Using fecal immmunochemical cartridges for gut microbiome analysis within a colorectal cancer screening program

References

• Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality Worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209–16. doi:10.3322/caac.21660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keum N, Giovannucci E. Global burden of colorectal cancer: emerging trends, risk factors and prevention strategies. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;16(12):713–732. doi:10.1038/s41575-019-0189-8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vuik FE, Nieuwenburg SA, Bardou M, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Bento MJ, Zadnik V, Pellisé M, Esteban L, Kaminski MF, et al. Increasing incidence of colorectal cancer in young adults in Europe over the last 25 years. Gut. 2019;68(10):1820–1826. doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2018-317592.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fearon ER. Molecular genetics of colorectal cancer. Annu Rev Pathol. 2011;6(1):479–507. doi:10.1146/annurev-pathol-011110-130235.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nikolouzakis TK, Vassilopoulou L, Fragkiadaki P, Mariolis Sapsakos T, Papadakis GZ, Spandidos DA, Tsatsakis MA, Tsiaoussis J. Improving diagnosis, prognosis and prediction by using biomarkers in CRC patients (Review). Oncol Rep. 2018;39(6):2455–2472. doi:10.3892/or.2018.6330.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hewitson P, Glasziou P, Watson E, Towler B, Irwig L. Cochrane systematic review of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test (hemoccult): an update. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103(6):1541–1549. doi:10.1111/j.1572-0241.2008.01875.x.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brenner H, Stock C, Hoffmeister M. Effect of screening sigmoidoscopy and screening colonoscopy on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Bmj. 2014;348(apr09 1):g2467. doi:10.1136/bmj.g2467.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Miller EA, Pinsky PF, Schoen RE, Prorok PC, Church TR. Effect of flexible sigmoidoscopy screening on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: long-term follow-up of the randomised US PLCO cancer screening trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019;4(2):101–110. doi:10.1016/S2468-1253(18)30358-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gsur A, Baierl A, Brezina S. Colorectal Cancer Study of Austria (CORSA): a population-based multicenter study. Biology (Basel). 2021;10:8.
   Google Scholar
• Jahn B, Sroczynski G, Bundo M, Mühlberger N, Puntscher S, Todorovic J, Rochau U, Oberaigner W, Koffijberg H, Fischer T, et al. Effectiveness, benefit harm and cost effectiveness of colorectal cancer screening in Austria. BMC Gastroenterol. 2019;19(1):209. doi:10.1186/s12876-019-1121-y.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang LC, Shun CT, Hsu WF, Tu CH, Tsai PY, Lin BR, Liang J-T, Wu M-S, Chiu H-M. Fecal immunochemical test detects sessile serrated adenomas and polyps with a low level of sensitivity. Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology: the Official Clinical Practice Journal of the American Gastroenterological Association. 2017;15(6):872–9.e1. doi:10.1016/j.cgh.2016.07.029.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niedermaier T, Balavarca Y, Stage-Specific BH. Sensitivity of fecal immunochemical tests for detecting colorectal cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020;115(1):56–69. doi:10.14309/ajg.0000000000000465.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cougnoux A, Dalmasso G, Martinez R, Buc E, Delmas J, Gibold L, Sauvanet P, Darcha C, Déchelotte P, Bonnet M, et al. Bacterial genotoxin colibactin promotes colon tumour growth by inducing a senescence-associated secretory phenotype. Gut. 2014;63(12):1932–1942. doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2013-305257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu S, Rhee KJ, Albesiano E, Rabizadeh S, Wu X, Yen HR, Huso DL, Brancati FL, Wick E, McAllister F, et al. A human colonic commensal promotes colon tumorigenesis via activation of T helper type 17 T cell responses. Nat Med. 2009;15(9):1016–1022. doi:10.1038/nm.2015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas AM, Manghi P, Asnicar F, Pasolli E, Armanini F, Zolfo M, Beghini F, Manara S, Karcher N, Pozzi C, et al. Metagenomic analysis of colorectal cancer datasets identifies cross-cohort microbial diagnostic signatures and a link with choline degradation. Nat Med. 2019;25(4):667–678. doi:10.1038/s41591-019-0405-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baxter NT, MTt R, Rogers MA, Schloss PD. Microbiota-based model improves the sensitivity of fecal immunochemical test for detecting colonic lesions. Genome Med. 2016;8(1):37. doi:10.1186/s13073-016-0290-3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sinha R, Chen J, Amir A, Vogtmann E, Shi J, Inman KS, Flores R, Sampson J, Knight R, Chia N, et al. Collecting fecal samples for microbiome analyses in epidemiology studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016;25(2):407–416. