Bacterial lipopolysaccharide modulates immune response in the colorectal tumor microenvironment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Immune responses can have opposing effects in colorectal cancer (CRC), the balance of which may determine whether a cancer regresses, progresses, or potentially metastasizes. These effects are evident in CRC consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) where both CMS1 and CMS4 contain immune infiltrates yet have opposing prognoses. The microbiome has previously been associated with CRC and immune response in CRC but has largely been ignored in the CRC subtype discussion. Using CMS subtyping, we aimed to determine the contributions of the microbiome to the pleiotropic effects evident in immune-infiltrated subtypes. We integrated host gene-expression and meta-transcriptomic data to determine the link between immune characteristics and microbiome contributions in these subtypes and identified lipopolysaccharide (LPS) binding as a potential functional mechanism. We identified candidate bacteria with LPS properties that could affect immune response, focusing on Fusobacterium periodonticum and Bacteroides fragilis in CMS1, and Porphyromonas asaccharolytica in CMS4. Treatment of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) with LPS isolated from these bacteria showed that F. periodonticum stimulates cytokine production in PBMCs while both B. fragilis and P. asaccharolytica had an inhibitory effect. Furthermore, LPS from the latter two species can inhibit the immunogenic properties of F. periodonticum LPS when co-incubated with PBMCs. We propose that different microbes in the CRC tumor microenvironment can alter the local immune activity, with important implications for prognosis and treatment response.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".