Explore the vast range of titles available.

We re-analyzed the data from a recent large-scale study that reported strong correlations between DNA signatures of microbial organisms and 33 different cancer types and that created machine-learning predictors with near-perfect accuracy at distinguishing among cancers. We found at least two fundamental flaws in the reported data and in the methods: (i) errors in the genome database and the associated computational methods led to millions of false-positive findings of bacterial reads across all samples, largely because most of the sequences identified as bacteria were instead human; and (ii) errors in the transformation of the raw data created an artificial signature, even for microbes with no reads detected, tagging each tumor type with a distinct signal that the machine-learning programs then used to create an apparently accurate classifier. Each of these problems invalidates the results, leading to the conclusion that the microbiome-based classifiers for identifying cancer presented in the study are entirely wrong. These flaws have subsequently affected more than a dozen additional published studies that used the same data and whose results are likely invalid as well. Recent reports showing that human cancers have a distinctive microbiome have led to a flurry of papers describing microbial signatures of different cancer types. Many of these reports are based on flawed data that, upon re-analysis, completely overturns the original findings. The re-analysis conducted here shows that most of the microbes originally reported as associated with cancer were not present at all in the samples. The original report of a cancer microbiome and more than a dozen follow-up studies are, therefore, likely to be invalid.

Background Human tissue is increasingly being whole genome sequenced as we transition into an era of genomic medicine. With this arises the potential to detect sequences originating from microorganisms, including pathogens amid the plethora of human sequencing reads. In cancer research, the tumorigenic ability of pathogens is being recognized, for example, Helicobacter pylori and human papillomavirus in the cases of gastric non-cardia and cervical carcinomas, respectively. As of yet, no benchmark has been carried out on the performance of computational approaches for bacterial and viral detection within host-dominated sequence data. Results We present the results of benchmarking over 70 distinct combinations of tools and parameters on 100 simulated cancer datasets spiked with realistic proportions of bacteria. mOTUs2 and Kraken are the highest performing individual tools achieving median genus-level F1 scores of 0.90 and 0.91, respectively. mOTUs2 demonstrates a high performance in estimating bacterial proportions. Employing Kraken on unassembled sequencing reads produces a good but variable performance depending on post-classification filtering parameters. These approaches are investigated on a selection of cervical and gastric cancer whole genome sequences where Alphapapillomavirus and Helicobacter are detected in addition to a variety of other interesting genera. Conclusions We provide the top-performing pipelines from this benchmark in a unifying tool called SEPATH, which is amenable to high throughput sequencing studies across a range of high-performance computing clusters. SEPATH provides a benchmarked and convenient approach to detect pathogens in tissue sequence data helping to determine the relationship between metagenomics and disease.

The identification of microbiological infection is usually a diagnostic investigation, a complex process that is firstly initiated by clinical suspicion. With the emergence of high-throughput sequencing (HTS) technologies, metagenomic analysis has unveiled the power to identify microbial DNA/RNA from a diverse range of clinical samples (1). Metagenomic analysis of whole human genomes at the clinical/research interface bypasses the steps of clinical scrutiny and targeted testing and has the potential to generate unexpected findings relating to infectious and sometimes transmissible disease. There is no doubt that microbial findings that may have a significant impact on a patient’s treatment and their close contacts should be reported to those with clinical responsibility for the sample-donating patient. There are no clear recommendations on how such findings that are incidental, or outside the original investigation, should be handled. Here we aim to provide an informed protocol for the management of incidental microbial findings as part of the 100,000 Genomes Project which may have broader application in this emerging field. As with any other clinical information, we aim to prioritise the reporting of data that are most likely to be of benefit to the patient and their close contacts. We also set out to minimize risks, costs and potential anxiety associated with the reporting of results that are unlikely to be of clinical significance. Our recommendations aim to support the practice of microbial metagenomics by providing a simplified pathway that can be applied to reporting the identification of potential pathogens from metagenomic datasets. Given that the ambition for UK sequenced human genomes over the next 5 years has been set to reach 5 million and the field of metagenomics is rapidly evolving, the guidance will be regularly reviewed and will likely adapt over time as experience develops.

Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18–45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference −1·4%, 95% CI −7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68–1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3–4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia. UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment.

Microbes can play a prominent role in cancer: Helicobacter pylori is involved in over 90% of gastric non-cardia adenocarcinoma and Human Papillomavirus plays a major role in cervical tumorigenesis. In this thesis, I evaluate computational approaches to identify the constituent taxa within human high-throughput sequence data. I have produced the top performing approaches into a pipeline (SEPATH) which is applied to a variety of datasets: RNA sequencing of urine from patients under clinical investigation for prostate cancer and over 10,000 whole genome sequences from Genomics England's 100,000 Genomes Project. The results are sparse and rife with environmental and sequencing contaminants. Despite this, SEPATH has revealed a range of interesting bacterial and viral genera associated with tumour samples. A preliminary association is observed between the identification of specific taxa and the development of aggressive prostate cancer. Many of the genera identified have been previously suggested for association with tumours such as Bacteroides and Fusobacterium in colorectal cancer. Alphapapillomavirus was noted in oral cancer which aligns with the expected genomic features (a lack of mutations in tumour suppressor gene TP53). Also, evidence has been detected for infectious disease which will be subject to independent validation and followed up appropriately. Analysing the microbial composition of tumours could provide an additional tool to aid in therapeutic stratification of cancer patients with little added cost following sequencing.

