Computational Microbiome Pharmacology Analysis Elucidates the Anti-Cancer Potential of Vaginal Microbes and Metabolites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The vaginal microbiome’s role in risk, progression, and treatment of female cancers has been widely explored. Yet, there remains a need to develop methods to understand the interaction of microbiome factors with host cells and to characterize their potential therapeutic functions. To address this challenge, we developed a systems biology framework we term the Pharmacobiome for microbiome pharmacology analysis. The Pharmacobiome framework evaluates similarities between microbes and microbial byproducts and known drugs based on their impact on host transcriptomic cellular signatures. Here, we apply our framework to characterization of the Anti-Gynecologic Cancer Vaginal Pharmacobiome. Using published vaginal microbiome multi-omics data from the Partners PrEP clinical trial, we constructed vaginal epithelial gene signatures associated with each profiled vaginal microbe and metabolite. We compared these microbiome-associated host gene signatures to post-drug perturbation host gene signatures associated with 35 FDA-approved anti-cancer drugs from the Library of Integrated Network-based Cellular Signatures database to identify vaginal microbes and metabolites with high statistical and functional similarity to these drugs. We found that Lactobacilli and their metabolites can regulate host gene expression in ways similar to many anti-cancer drugs. Additionally, we experimentally tested our model prediction that taurine, a metabolite produced by L. crispatus, kills cancerous breast and endometrial cancer cells. Our study shows that the Pharmacobiome is a powerful framework for characterizing the anti-cancer therapeutic potential of vaginal microbiome factors with generalizability to other cancers, microbiomes, and diseases.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".