4.7 Review

The Female Reproductive Tract Microbiome-Implications for Gynecologic Cancers and Personalized Medicine

Journal

JOURNAL OF PERSONALIZED MEDICINE
Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jpm11060546

Keywords

female reproductive tract microbiome; upper reproductive tract microbiome; vaginal microbiome; uterine microbiome; gynecologic cancer; endometrial cancer; ovarian cancer

Funding

  1. Norma C. and Albert I. Geller Designated Professorship in Ovarian Cancer Research

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recent studies have shown the existence of a microbiome in the upper female reproductive tract, previously assumed to be sterile under non-pathologic conditions. While the vaginal microbiome and its impact on reproductive health have been extensively studied, research on the microbiome of the upper female reproductive tract in gynecologic cancers is limited.
The microbial colonization of the lower female reproductive tract has been extensively studied over the past few decades. In contrast, the upper female reproductive tract including the uterine cavity and peritoneum where the ovaries and fallopian tubes reside were traditionally assumed to be sterile under non-pathologic conditions. However, recent studies applying next-generation sequencing of the bacterial 16S ribosomal RNA gene have provided convincing evidence for the existence of an upper female reproductive tract microbiome. While the vaginal microbiome and its importance for reproductive health outcomes has been extensively studied, the microbiome of the upper female reproductive tract and its relevance for gynecologic cancers has been less studied and will be the focus of this article. This targeted review summarizes the pertinent literature on the female reproductive tract microbiome in gynecologic malignancies and its anticipated role in future research and clinical applications in personalized medicine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available