Background Up to 80% of cases of prostate cancer present with multifocal independent tumour lesions leading to the concept of a field effect present in the normal prostate predisposing to cancer development. In the present study we applied Whole Genome DNA Sequencing (WGS) to a group of morphologically normal tissue ( n  = 51), including benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and non-BPH samples, from men with and men without prostate cancer. We assess whether the observed genetic changes in morphologically normal tissue are linked to the development of cancer in the prostate. Results Single nucleotide variants ( P  = 7.0 × 10 –03 , Wilcoxon rank sum test) and small insertions and deletions (indels, P  = 8.7 × 10 –06 ) were significantly higher in morphologically normal samples, including BPH, from men with prostate cancer compared to those without. The presence of subclonal expansions under selective pressure, supported by a high level of mutations, were significantly associated with samples from men with prostate cancer ( P  = 0.035, Fisher exact test). The clonal cell fraction of normal clones was always higher than the proportion of the prostate estimated as epithelial ( P  = 5.94 × 10 –05 , paired Wilcoxon signed rank test) which, along with analysis of primary fibroblasts prepared from BPH specimens, suggests a stromal origin. Constructed phylogenies revealed lineages associated with benign tissue that were completely distinct from adjacent tumour clones, but a common lineage between BPH and non-BPH morphologically normal tissues was often observed. Compared to tumours, normal samples have significantly less single nucleotide variants ( P  = 3.72 × 10 –09 , paired Wilcoxon signed rank test), have very few rearrangements and a complete lack of copy number alterations. Conclusions Cells within regions of morphologically normal tissue (both BPH and non-BPH) can expand under selective pressure by mechanisms that are distinct from those occurring in adjacent cancer, but that are allied to the presence of cancer. Expansions, which are probably stromal in origin, are characterised by lack of recurrent driver mutations, by almost complete absence of structural variants/copy number alterations, and mutational processes similar to malignant tissue. Our findings have implications for treatment (focal therapy) and early detection approaches.

We re-analyzed the data from a recent large-scale study that reported strong correlations between microbial organisms and 33 different cancer types, and that created machine learning predictors with near-perfect accuracy at distinguishing among cancers. We found at least two fundamental flaws in the reported data and in the methods: (1) errors in the genome database and the associated computational methods led to millions of false positive findings of bacterial reads across all samples, largely because most of the sequences identified as bacteria were instead human; and (2) errors in transformation of the raw data created an artificial signature, even for microbes with no reads detected, tagging each tumor type with a distinct signal that the machine learning programs then used to create an apparently accurate classifier. Each of these problems invalidates the results, leading to the conclusion that the microbiome-based classifiers for identifying cancer presented in the study are entirely wrong. These flaws have subsequently affected more than a dozen additional published studies that used the same data and whose results are likely invalid as well.

Cancer progression involves the sequential accumulation of genetic alterations that cumulatively shape the tumour phenotype. In prostate cancer, tumours can follow divergent evolutionary trajectories that lead to distinct subtypes, but the causes of this divergence remain unclear. While causal inference could elucidate the factors involved, conventional methods are unsuitable due to the possibility of unobserved confounders and ambiguity in the direction of causality. Here, we propose a method that circumvents these issues and apply it to genomic data from 829 prostate cancer patients. We identify several genetic alterations that drive divergence as well as others that prevent this transition, locking tumours into one trajectory. Further analysis reveals that these genetic alterations may cause each other, implying a positive-feedback loop that accelerates divergence. Our findings provide insights into how cancer subtypes emerge and offer a foundation for genomic surveillance strategies aimed at monitoring the progression of prostate cancer.

The results published in Poore and Kopylova et al. 2020 revealed the possibility of being able to almost perfectly differentiate between types of tumour based on their microbial composition using machine learning models. Whilst we believe that there is the potential for microbial composition to be used in this manner, we have concerns with the manuscript that make us question the certainty of the conclusions drawn. We believe there are issues in the areas of the contribution of contamination, handling of batch effects, false positive classifications and limitations in the machine learning approaches used. This makes it difficult to identify whether the authors have identified true biological signal and how robust these models would be in use as clinical biomarkers. We commend Poore and Kopylova et al. on their approach to open data and reproducibility that has enabled this analysis. We hope that this discourse assists the future development of machine learning models and hypothesis generation in microbiome research.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.

Cancer progression involves the sequential accumulation of genetic alterations that cumulatively shape the tumour phenotype. In prostate cancer, tumours can follow divergent evolutionary trajectories that lead to distinct subtypes, but the causes of this divergence remain unclear. While causal inference could elucidate the factors involved, conventional methods are unsuitable due to the possibility of unobserved confounders and ambiguity in the direction of causality. Here, we propose a method that circumvents these issues and apply it to genomic data from 829 prostate cancer patients. We identify several genetic alterations that drive divergence as well as others that prevent this transition, locking tumours into one trajectory. Further analysis reveals that these genetic alterations may cause each other, implying a positive-feedback loop that accelerates divergence. Our findings provide insights into how cancer subtypes emerge and offer a foundation for genomic surveillance strategies aimed at monitoring the progression of prostate cancer.