Healthcare professionals' knowledge and attitudes toward the microbiome and fecal microbiotherapy or microbiota transfer in hematology and oncology: an international survey.

Q4 Health Professions
Clinical hematology international Pub Date : 2026-09-16 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.46989/001c.166241
Marion Larue, Giorgia Battipaglia, Hendrik Poeck, Riccardo Masetti, Christoph Stein-Thoeringer, Jaime Sanz, Daniela Weber, Annalisa Ruggeri, Zinaida Peric, Raphael Duarte, Mohamad Mohty, Florent Malard
{"title":"Healthcare professionals' knowledge and attitudes toward the microbiome and fecal microbiotherapy or microbiota transfer in hematology and oncology: an international survey.","authors":"Marion Larue, Giorgia Battipaglia, Hendrik Poeck, Riccardo Masetti, Christoph Stein-Thoeringer, Jaime Sanz, Daniela Weber, Annalisa Ruggeri, Zinaida Peric, Raphael Duarte, Mohamad Mohty, Florent Malard","doi":"10.46989/001c.166241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The gut microbiome has emerged as a critical factor influencing cancer progression, treatment response, and complications in hematology and oncology. Fecal microbiota transfer (FMT) is being explored as a novel biotherapeutic strategy, yet the knowledge and attitudes of healthcare professionals towards its clinical use remain poorly defined. We conducted an international survey of 152 healthcare professionals, including hematologists, oncologists, transplant specialists, and others. Most respondents were affiliated with academic centers (66.0%) and practiced primarily in hematology (48.0%) or transplantation (34.0%). Awareness of the microbiome's clinical relevance was widespread, but perceptions of microbiome profiling and FMT remained cautious. One-third of participants were in favor of routine microbiome profiling, while half considered it promising but still investigational. Direct clinical experience with FMT was limited: only 20.4% had prescribed it and 14.5% had referred patients. Nonetheless, over half indicated they would consider adopting FMT in the near future. The main reported barriers to broader use included limited regulatory approval (63.8%), logistical or supply challenges (57.9%), and physician skepticism or lack of knowledge (51.3%). Despite these challenges, more than 70% of respondents expressed strong interest in further education, standardized guidelines, and training opportunities to support safe and effective implementation. This survey highlights a strong enthusiasm regarding microbiome-based interventions in cancer and transplantation care. While current clinical use remains limited, healthcare professionals recognize the therapeutic potential of FMT and call for structured education, multidisciplinary collaboration, and clear regulatory frameworks to enable its integration into routine practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":93942,"journal":{"name":"Clinical hematology international","volume":"8 3","pages":"41-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13619122/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical hematology international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46989/001c.166241","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The gut microbiome has emerged as a critical factor influencing cancer progression, treatment response, and complications in hematology and oncology. Fecal microbiota transfer (FMT) is being explored as a novel biotherapeutic strategy, yet the knowledge and attitudes of healthcare professionals towards its clinical use remain poorly defined. We conducted an international survey of 152 healthcare professionals, including hematologists, oncologists, transplant specialists, and others. Most respondents were affiliated with academic centers (66.0%) and practiced primarily in hematology (48.0%) or transplantation (34.0%). Awareness of the microbiome's clinical relevance was widespread, but perceptions of microbiome profiling and FMT remained cautious. One-third of participants were in favor of routine microbiome profiling, while half considered it promising but still investigational. Direct clinical experience with FMT was limited: only 20.4% had prescribed it and 14.5% had referred patients. Nonetheless, over half indicated they would consider adopting FMT in the near future. The main reported barriers to broader use included limited regulatory approval (63.8%), logistical or supply challenges (57.9%), and physician skepticism or lack of knowledge (51.3%). Despite these challenges, more than 70% of respondents expressed strong interest in further education, standardized guidelines, and training opportunities to support safe and effective implementation. This survey highlights a strong enthusiasm regarding microbiome-based interventions in cancer and transplantation care. While current clinical use remains limited, healthcare professionals recognize the therapeutic potential of FMT and call for structured education, multidisciplinary collaboration, and clear regulatory frameworks to enable its integration into routine practice.

血液学和肿瘤学中卫生保健专业人员对微生物组和粪便微生物治疗或微生物群转移的知识和态度:一项国际调查。
肠道微生物组已成为影响血液学和肿瘤学癌症进展、治疗反应和并发症的关键因素。粪便微生物群转移(FMT)作为一种新的生物治疗策略正在被探索,然而卫生保健专业人员对其临床应用的知识和态度仍然不明确。我们对152名医疗保健专业人员进行了一项国际调查,包括血液学家、肿瘤学家、移植专家等。大多数受访者隶属于学术中心(66.0%),主要从事血液学(48.0%)或移植(34.0%)。人们普遍意识到微生物组的临床相关性,但对微生物组分析和FMT的看法仍然谨慎。三分之一的参与者赞成常规的微生物组分析,而一半的人认为它很有前途,但仍处于研究阶段。FMT的直接临床经验有限:只有20.4%的人开过处方,14.5%的人转诊过患者。尽管如此,超过一半的人表示他们会考虑在不久的将来采用FMT。广泛使用的主要障碍包括有限的监管批准(63.8%),后勤或供应挑战(57.9%),医生怀疑或缺乏知识(51.3%)。尽管存在这些挑战,但超过70%的受访者对进一步教育、标准化指南和培训机会表达了浓厚的兴趣,以支持安全有效的实施。这项调查强调了对基于微生物组的癌症和移植治疗干预的强烈热情。虽然目前的临床应用仍然有限,但医疗保健专业人员认识到FMT的治疗潜力,并呼吁进行结构化的教育、多学科合作和明确的监管框架,以使其融入日常实践。
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
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书