Beyond borders: A systematic review and meta-analysis of human-specific faecal markers across geographical settings.

IF 11.4 1区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Leah R Barrett, Paris Beasy, Yussi M Palacios Delgado, John D Boyce, Karin Leder, David T McCarthy, Rebekah Henry
{"title":"Beyond borders: A systematic review and meta-analysis of human-specific faecal markers across geographical settings.","authors":"Leah R Barrett, Paris Beasy, Yussi M Palacios Delgado, John D Boyce, Karin Leder, David T McCarthy, Rebekah Henry","doi":"10.1080/10643389.2025.2455031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Human fecal waste is a global health risk associated with diarrheal diseases, responsible for approximately 1.2 million deaths annually. Microbial Source Tracking (MST) is a molecular method that evaluates environmental sources of fecal contamination, aiding quantification of this contamination and associated health risks. However, reported variations in global human gut microbiomes and geographic performance of human-specific fecal markers suggest that current MST targets may not have broad applicability across populations. This systematic review quantified the performance of human-specific fecal markers to identify those suitable for use across various geographic regions. We evaluated data from primary research articles, published before 18<sup>th</sup> October 2023, identified through PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science using PRISMA guidelines. 103 studies published between 1995 and 2023, spanning 34 countries, 6 continents, and 4 climate zones met inclusion criteria, with quantifiable performance metrics (sensitivity, specificity or accuracy) and a geographic testing location. Extracted data was analyzed to establish marker performance across geographic locations, climate zones, and development status. Over 80% were conducted in High-Income Countries (HICs) and >50% in temperate zones, primarily in the USA (43%), Australia (24%), and Spain (19%). <i>Bacteroides HF183</i> was the most commonly tested (<i>n</i> = 45 studies). However, no target consistently demonstrated sensitivity, specificity, and/or accuracy >80% across different settings. Consequently, a decision tree is presented supporting selection of appropriate human-specific markers for regional-specific baseline studies. This provides critical information to support new MST research, particularly in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), assisting with informed decision and method selection for assessing risks of faecal derived pathogens.</p>","PeriodicalId":10823,"journal":{"name":"Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology","volume":"55 7","pages":"447-464"},"PeriodicalIF":11.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12051442/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2025.2455031","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Human fecal waste is a global health risk associated with diarrheal diseases, responsible for approximately 1.2 million deaths annually. Microbial Source Tracking (MST) is a molecular method that evaluates environmental sources of fecal contamination, aiding quantification of this contamination and associated health risks. However, reported variations in global human gut microbiomes and geographic performance of human-specific fecal markers suggest that current MST targets may not have broad applicability across populations. This systematic review quantified the performance of human-specific fecal markers to identify those suitable for use across various geographic regions. We evaluated data from primary research articles, published before 18th October 2023, identified through PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science using PRISMA guidelines. 103 studies published between 1995 and 2023, spanning 34 countries, 6 continents, and 4 climate zones met inclusion criteria, with quantifiable performance metrics (sensitivity, specificity or accuracy) and a geographic testing location. Extracted data was analyzed to establish marker performance across geographic locations, climate zones, and development status. Over 80% were conducted in High-Income Countries (HICs) and >50% in temperate zones, primarily in the USA (43%), Australia (24%), and Spain (19%). Bacteroides HF183 was the most commonly tested (n = 45 studies). However, no target consistently demonstrated sensitivity, specificity, and/or accuracy >80% across different settings. Consequently, a decision tree is presented supporting selection of appropriate human-specific markers for regional-specific baseline studies. This provides critical information to support new MST research, particularly in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMICs), assisting with informed decision and method selection for assessing risks of faecal derived pathogens.

超越边界:跨地理环境的人类特异性粪便标志物的系统回顾和荟萃分析。
人类粪便是与腹泻疾病相关的全球健康风险,每年造成约120万人死亡。微生物源追踪(MST)是一种评估粪便污染环境来源的分子方法,有助于量化这种污染和相关的健康风险。然而,据报道,全球人类肠道微生物组的变化和人类特异性粪便标志物的地理表现表明,目前的MST靶点可能不具有广泛的人群适用性。本系统综述量化了人类特异性粪便标志物的性能,以确定适合在不同地理区域使用的标志物。我们评估了2023年10月18日之前发表的主要研究文章的数据,通过PubMed、Scopus和Web of Science使用PRISMA指南进行了识别。1995年至2023年间发表的103项研究,涵盖34个国家、6大洲和4个气候带,符合纳入标准,具有可量化的性能指标(灵敏度、特异性或准确性)和地理测试位置。对提取的数据进行分析,以建立跨地理位置、气候带和发展状况的市场表现。超过80%在高收入国家(HICs)进行,50%在温带地区进行,主要是在美国(43%)、澳大利亚(24%)和西班牙(19%)。HF183是最常检测的拟杆菌(n = 45)。然而,在不同的环境下,没有一个靶标始终如一地显示出超过80%的敏感性、特异性和/或准确性。因此,提出了一个决策树,支持为区域特异性基线研究选择适当的人类特异性标记。这为支持新的MST研究提供了关键信息,特别是在低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs),有助于做出明智的决策和选择评估粪便来源病原体风险的方法。
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
CiteScore
27.30
自引率
1.60%
发文量
64
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Two of the most pressing global challenges of our era involve understanding and addressing the multitude of environmental problems we face. In order to tackle them effectively, it is essential to devise logical strategies and methods for their control. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology serves as a valuable international platform for the comprehensive assessment of current knowledge across a wide range of environmental science topics. Environmental science is a field that encompasses the intricate and fluid interactions between various scientific disciplines. These include earth and agricultural sciences, chemistry, biology, medicine, and engineering. Furthermore, new disciplines such as environmental toxicology and risk assessment have emerged in response to the increasing complexity of environmental challenges. The purpose of Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology is to provide a space for critical analysis and evaluation of existing knowledge in environmental science. By doing so, it encourages the advancement of our understanding and the development of effective solutions. This journal plays a crucial role in fostering international cooperation and collaboration in addressing the pressing environmental issues of our time.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信