4.6 Article

Gut Microbiome Alterations Affect Glioma Development and Foxp3 Expression in Tumor Microenvironment in Mice

期刊

FRONTIERS IN ONCOLOGY
卷 12, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.836953

关键词

glioma; gut microbiome; tumor microenvironment; antibiotics; fecal microbiota transplantation

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the relationship between gut microbiome (GM) and glioma and found that an imbalance in GM promotes glioma growth, while a balanced GM can delay glioma development. In particular, an increased abundance of Bacteroidia is associated with accelerated glioma progression.
Glioma is the most common malignant tumor of the central nervous system (CNS), with high degree of malignancy and poor prognosis. The gut microbiome (GM) is composed of microorganisms with different properties and functions, which play an important role in human physiology and biological activities. It has been proved that GM can affect the development of glioma through natural immunity, but whether GM can affect glioma through adaptive immunity and whether there are some microorganisms in the GM that may affect glioma growth still remain unclear. In our study, we evaluated the relationship between GM and glioma. We proved that (I) glioma growth can induce structural changes of mouse GM, including the decreased abundance of Bacteroidia and increased abundance of Firmicutes. (II) GM dysbiosis can downregulate Foxp3 expression in the brain and promote glioma growth. A balanced environment of GM can upregulate the expression of Foxp3 in the brain and delay the development of glioma. (III) The increased abundance of Bacteroidia is associated with accelerated glioma progression, while its decreased abundance is associated with delayed glioma progression, which may be one of the key microorganisms affecting glioma growth. This study is helpful to reveal the relationship between GM and glioma development and provide new ideas for adjuvant therapy of glioma.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据