Integrating current analyses of the breast cancer microbiome
Sohail, S.; Burns, M. B.
Show abstract
Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death for women in the US (American Cancer Society: About Breast Cancer, n.d.). Many cancer types have significant associations with their resident microbial communities - emerging evidence suggests that breast cancers also interact with the local tissue-associated microbiota. Studies have examined the relationship between breast cancer and its microbiome, however, the studies varied in their approaches used to evaluate these relationships. Microbiome research advances rapidly and analysis pipelines and databases are updated frequently. This dynamic environment makes inter-study comparisons and superficial evaluations challenging as no two studies are using the same standards for evaluation. Researchers have observed the microbiota of tumor tissue, surrounding normal sites, and healthy breast tissue from non-cancer individuals (Hieken et al., 2016; Urbaniak et al., 2016; Xuan et al., 2014), but they have not been able to translate their findings into information that can be used for breast cancer treatment or detection nor address what affect studying different variable regions has in their analysis. Within the majority of these studies, comparisons of the tumor tissue with adjacent normal tissue has revealed differences. This project will integrate all available studies related to breast cancer and the mammary microbiome to 1 reassess the original findings in light of advances in this rapidly progressing field and 2 incorporate all the data available as a large meta-analysis to identify general trends and specific differences across patient cohorts and studies.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Meta-analysis of Microbiome Association Networks Reveal Patterns of Dysbiosis in Diseased Microbiomes 94%
- Manually weighted taxonomy classifiers improve species-specific rumen microbiome analysis compared to unweighted or average weighted taxonomy classifiers 93%
- Comparison of the effectiveness of different normalization methods for metagenomic cross-study phenotype prediction under heterogeneity 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- rRNA Operon Improves Species-Level Classification of Bacteria and Microbial Community Analysis Compared to 16S rRNA 93%
- Library Preparation and Sequencing Platform Introduce Bias in Metagenomic-Based Characterizations of Microbiomes 93%
- Microbiome and climate: Skin microbial diversity and community functions of Polypedates megacephalus (Anura: Rhacophoridae) associated with bioclimate 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- parafac4microbiome: Exploratory analysis of longitudinal microbiome data using Parallel Factor Analysis 93%
- The impact of kit, environment and sampling contamination on the observed microbiome of bovine milk 93%
- Optimizing mouse metatranscriptome profiling by selective removal of redundant nucleic acid sequences 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Gut Microbiome Dynamics and Predictive Value in Hospitalized COVID-19 Patients: A Comparative Analysis of Shallow and Deep Shotgun Sequencing 94%
- Comparative metatranscriptomics of periodontitis supports a common polymicrobial shift in metabolic function and identifies novel putative disease-associated ncRNAs 93%
- Microclimate Shapes the Phylosymbiosis of Rodent Gut Microbiota in Jordan's Great Rift Valley 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.