Comparison of vaginal microbiota in gynecologic cancer patients pre- and post-radiation therapy and healthy women

Despina Tsementzi, Angela Pena-Gonzalez, Jinbing Bai, Yi-Juan Hu, Pretesh Patel, Joseph Shelton, Mary Dolan, Jessica Arluck, Namita Khanna, Lesley Conrad, Isabelle Scott, Tony Y Eng, Konstantinos T Konstantinidis, Deborah W Bruner, Despina Tsementzi, Angela Pena-Gonzalez, Jinbing Bai, Yi-Juan Hu, Pretesh Patel, Joseph Shelton, Mary Dolan, Jessica Arluck, Namita Khanna, Lesley Conrad, Isabelle Scott, Tony Y Eng, Konstantinos T Konstantinidis, Deborah W Bruner

Abstract

Background: While the importance of commensal microbes in vaginal health is well appreciated, little is known about the effects of gynecological cancer (GynCa) and radiation therapy (RT) on the vaginal microbiome (VM) of postmenopausal women.

Methods: We studied women with GynCa, pre- (N = 65) and post-RT (N = 25) and a group of healthy controls (N = 67) by sequencing the V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene from vaginal swabs and compared the diversity and composition of VMs between the three groups accounting for potential confounding factors in multivariate analysis of variance.

Results: Comparisons of cancer vs healthy groups revealed that Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium have significantly higher relative abundance in the healthy group, while the cancer group was enriched in 16 phylogroups associated with bacterial vaginosis (BV) and inflammation, including Sneathia, Prevotella, Peptoniphilus, Fusobacterium, Anaerococcus, Dialister, Moryella, and Peptostreptococcus. In our sample, RT affected the α-diversity and correlated with higher abundance of typically rare VM species, including several members of the Lacnospiraceae family, a taxon previously linked to vaginal dysbiosis. In addition to cancer and treatment modalities, age and vaginal pH were identified as significant parameters that structure the VM.

Conclusions: This is among the first reports identifying VM changes among postmenopausal women with cancer. RT alone seems to affect several phylogroups (12 bacterial genera), while gynecological cancer and its treatment modalities are associated with even greater significant shifts in the vaginal microbiota including the enrichment of opportunistic bacterial pathogens, which warrants further attention.

Keywords: 16S rRNA gene; gynecologic cancer; postmenopausal women; radiation therapy; vaginal microbiota.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

© 2020 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Vaginal microbiota in cancer (pre‐RT) and healthy groups. A, Heatmap showing hierarchical clustering of differentially abundant bacterial genera between the healthy and cancer group (n = 20). Three groups were observed: cluster I contained three genera significantly enriched in the healthy group, which included Bifidobacterium, Allistipes, and Lactobacillus. Cluster II grouped eight bacterial genera which were found in both groups but showed higher abundances in the cancer group overall. Finally, cluster III grouped nine genera which were observed mostly enriched in the GynCa group and completely absent from the majority of the healthy samples. B, Boxplots showing the estimated median relative abundance of Lactobacillus spp. in healthy and pre‐RT groups. Note that, in general, Lactobacillus spp. was more abundant in healthy than pre‐RT samples. C, Boxplots showing the estimated median relative abundance of Sneathia spp. in healthy and pre‐RT samples. A higher relative abundance of Sneathia spp. was observed in pre‐RT samples vs healthy. In panels (B) and (C), boxplots represent the first and third quartile and the horizontal segment represent the median value. RT, radiation therapy
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Comparison of community diversity metrics among healthy, pre‐RT and post‐RT cancer vaginal microbiome communities. A diversity overall increases from healthy to pre‐ and post‐RT cancer groups, a potential indication of disturbance in the microbial communities. Cancer samples show higher diversity than healthy samples in terms if richness, Shannon, and phylogenetic diversity. Post‐RT samples show slightly higher diversity than post‐RT samples in terms of Shannon and phylogenetic diversity. RT, radiation therapy
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
Differentially abundant bacterial operational taxonomic units between (A) healthy and cancer and (B) pre‐ and post‐RT vaginal microbiomes. Previously reported associations for each phylogroup are marked with squared indications and described in the discussion section. RT, radiation therapy
FIGURE 4
FIGURE 4
Detection of discriminative phylogroups in healthy vs cancer cohort. The plot compares the estimated relative abundance of eight selected operational taxonomic units discriminative of healthy (Lactobacillus, Allistipes, Akkersmania, and Bifidobacter) or GynCa groups (Prevotella, Porhyromonas, Fusobacteria, and Peptococcus). Continuous black lines correspond to the estimated mean relative abundances while striped black lines depict the median

