Cancer invasion and anaerobic bacteria: new insights into mechanisms.

There is growing evidence that altered microbiota abundance of a range of specific anaerobic bacteria are associated with cancer, including Peptoniphilus spp., Porphyromonas spp., Fusobacterium spp., Fenollaria spp., Prevotella spp., Sneathia spp., Veillonella spp. and Anaerococcus spp. linked to multiple cancer types. In this review we explore these pathogenic associations. The mechanisms by which bacteria are known or predicted to interact with human cells are reviewed and we present an overview of the interlinked mechanisms and hypotheses of how multiple intracellular anaerobic bacterial pathogens may act together to cause host cell and tissue microenvironment changes associated with carcinogenesis and cancer cell invasion. These include combined effects on changes in cell signalling, DNA damage, cellular metabolism and immune evasion. Strategies for early detection and eradication of anaerobic cancer-associated bacterial pathogens that may prevent cancer progression are proposed.

Major data analysis errors invalidate cancer microbiome findings.

IMPORTANCE: Recent reports showing that human cancers have a distinctive microbiome have led to a flurry of papers describing microbial signatures of different cancer types. Many of these reports are based on flawed data that, upon re-analysis, completely overturns the original findings. The re-analysis conducted here shows that most of the microbes originally reported as associated with cancer were not present at all in the samples. The original report of a cancer microbiome and more than a dozen follow-up studies are, therefore, likely to be invalid.

Caution regarding the specificities of pan-cancer microbial structure.

Results published in an article by Poore et al. (Nature. 2020;579:567-574) suggested that machine learning models can almost perfectly distinguish between tumour types based on their microbial composition using machine learning models. Whilst we believe that there is the potential for microbial composition to be used in this manner, we have concerns with the paper that make us question the certainty of the conclusions drawn. We believe there are issues in the areas of the contribution of contamination, handling of batch effects, false positive classifications and limitations in the machine learning approaches used. This makes it difficult to identify whether the authors have identified true biological signal and how robust these models would be in use as clinical biomarkers. We commend Poore et al. on their approach to open data and reproducibility that has enabled this analysis. We hope that this discourse assists the future development of machine learning models and hypothesis generation in microbiome research.

Major data analysis errors invalidate cancer microbiome findings.

We re-analyzed the data from a recent large-scale study that reported strong correlations between microbial organisms and 33 different cancer types, and that created machine learning predictors with near-perfect accuracy at distinguishing among cancers. We found at least two fundamental flaws in the reported data and in the methods: (1) errors in the genome database and the associated computational methods led to millions of false positive findings of bacterial reads across all samples, largely because most of the sequences identified as bacteria were instead human; and (2) errors in transformation of the raw data created an artificial signature, even for microbes with no reads detected, tagging each tumor type with a distinct signal that the machine learning programs then used to create an apparently accurate classifier. Each of these problems invalidates the results, leading to the conclusion that the microbiome-based classifiers for identifying cancer presented in the study are entirely wrong. These flaws have subsequently affected more than a dozen additional published studies that used the same data and whose results are likely invalid as well.

Quality Control in Metagenomics Data.

Experiments involving metagenomics data are become increasingly commonplace. Processing such data requires a unique set of considerations. Quality control of metagenomics data is critical to extracting pertinent insights. In this chapter, we outline some considerations in terms of study design and other confounding factors that can often only be realized at the point of data analysis.In this chapter, we outline some basic principles of quality control in metagenomics, including overall reproducibility and some good practices to follow. The general quality control of sequencing data is then outlined, and we introduce ways to process this data by using bash scripts and developing pipelines in Snakemake (Python).A significant part of quality control in metagenomics is in analyzing the data to ensure you can spot relationships between variables and to identify when they might be confounded. This chapter provides a walkthrough of analyzing some microbiome data (in the R statistical language) and demonstrates a few days to identify overall differences and similarities in microbiome data. The chapter is concluded by discussing remarks about considering taxonomic results in the context of the study and interrogating sequence alignments using the command line.

Microbiomes of Urine and the Prostate Are Linked to Human Prostate Cancer Risk Groups.

