The Salivary Microbiome and Predicted Metabolite Production are Associated with Progression from Barrett’s Esophagus to Esophageal Adenocarcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) is rising in incidence and associated with poor survival, and established risk factors do not explain this trend. Microbiome alterations have been associated with progression from the precursor Barrett’s esophagus (BE) to EAC, yet the oral microbiome, tightly linked to the esophageal microbiome and easier to sample, has not been extensively studied in this context. We aimed to assess the relationship between the salivary microbiome and neoplastic progression in BE to identify microbiome-related factors that may drive EAC development. We collected clinical data and oral health and hygiene history and characterized the salivary microbiome from 250 patients with and without BE, including 78 with advanced neoplasia (high grade dysplasia or early adenocarcinoma). We assessed differential relative abundance of taxa by 16S rRNA gene sequencing and associations between microbiome composition and clinical features and used microbiome metabolic modeling to predict metabolite production. We found significant shifts and increased dysbiosis associated with progression to advanced neoplasia, with these associations occurring independent of tooth loss, and the largest shifts were with the genus Streptococcus . Microbiome metabolic models predicted significant shifts in the metabolic capacities of the salivary microbiome in patients with advanced neoplasia, including increases in L- lactic acid and decreases in butyric acid and L-tryptophan production. Our results suggest both a mechanistic and predictive role for the oral microbiome in esophageal adenocarcinoma. Further work is warranted to identify the biological significance of these alterations, to validate metabolic shifts, and to determine whether they represent viable therapeutic targets for prevention of progression in BE.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".