4.3 Article

Alterations in the gut microbiome in patients with esophageal carcinoma in response to esophagectomy and neoadjuvant treatment

期刊

SURGERY TODAY
卷 53, 期 6, 页码 663-674

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00595-022-02607-3

关键词

Gut microbiome; Esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; Esophagectomy; Neoadjuvant treatment; Chemotherapy

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The gut microbiome of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma is altered, with differences in microbial diversity and composition compared to healthy individuals. These alterations are more pronounced after surgical intervention.
Purpose Analyzing the gut microbiome is essential for planning treatment strategies to manage esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. This study aimed to characterize the gut microbiome of patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma and to identify alterations in its composition during treatment. Methods We observed alterations in the gut microbiome in 21 consecutive patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma at five different time points, from neoadjuvant treatment to postoperative surgery. Ten healthy individuals were used as a non-cancer control group. Fecal samples were collected and analyzed using 16S ribosomal ribonucleic acid sequencing. Results Before treatment, participants with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma had different alpha and beta diversity in comparison to healthy controls. The number of Streptococcus, a facultative anaerobic bacterium, was significantly higher, whereas that of Faecalibacterium, an obligate anaerobic bacterium, was significantly lower. Both alpha and beta diversity remained unchanged during neoadjuvant treatment, but the alterations were pronounced after surgery. The increase in the relative abundance of Streptococcus and the decrease in that of Faecalibacterium also tended to be more pronounced after surgery. Conclusions The gut microbiome in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma is altered with surgical intervention.

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

4.3
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