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-15-0951.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu Z, Hullings AG, Ghanbari R, Etemadi A, Wan Y, Zhu B, Poustchi H, Fahraji BB, Sakhvidi MJZ, Shi J, et al. Comparison of fecal and oral collection methods for studies of the human microbiota in two Iranian cohorts. BMC Microbiol. 2021;21(1):324. doi:10.1186/s12866-021-02387-9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zouiouich S, Mariadassou M, Rué O, Vogtmann E, Huybrechts I, Severi G, Boutron-Ruault M-C, Senore C, Naccarati A, Mengozzi G, et al. Comparison of fecal sample collection methods for microbial analysis embedded within colorectal cancer screening programs. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2022 Feb;31(2):305–314. doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-21-0188.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klindworth A, Pruesse E, Schweer T, Peplies J, Quast C, Horn M, Glöckner FO. Evaluation of general 16S ribosomal RNA gene PCR primers for classical and next-generation sequencing-based diversity studies. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41(1):e1. doi:10.1093/nar/gks808.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnetjournal. 2011;17:10–12.
   Google Scholar
• Weinstein MM, Prem A, Jin M, Tang S, Bhasin JM. FIGARO: an efficient and objective tool for optimizing microbiome rRNA gene trimming parameters. bioRxiv. 2019;610394. doi:10.1101/610394.
   Google Scholar
• Callahan BJ, McMurdie PJ, Rosen MJ, Han AW, Johnson AJ, Holmes SP. DADA2: high-resolution sample inference from Illumina amplicon data. Nat Methods. 2016;13(7):581–583. doi:10.1038/nmeth.3869.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murali A, Bhargava A, Wright ES. IDTAXA: a novel approach for accurate taxonomic classification of microbiome sequences. Microbiome. 2018;6(1):140. doi:10.1186/s40168-018-0521-5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Quast C, Pruesse E, Yilmaz P, Gerken J, Schweer T, Yarza P, Peplies J, Glöckner FO. The SILVA ribosomal RNA gene database project: improved data processing and web-based tools. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;41(D1):D590–D6. doi:10.1093/nar/gks1219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gloor GB, Reid G. Compositional analysis: a valid approach to analyze microbiome high-throughput sequencing data. Canadian Journal of Microbiology. 2016;62(8):692–703. doi:10.1139/cjm-2015-0821.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gloor GB, Macklaim JM, Pawlowsky-Glahn V, Egozcue JJ. Microbiome datasets are compositional: and this is not optional. Frontiers in Microbiology. 2017;8:2224. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2017.02224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palarea-Albaladejo J, Martín-Fernández JA. zCompositions — r package for multivariate imputation of left-censored data under a compositional approach. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Sys. 2015;143:85–96. doi:10.1016/j.chemolab.2015.02.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hintze JL, Nelson RD. Violin plots: a box plot-density trace synergism. Am Stat. 1998;52:181–184.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–163. doi:10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward JH. Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J Am Stat Assoc. 1963;58(301):236–244. doi:10.1080/01621459.1963.10500845.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fernandes AD, Reid JNS, Macklaim JM, McMurrough TA, Edgell DR, Gloor GB. Unifying the analysis of high-throughput sequencing datasets: characterizing RNA-seq, 16S rRNA gene sequencing and selective growth experiments by compositional data analysis. Microbiome. 2014;2(1):15. doi:10.1186/2049-2618-2-15.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gloor GB. Gloor lab musings [Internet] 2021. [cited 23 Dec 2021]. Available from: https://gloorlab.blogspot.com/2021/03/measuring-effect-size-in-aldex2.html.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences: academic press; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton NE, Ferry M. ggtern: ternary diagrams using ggplot2. J Statistical Software, Code Snippets. 2018;87:1–17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• R Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna (Austria): R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Wickham H ggplot2: elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer-Verlag New York; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Alboukadel K. ggpubr: ‘ggplot2’ Based Publication Ready Plots. 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Pedersen TL. ggraph: an implementation of grammar of graphics for graphs and networks. 2021.