References

    1. Gupta S, Kakkar V, Bhushan I. Crosstalk between vaginal microbiome and female health: a review. Microb Pathog. 2019;136:103696.
    1. Greenbaum S, Greenbaum G, Moran‐Gilad J, Weintraub AY. Ecological dynamics of the vaginal microbiome in relation to health and disease. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019;220(4):324‐335.
    1. Ravel J, Gajer P, Abdo Z, et al. Vaginal microbiome of reproductive‐age women. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108(Suppl 1):4680‐4687.
    1. Gajer P, Brotman RM, Bai G, et al. Temporal dynamics of the human vaginal microbiota. Sci Transl Med. 2012;4(132):132ra52‐132ra52.
    1. Brotman RM, Shardell MD, Gajer P, et al. Association between the vaginal microbiota, menopause status and signs of vulvovaginal atrophy. Menopause. 2014;21(5):450‐458.
    1. Romero R, Hassan SS, Gajer P, et al. The composition and stability of the vaginal microbiota of normal pregnant women is different from that of non‐pregnant women. Microbiome. 2014;2(1):4.
    1. Muhleisen AL, Herbst‐Kralovetz MM. Menopause and the vaginal microbiome. Maturitas. 2016;91:42‐50.
    1. CDC . Gynecologic Cancers [Internet]. 2019. . Accessed December 9, 2019.
    1. Fernandes A, Bhuva NJ, Taylor A. Management of toxicities following pelvic irradiation for gynaecological cancers. Curr Opin Oncol. 2015;27(5):405‐411.
    1. Hofsjö A, Bohm‐Starke N, Blomgren B, Jahren H, Steineck G, Bergmark K. Radiotherapy‐induced vaginal fibrosis in cervical cancer survivors. Acta Oncol. 2017;56(5):661‐666.
    1. Jensen PT, Groenvold M, Klee MC, Thranov I, Petersen MA, Machin D. Longitudinal study of sexual function and vaginal changes after radiotherapy for cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003;56(4):937‐949.
    1. Champer M, Wong AM, Champer J, et al. The role of the vaginal microbiome in gynaecological cancer. BJOG. 2018;125(3):309‐315.
    1. Muls A, Andreyev J, Lalondrelle S, Taylor A, Norton C, Hart A. Systematic review: The impact of cancer treatment on the gut and vaginal microbiome in women with a gynecological malignancy. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2017;27(7):1550‐1559.
    1. HMP . Manual of Procedures for Human Microbiome Project, Version 12.0 (dbGaP ID: phd003190).
    1. Kozich JJ, Westcott SL, Baxter NT, Highlander SK, Schloss PD. Development of a dual‐index sequencing strategy and curation pipeline for analyzing amplicon sequence data on the MiSeq illumina sequencing platform. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2013;79(17):5112.
    1. Johnston ER, Rodriguez‐R LM, Luo C, et al. Metagenomics reveals pervasive bacterial populations and reduced community diversity across the Alaska tundra ecosystem. Front Microbiol. 2016;7:579.
    1. Oksanen J, Blanchet FG, Kindt R, et al. vegan: Community Ecology Package [Internet]. 2013. . Accessed January 10, 2014.
    1. Caporaso JG, Kuczynski J, Stombaugh J, et al. QIIME allows analysis of high‐throughput community sequencing data. Nat Methods. 2010;7(5):335‐336.
    1. Wang Q, Garrity GM, Tiedje JM, Cole JR. Naive Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new bacterial taxonomy. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007;73(16):5261‐5267.
