MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409632787 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2025-6522

Abstract 6522: Sex differences in gut microbial composition during pelvic radiation therapy in experimental models of muscle-invasive bladder cancer

2025· article· en· W4409632787 on OpenAlexaff
Éva Michaud, M. Stendel, José João Mansure, Fabio Cury, Wassim Kassouf

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiation therapyBladder cancerCancerMedicineAnal cancerUrologyInternal medicinePhysiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Radical cystectomy is the standard of care for muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) but significantly impacts patients’ quality of life. As not all patients are surgery-eligible, radiation therapy (RT) has emerged as a viable bladder-sparing approach. Yet, 25-30% of patients do not respond and will require salvage cystectomy. To add, while females are less at risk for bladder cancer, they tend to develop more aggressive disease phenotypes, and poorer response to surgery or RT. Determinants of radiation efficacy may reside outside the stole study of the tumor micro-environment (TME), as the gut microbiome, which is implicated in radiation-induced toxicity, may be influential in polarizing tumor responses to RT. Although RT effects on the microbiome have been previously studied, relationship between TME, local immune responses and gut microbes have yet to be described in MIBC. Methods: C57Bl/6 male (n=20) and female (n=20) mice were treated with 6x6Gy of RT to the bladder or left untreated (n=10 per group) then monitored for 4 weeks without tumor induction. We then generated a N-butyl-N-(4-hydroxybutyl) nitrosamine (BBN) bladder tumor model where 3x8Gy radiation was administered to the bladder tumor at week 16 of BBN exposure. After RT was administered, stool samples were collected from all mice for 4 weeks for 16S rRNA-sequencing. Sequence data was converted to metabolic pathways using PiCRUST2. Formalin-fixed tumor tissues were stained by immunohistochemistry for B cell, T cell, macrophages and neutrophil markers. Results: RT-treated males associated with high abundance of Akkermansia, Bifidobacterium and Faecalibaculum, all promoters gut health and response to anti-cancer therapies in humans. In contrast, RT-treated females selectively clustered according to Roseburia, Romboutsia and Bifidobacterium abundance. Females appeared more resistant to RT-induced dysbiosis at baseline, a protection that is abrogated upon tumor induction. RT treatment following tumor induction led to increased Clostridium abundance in females but decreased abundance in males. To add, KEGG pathways analysis predicted increased proteasome and flavonoid synthesis activity in females receiving RT, suggesting higher rates of metabolic conversion in females compared to males. Lastly, tumor immune infiltrates varied in composition and quantity according to both sex and treatment, underlining the sex-specific impacts of RT on both the microbiome and TME. Conclusion: Our results indicate pelvic RT does affect microbiome composition with significant dysbiosis in males compared to females. Differential composition in both sexes upon tumor induction suggest RT does not affect males and female microbiomes similarly, which may condition distinct tumor immune responses. This is the first study to link sex, microbiome and RT in experimental models of MIBC to our knowledge. Citation Format: Éva Michaud, Matthew Stendel, José Joao Mansure, Fabio Cury, Wassim Kassouf. Sex differences in gut microbial composition during pelvic radiation therapy in experimental models of muscle-invasive bladder cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2025; Part 1 (Regular Abstracts); 2025 Apr 25-30; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2025;85(8_Suppl_1):Abstract nr 6522.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.076
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.324 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments→French-language works237,207→