Comparison of the Human Gut Microbiota between Normal Control Subjects and Patients with Colonic Polyps and Colorectal Cancer

Kittipot Uppakarn,Khotchawan Bangpanwimon,Tipparat Hongpattarakere,Worrawit Wanitsuwan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1172479/v1
2021-12-21
Abstract:Abstract Background: The human gut microbiota has been related to numerous colonic diseases. To identify colorectal cancer (CRC)-associated microbiota, the gut microbiomes of patients with colonic polyps and CRC compared to normal controls were analyzed. Methods: Between July and December 2020, forty-four stool samples were obtained from participants older than 50 years who were scheduled for elective colonoscopies at the Surgery Clinic, Songklanagarind Hospital. The samples were divided into 3 groups (17 normal control, 17 colonic polyps, and 10 CRC) and were collected for analysis with a 16s metagenomic sequencing library preparation with MiSeq Reporter software (MSR) following the protocol of the 16s metagenomics workflow. The microbiome data were analyzed with Kruskal–Wallis test with the Dunn-Bonferroni post hoc method. Results: The relative proportions of beneficial butyrate-producers Kineothrix alysoides , Eubacterium rectale , and Roseburia inulinsivorans were significantly higher in healthy control and colonic polyp groups compared with the CRC group at the top three lowest p-values. The recommended CRC biomarker Clostridium symbiosum was shown in a significantly higher proportion in the CRC group than in the normal control group. The prevalences and relative proportion of the novel CRC-associated species Acutalibacter muris and the familiar CRC-associated species Christensenella massiliensis and lntestinimonas butyriciproducens were significantly higher in the CRC group than in the normal control and colonic polyp groups at the top three lowest p-values. Conclusions: A correlation between specific bacteria and clinical outcomes was found in this pilot study. The microbiome data revealed possible microbial biomarkers associated with CRC. Studies with larger numbers of stool samples are required to substantiate our findings.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?