   Google Scholar
• Vogtmann E, Chen J, Kibriya MG, Chen Y, Islam T, Eunes M, Ahmed A, Naher J, Rahman A, Amir A, et al. Comparison of fecal collection methods for microbiota studies in Bangladesh. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2017;83(10):10. doi:10.1128/AEM.00361-17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Zolnik CP, Qiu Y, Usyk M, Wang T, Strickler HD, Isasi CR, Kaplan RC, Kurland IJ, Qi Q, et al. Comparison of fecal collection methods for microbiome and metabolomics studies. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2018;8:301. doi:10.3389/fcimb.2018.00301.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrd DA, Chen J, Vogtmann E, Hullings A, Song SJ, Amir A, Kibriya MG, Ahsan H, Chen Y, Nelson H, et al. Reproducibility, stability, and accuracy of microbial profiles by fecal sample collection method in three distinct populations. PLoS One. 2019;14(11):e0224757. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0224757.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rounge TB, Meisal R, Nordby JI, Ambur OH, de Lange T, Hoff G. Evaluating gut microbiota profiles from archived fecal samples. BMC Gastroenterol. 2018;18(1):171. doi:10.1186/s12876-018-0896-6.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Carroll IM, Ringel-Kulka T, Siddle JP, Klaenhammer TR, Ringel Y, Neufeld J. Characterization of the fecal microbiota using high-throughput sequencing reveals a stable microbial community during storage. PLoS One. 2012;7(10):e46953. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0046953.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardona S, Eck A, Cassellas M, Gallart M, Alastrue C, Dore J, Azpiroz F, Roca J, Guarner F, Manichanh C, et al. Storage conditions of intestinal microbiota matter in metagenomic analysis. BMC Microbiol. 2012;12(1):158. doi:10.1186/1471-2180-12-158.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gudra D, Shoaie S, Fridmanis D, Klovins J, Wefer H, Silamikelis I, Peculis R, Kalnina I, Elbere I, Radovica-Spalvina I, et al. A widely used sampling device in colorectal cancer screening programmes allows for large-scale microbiome studies. Gut. 2019;68(9):1723–1725. doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2018-316225.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogtmann E, Chen J, Amir A, Shi J, Abnet CC, Nelson H, Knight R, Chia N, Sinha R. Comparison of collection methods for fecal samples in microbiome studies. Am J Epidemiol. 2017;185(2):115–123. doi:10.1093/aje/kww177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masi AC, Koo S, Lamb CA, Hull MA, Sharp L, Nelson A, Hampton JS, Rees CJ, Stewart CJ. Using faecal immunochemical test (FIT) undertaken in a national screening programme for large-scale gut microbiota analysis. Gut. 2021;70(2):429–431. doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2020-321594.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krigul KL, Aasmets O, Lüll K, Org T, Org E. Using fecal immunochemical tubes for the analysis of the gut microbiome has the potential to improve colorectal cancer screening. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):19603. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-99046-w.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grobbee EJ, Lam SY, Fuhler GM, Blakaj B, Konstantinov SR, Bruno MJ, Peppelenbosch MP, Kuipers EJ, Spaander MC. First steps towards combining faecal immunochemical testing with the gut microbiome in colorectal cancer screening. United Eur Gastroenterology J. 2020;8(3):293–302. doi:10.1177/2050640619890732.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaul A, Mandal S, Davidov O, Peddada SD. Analysis of microbiome data in the presence of excess zeros. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:2114. doi:10.3389/fmicb.2017.02114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poretsky R, Rodriguez RL, Luo C, Tsementzi D, Konstantinidis KT, Rodriguez-Valera F. Strengths and limitations of 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing in revealing temporal microbial community dynamics. PLoS One. 2014;9(4):e93827. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0093827.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gantuya B, El Serag HB, Saruuljavkhlan B, Azzaya D, Matsumoto T, Uchida T, Oyuntsetseg K, Oyunbileg N, Davaadorj D, Yamaoka Y, et al. Advantage of 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing in Helicobacter pylori diagnosis. Helicobacter. 2021;26(3):e12790. doi:10.1111/hel.12790
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar