Metagenomic analysis reveals a rich bacterial content in high‐risk prostate tumors from African men
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inflammation is a hallmark of prostate cancer (PCa), yet no pathogenic agent has been identified. Men from Africa are at increased risk for both aggressive prostate disease and infection. We hypothesize that pathogenic microbes may be contributing, at least in part, to high-risk PCa presentation within Africa and in turn the observed ethnic disparity. METHODS: Here we reveal through metagenomic analysis of host-derived whole-genome sequencing data, the microbial content within prostate tumor tissue from 22 men. What is unique about this study is that patients were separated by ethnicity, African vs European, and environments, Africa vs Australia. RESULTS: We identified 23 common bacterial genera between the African, Australian, and Chinese prostate tumor samples, while nonbacterial microbes were notably absent. While the most abundant genera across all samples included: Escherichia, Propionibacterium, and Pseudomonas, the core prostate tumor microbiota was enriched for Proteobacteria. We observed a significant increase in the richness of the bacterial communities within the African vs Australian samples (t = 4.6-5.5; P = .0004-.001), largely driven by eight predominant genera. Considering core human gut microbiota, African prostate tissue samples appear enriched for Escherichia and Acidovorax, with an abundance of Eubacterium associated with host tumor hypermutation. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides suggestive evidence for the presence of a core, bacteria-rich, prostate microbiome. While unable to exclude for fecal contamination, the observed increased bacterial content and richness within the African vs non-African samples, together with elevated tumor mutational burden, suggests the possibility that bacterially-driven oncogenic transformation within the prostate microenvironment may be contributing to aggressive disease presentation in Africa.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".