Suppr超能文献

比较结直肠癌筛查项目中微生物分析用粪便样本采集方法。

Comparison of Fecal Sample Collection Methods for Microbial Analysis Embedded within Colorectal Cancer Screening Programs.

机构信息

Nutrition and Metabolism Section, International Agency for Research on Cancer-WHO, Lyon, France.

INRAE, MaIAGE, Université Paris-Saclay, Jouy-en-Josas, France.

出版信息

Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2022 Feb;31(2):305-314. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-21-0188. Epub 2021 Nov 15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer screening programs with fecal sample collection may provide a platform for population-based gut microbiome disease research. We investigated sample collection and storage method impact on the accuracy and stability of the V3-V4 region of the 16S rRNA genes and bacterial quantity across seven different collection methods [i.e., no solution, two specimen collection cards, and four types of fecal immunochemical test (FIT) used in four countries] among 19 healthy volunteers.

METHODS

Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated for the relative abundance of the top three phyla, the most abundant genera, alpha diversity metrics, and the first principal coordinates of the beta diversity matrices to estimate the stability of microbial profiles after storage for 7 days at room temperature, 4°C or 30°C, and after screening for the presence of occult blood in the stool. In addition, accuracy was estimated for samples frozen immediately compared to samples with no solution (i.e., the putative gold standard).

RESULTS

When compared with the putative gold standard, we observed significant variation for all collection methods. However, interindividual variability was much higher than the variability introduced by the collection method. Stability ICCs were high (≥0.75) for FIT tubes that underwent colorectal cancer screening procedures. The relative abundance of Actinobacteria (0.65) was an exception and was lower for different FIT tubes stored at 30°C (range, 0.41-0.90) and room temperature (range, 0.06-0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

Paper-based collection cards and different types of FIT are acceptable tools for microbiome measurements.

IMPACT

Our findings inform on the utility of commonly used fecal sample collection methods for developing microbiome-focused cohorts nested within screening programs.

摘要

背景

基于粪便样本采集的结直肠癌筛查项目可为基于人群的肠道微生物组疾病研究提供平台。我们研究了 7 种不同采集方法(即无溶液、2 种标本采集卡和 4 种用于 4 个国家的粪便免疫化学检测(FIT))对 19 名健康志愿者中 16S rRNA 基因 V3-V4 区和细菌数量的准确性和稳定性的影响。

方法

计算了前三个门的相对丰度、最丰富的属、alpha 多样性指标和 beta 多样性矩阵的第一主坐标的组内相关系数(ICC),以估计在室温、4°C 或 30°C 下储存 7 天后微生物谱的稳定性,以及在粪便中检测到隐匿性血液后。此外,还对立即冷冻的样本与无溶液样本(即假定的金标准)的准确性进行了估计。

结果

与假定的金标准相比,我们观察到所有采集方法都存在显著差异。然而,个体间的变异性远高于采集方法引入的变异性。接受结直肠癌筛查程序的 FIT 管的稳定性 ICC 较高(≥0.75)。放线菌的相对丰度(0.65)是一个例外,并且在 30°C(范围为 0.41-0.90)和室温(范围为 0.06-0.94)下不同的 FIT 管中储存时较低。

结论

基于纸张的采集卡和不同类型的 FIT 是微生物组测量的可接受工具。

影响

我们的研究结果为基于人群的肠道微生物组疾病研究提供了信息,这些研究是在筛查项目中嵌套的微生物组重点队列中常用的粪便样本采集方法的效用。

相似文献

1
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. Epub 2021 Nov 15.
2
Stability of the Fecal and Oral Microbiome over 2 Years at -80°C for Multiple Collection Methods.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2023 Mar 6;32(3):444-451. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-22-0883.
4
Reproducibility, stability, and accuracy of microbial profiles by fecal sample collection method in three distinct populations.
PLoS One. 2019 Nov 18;14(11):e0224757. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224757. eCollection 2019.
5
Comparison of Fecal Collection Methods for Microbiota Studies in Bangladesh.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2017 May 1;83(10). doi: 10.1128/AEM.00361-17. Print 2017 May 15.
7
Comparison of Fecal Collection Methods for Microbiome and Metabolomics Studies.
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2018 Aug 28;8:301. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2018.00301. eCollection 2018.
9
Comparison of Collection Methods for Fecal Samples in Microbiome Studies.
Am J Epidemiol. 2017 Jan 15;185(2):115-123. doi: 10.1093/aje/kww177. Epub 2016 Dec 16.
10
Comparison of Fecal Collection Methods on Variation in Gut Metagenomics and Untargeted Metabolomics.
mSphere. 2021 Oct 27;6(5):e0063621. doi: 10.1128/mSphere.00636-21. Epub 2021 Sep 15.

引用本文的文献

2
Profiling small RNAs in fecal immunochemical tests: is it possible?
Mol Cancer. 2023 Oct 3;22(1):161. doi: 10.1186/s12943-023-01869-w.
4
5
Effects of Stool Sample Preservation Methods on Gut Microbiota Biodiversity: New Original Data and Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.
Microbiol Spectr. 2023 Jun 15;11(3):e0429722. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.04297-22. Epub 2023 Apr 24.
6
Using fecal immmunochemical cartridges for gut microbiome analysis within a colorectal cancer screening program.
Gut Microbes. 2023 Jan-Dec;15(1):2176119. doi: 10.1080/19490976.2023.2176119.
7
Stability of the Fecal and Oral Microbiome over 2 Years at -80°C for Multiple Collection Methods.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2023 Mar 6;32(3):444-451. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-22-0883.

本文引用的文献

1
Parvimonas micra as a putative non-invasive faecal biomarker for colorectal cancer.
Sci Rep. 2020 Sep 17;10(1):15250. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-72132-1.
2
The Human Microbiome in Relation to Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review of Epidemiologic Studies.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020 Oct;29(10):1856-1868. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-20-0288. Epub 2020 Jul 29.
4
Reproducibility, stability, and accuracy of microbial profiles by fecal sample collection method in three distinct populations.
PLoS One. 2019 Nov 18;14(11):e0224757. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224757. eCollection 2019.
5
Effects of the long-term storage of human fecal microbiota samples collected in RNAlater.
Sci Rep. 2019 Jan 24;9(1):601. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-36953-5.
6
Evaluating gut microbiota profiles from archived fecal samples.
BMC Gastroenterol. 2018 Nov 8;18(1):171. doi: 10.1186/s12876-018-0896-6.
7
A widely used sampling device in colorectal cancer screening programmes allows for large-scale microbiome studies.
Gut. 2019 Sep;68(9):1723-1725. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2018-316225. Epub 2018 Sep 21.
8
Comparison of Fecal Collection Methods for Microbiome and Metabolomics Studies.
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2018 Aug 28;8:301. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2018.00301. eCollection 2018.
9
FROGS: Find, Rapidly, OTUs with Galaxy Solution.
Bioinformatics. 2018 Apr 15;34(8):1287-1294. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx791.
10
Comparison of Fecal Collection Methods for Microbiota Studies in Bangladesh.
Appl Environ Microbiol. 2017 May 1;83(10). doi: 10.1128/AEM.00361-17. Print 2017 May 15.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验