Analysis of the cervical microbiome and potential biomarkers from postpartum HIV-positive women displaying cervical intraepithelial lesions

Study information

Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09

study design

case-control

Citation

PMID PubMed identifier for scientific articles.

29234019

DOI Digital object identifier for electronic documents.

10.1038/s41598-017-17351-9

URI Uniform resource identifier for web resources.

Authors

Curty G, Costa RL, Siqueira JD, Meyrelles AI, Machado ES, Soares EA, Soares MA

Journal

Scientific reports

Year

2017

The cervical microbiota composition and diversity of HIV-positive women in the postpartum period is unknown. Using a high-throughput bacterial 16S rRNA gene sequencing, we identified four community state types (CSTs). CST III (Lactobacillusdominant) and CST IV (IV-A, IV-B.1, IV-B.2; high-diversity) were found in 41% and 59% of samples, respectively. We did not find association of any CST to postpartum period (six or twelve months), HPV infection or cytology (normal or lesion). However, five bacterial genera were associated with cervical lesions (Gardnerella, Aerococcus, Schlegelella, Moryella and Bifidobacterium), with significant odds ratio (OR) of 40 (2.28-706) for the presence of Moryella and 3.5 (1.36-8.9) for Schlegelella. Longitudinal analysis of samples at postpartum that regressed (lesion to normal), progressed (normal to lesion) and maintained the cytology (lesion or normal) evidenced Gardnerella with a significantly higher abundance in regressing lesions. In the current study, we report the first data on the cervical microbiota of HIV-positive women in the postpartum period. Consistent with previous studies of HIV-negative cohorts, HIV-positive women present a stable cervical microbiota of high-diversity in the postpartum period. Our results highlight that specific microbiota species may serve as sensors for changes in the cervical microenvironment associated with cervical lesions.

Experiment 1

Edit History Delete

Flag for review

Your review change was submittedDuplicate this Experiment Add a new Signature

Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09

Curated date: 2021/01/10

Curator: WikiWorks743

Revision editor(s): WikiWorks753, WikiWorks743

Subjects

Location of subjects: Brazil

Host species Species from which microbiome was sampled (if applicable): Homo sapiens

Body site Anatomical site where microbial samples were extracted from according to the Uber Anatomy Ontology: Uterus Uterus

Condition The experimental condition / phenotype studied according to the Experimental Factor Ontology: cervical glandular intraepithelial neoplasia cervical glandular intraepithelial neoplasia

Group 0 name Corresponds to the control (unexposed) group for case-control studies: Normal tissue HIV patients
Group 1 name Corresponds to the case (exposed) group for case-control studies: Cervical Intraepithelial Lesion HIV patients
Group 1 definition Diagnostic criteria applied to define the specific condition / phenotype represented in the case (exposed) group: Cases were identified by HIV rapid or ELISA test and subsequent Western blot following recommendations for HIV diagnosis by the Brazilian Ministry of Health.
Group 0 sample size Number of subjects in the control (unexposed) group: 42
Group 1 sample size Number of subjects in the case (exposed) group: 38

Lab analysis

Sequencing type: 16S

16S variable region One or more hypervariable region(s) of the bacterial 16S gene: V3-V6

Sequencing platform Manufacturer and experimental platform used for quantifying microbial abundance: Illumina

Statistical Analysis

Statistical test: LEfSe

Significance threshold p-value or FDR threshold used for differential abundance testing (if any): 0.05
MHT correction Have statistical tests be corrected for multiple hypothesis testing (MHT)?: Yes

Signature 1

Edit History Delete

Flag for review

Your review change was submitted

Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09

Curated date: 2018-10-06

Curator: Phyu Han

Revision editor(s): WikiWorks743

Source: Figure 3

Description: Bacteria that presented higher relative abundance in cervical lesions using LEfse

Abundance in Group 1: increased abundance in Cervical Intraepithelial Lesion HIV patients

NCBI	Links
Moryella

Revision editor(s): WikiWorks743

Experiment 2

Edit History Delete

Flag for review

Your review change was submittedDuplicate this Experiment Add a new Signature

Reviewed Marked as Reviewed by Shaimaa Elsafoury on 2021/02/09

Curated date: 2021/01/10

Curator: WikiWorks743

Revision editor(s): WikiWorks753, WikiWorks743

Subjects

Location of subjects: Brazil

Host species Species from which microbiome was sampled (if applicable): Homo sapiens

Body site Anatomical site where microbial samples were extracted from according to the Uber Anatomy Ontology: Uterus Uterus

Condition The experimental condition / phenotype studied according to the Experimental Factor Ontology: cervical glandular intraepithelial neoplasia cervical glandular intraepithelial neoplasia

Group 0 name Corresponds to the control (unexposed) group for case-control studies: Normal tissue HIV patients
Group 1 name Corresponds to the case (exposed) group for case-control studies: Cervical Intraepithelial Lesion HIV patients
Group 1 definition Diagnostic criteria applied to define the specific condition / phenotype represented in the case (exposed) group: Cases were identified by HIV rapid or ELISA test and subsequent Western blot following recommendations for HIV diagnosis by the Brazilian Ministry of Health.
Group 0 sample size Number of subjects in the control (unexposed) group: 42
Group 1 sample size Number of subjects in the case (exposed) group: 38

Lab analysis

Sequencing type: 16S

Sequencing platform Manufacturer and experimental platform used for quantifying microbial abundance: Illumina

Statistical Analysis

Statistical test: LEfSe

Significance threshold p-value or FDR threshold used for differential abundance testing (if any): 0.1
MHT correction Have statistical tests be corrected for multiple hypothesis testing (MHT)?: No