenellaceae R.7 (Beta = 22.75,95%CI = 4.22-41.28, P = .0161, FDR = 0.0322); Intestinimonas (Beta = -33.24,95%CI = -54.90-11.58, P = .0026, FDR = 0.0104)).

Conclusions: Our findings supported a bidirectionally causal relationship between gut microbiota and EC, implying the potential role of gut microbiota in preventing the occurrence and development of EC.

食管癌与肠道菌群的因果关系:一项双向孟德尔随机研究。
目的:据报道,肠道微生物群与食管癌(EC)的发病率和预后有关,但其遗传相关性尚不清楚。我们进行了双向磁共振分析,以评估EC与粪便样本肠道微生物群之间的因果关系。方法:分别利用MiBioGen联盟提供的18340例个体的微生物组全基因组关联研究(GWAS)数据和UK Biobank提供的EC GWAS数据(740例食管癌病例和372 016例对照组)作为暴露和/或结局数据。经过严格筛选,获得了可靠的单核苷酸多态性(snp)。采用反方差加权(IVW)方法进行双向孟德尔随机化(MR)分析。采用MR-Egger法、加权中位数法、加权模型和留一法进行敏感性分析,检验结果的稳定性、异质性和多效性。结果:前向磁共振分析显示,每个标准差的微生物特征丰度增加与EC的高风险相关(Coprobacter (OR = 1.001,95%CI = 1.000-1.002, P = 1.001)。0281, fdr = 0.0424);Ruminococcus1 (OR = 1.001, 95% ci -1.002 = 1.000, P =。0318, fdr = 0.0424);Senegalimassilia (OR = 1.002, 95% ci -1.003 = 1.000, P =。0062, fdr = 0.0372);韦永氏球菌属(OR = 1.001, 95% ci -1.002 = 1.000, P =。0182, FDR = 0.0372))或较低的EC风险(氧化还原真杆菌(or = 0.999, 95%CI = 0.998-1.000, P = 0.0372)。0379, fdr = 00 433);毛螺菌属(OR = 0.998, 95% ci -1.000 = 0.996, P =。0186, fdr = 0.0372);Romboutsia (OR = 0.999,95%CI = 0.998-1.000, P =;0482, fdr = 0.0482);Turicibacter (OR = 0.999, 95% ci -1.000 = 0.998, P =。0133, fdr = 0.0372))。反向MR分析显示,对EC的遗传易感性也与肠道微生物组(Eggerthella属)变化的易感性增加有因果关系(Beta = 37.63,95%CI = 4.76-70.50, P =。0248, fdr = 0.0331);Coprococcus 2(β= 23.90,95% ci -46.15 = 1.65, P =。0353, fdr = 0.0353);Christensenellaceae R.7(β= 22.75,95% ci -41.28 = 4.22, P =。0161, fdr = 0.0322);Intestinimonas(β= -33.24,95% ci -11.58 = -54.90, P =。0026, fdr = 0.0104))。结论:我们的研究结果支持肠道菌群与EC之间的双向因果关系,暗示肠道菌群在预防EC发生和发展中的潜在作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Evidence-based Integrative Medicine
Journal of Evidence-based Integrative Medicine INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信