BACKGROUND: Bacteria play a suspected role in the development of several cancer types, and associations between the presence of particular bacteria and prostate cancer have been reported. OBJECTIVE: To provide improved characterisation of the prostate and urine microbiome and to investigate the prognostic potential of the bacteria present. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Microbiome profiles were interrogated in sample collections of patient urine (sediment microscopy: n = 318, 16S ribosomal amplicon sequencing: n = 46; and extracellular vesicle RNA-seq: n = 40) and cancer tissue (n = 204). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Microbiomes were assessed using anaerobic culture, population-level 16S analysis, RNA-seq, and whole genome DNA sequencing. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We demonstrate an association between the presence of bacteria in urine sediments and higher D'Amico risk prostate cancer (discovery, n = 215 patients, p < 0.001; validation, n = 103, p < 0.001, χ2 test for trend). Characterisation of the bacterial community led to the (1) identification of four novel bacteria (Porphyromonas sp. nov., Varibaculum sp. nov., Peptoniphilus sp. nov., and Fenollaria sp. nov.) that were frequently found in patient urine, and (2) definition of a patient subgroup associated with metastasis development (p = 0.015, log-rank test). The presence of five specific anaerobic genera, which includes three of the novel isolates, was associated with cancer risk group, in urine sediment (p = 0.045, log-rank test), urine extracellular vesicles (p = 0.039), and cancer tissue (p = 0.035), with a meta-analysis hazard ratio for disease progression of 2.60 (95% confidence interval: 1.39-4.85; p = 0.003; Cox regression). A limitation is that functional links to cancer development are not yet established. CONCLUSIONS: This study characterises prostate and urine microbiomes, and indicates that specific anaerobic bacteria genera have prognostic potential. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this study, we investigated the presence of bacteria in patient urine and the prostate. We identified four novel bacteria and suggest a potential prognostic utility for the microbiome in prostate cancer.

SEPATH: benchmarking the search for pathogens in human tissue whole genome sequence data leads to template pipelines.

BACKGROUND: Human tissue is increasingly being whole genome sequenced as we transition into an era of genomic medicine. With this arises the potential to detect sequences originating from microorganisms, including pathogens amid the plethora of human sequencing reads. In cancer research, the tumorigenic ability of pathogens is being recognized, for example, Helicobacter pylori and human papillomavirus in the cases of gastric non-cardia and cervical carcinomas, respectively. As of yet, no benchmark has been carried out on the performance of computational approaches for bacterial and viral detection within host-dominated sequence data. RESULTS: We present the results of benchmarking over 70 distinct combinations of tools and parameters on 100 simulated cancer datasets spiked with realistic proportions of bacteria. mOTUs2 and Kraken are the highest performing individual tools achieving median genus-level F1 scores of 0.90 and 0.91, respectively. mOTUs2 demonstrates a high performance in estimating bacterial proportions. Employing Kraken on unassembled sequencing reads produces a good but variable performance depending on post-classification filtering parameters. These approaches are investigated on a selection of cervical and gastric cancer whole genome sequences where Alphapapillomavirus and Helicobacter are detected in addition to a variety of other interesting genera. CONCLUSIONS: We provide the top-performing pipelines from this benchmark in a unifying tool called SEPATH, which is amenable to high throughput sequencing studies across a range of high-performance computing clusters. SEPATH provides a benchmarked and convenient approach to detect pathogens in tissue sequence data helping to determine the relationship between metagenomics and disease.

Potential for diagnosis of infectious disease from the 100,000 Genomes Project Metagenomic Dataset: Recommendations for reporting results.

The identification of microbiological infection is usually a diagnostic investigation, a complex process that is firstly initiated by clinical suspicion. With the emergence of high-throughput sequencing (HTS) technologies, metagenomic analysis has unveiled the power to identify microbial DNA/RNA from a diverse range of clinical samples (1). Metagenomic analysis of whole human genomes at the clinical/research interface bypasses the steps of clinical scrutiny and targeted testing and has the potential to generate unexpected findings relating to infectious and sometimes transmissible disease. There is no doubt that microbial findings that may have a significant impact on a patient's treatment and their close contacts should be reported to those with clinical responsibility for the sample-donating patient. There are no clear recommendations on how such findings that are incidental, or outside the original investigation, should be handled. Here we aim to provide an informed protocol for the management of incidental microbial findings as part of the 100,000 Genomes Project which may have broader application in this emerging field. As with any other clinical information, we aim to prioritise the reporting of data that are most likely to be of benefit to the patient and their close contacts. We also set out to minimize risks, costs and potential anxiety associated with the reporting of results that are unlikely to be of clinical significance. Our recommendations aim to support the practice of microbial metagenomics by providing a simplified pathway that can be applied to reporting the identification of potential pathogens from metagenomic datasets. Given that the ambition for UK sequenced human genomes over the next 5 years has been set to reach 5 million and the field of metagenomics is rapidly evolving, the guidance will be regularly reviewed and will likely adapt over time as experience develops.