    1. Paulson JN, Stine OC, Bravo HC, Pop M. Robust methods for differential abundance analysis in marker gene surveys. Nat Methods. 2013;10(12):1200‐1202.
    1. Segata N, Izard J, Waldron L, et al. Metagenomic biomarker discovery and explanation. Genome Biol. 2011;12:R60.
    1. Harwich MD, Serrano MG, Fettweis JM, et al. Genomic sequence analysis and characterization of Sneathia amnii sp. nov. BMC Genomics. 2012;13(S8). 10.1186/1471-2164-13-S8-S4
    1. Zhernakova A, Kurilshikov A, Bonder MJ, et al. Population‐based metagenomics analysis reveals markers for gut microbiome composition and diversity. Science. 2016;352(6285):565‐569.
    1. Mitra A, MacIntyre DA, Lee YS, et al. Cervical intraepithelial neoplasia disease progression is associated with increased vaginal microbiome diversity. Sci Rep. 2015;5:16865.
    1. Freitas AC, Hill JE. Quantification, isolation and characterization of Bifidobacterium from the vaginal microbiomes of reproductive aged women. Anaerobe. 2017;47:145‐156.
    1. Xiao B, Niu X, Han NA, et al. Predictive value of the composition of the vaginal microbiota in bacterial vaginosis, a dynamic study to identify recurrence‐related flora. Sci Rep. 2016;6(1):1‐9.
    1. Nelson TM, Borgogna J‐LC, Brotman RM, Ravel J, Walk ST, Yeoman CJ. Vaginal biogenic amines: biomarkers of bacterial vaginosis or precursors to vaginal dysbiosis? Front Physiol. 2015;6 . Accessed November 27, 2019.
    1. Onderdonk AB, Delaney ML, Fichorova RN. The human microbiome during bacterial vaginosis. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2016;29(2):223‐238.
    1. Anahtar M, Byrne E, Doherty K, et al. Cervicovaginal bacteria are a major modulator of host inflammatory responses in the female genital tract. Immunity. 2015;42(5):965‐976.
    1. Caselli E, Soffritti I, D'Accolti M, Piva I, Greco P, Bonaccorsi G. Atopobium vaginae and Porphyromonas somerae induce proinflammatory cytokines expression in endometrial cells: a possible implication for endometrial cancer? [Internet]. Cancer Manag Res. 2019. . Accessed November 27, 2019.
    1. Zhou Z, Chen J, Yao H, Hu H. Fusobacterium and colorectal cancer. Front Oncol. 2018;8 [Internet]. . Accessed November 26, 2019.
    1. Curty G, Costa RL, Siqueira JD, et al. Analysis of the cervical microbiome and potential biomarkers from postpartum HIV‐positive women displaying cervical intraepithelial lesions. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1). [Internet]. . Accessed November 26, 2019.
    1. Ritu W, Enqi W, Zheng S, Wang J, Ling Y, Wang Y. Evaluation of the associations between cervical microbiota and HPV infection, clearance, and persistence in cytologically normal women. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2019;12(1):43‐56.
    1. Muzny CA, Sunesara IR, Kumar R, et al. Characterization of the vaginal microbiota among sexual risk behavior groups of women with bacterial vaginosis. PLoS ONE. 2013;8(11):e80254.
    1. Lennard K, Dabee S, Barnabas SL, et al. Microbial composition predicts genital tract inflammation and persistent bacterial vaginosis in South African adolescent females. Infect Immun. 2018;86(1):e00410‐17.
    1. Lev‐Sagie A, Goldman‐Wohl D, Cohen Y, et al. Vaginal microbiome transplantation in women with intractable bacterial vaginosis. Nat Med. 2019;25(10):1500‐1504.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