4.6 Review

The intestinal microbiota in colorectal cancer metastasis-Passive observer or key player?

Journal

CRITICAL REVIEWS IN ONCOLOGY HEMATOLOGY
Volume 180, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103856

Keywords

Colorectal cancer; Metastasis; Intestinal microbiome

Funding

  1. Cancer Research UK [C64263, A29365]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several studies have shown the association between intestinal microbiota and colorectal cancer (CRC). Bacteria are an important component of the tumor microenvironment and may contribute to CRC metastasis through various mechanisms, such as signaling through metabolites, promoting epithelial-mesenchymal transition, creating an immunosuppressive microenvironment, and impairing the gut-vascular barrier.
The association between colorectal cancer (CRC) and alterations in intestinal microbiota has been demonstrated by several studies, and there is increasing evidence that bacteria are an important component of the tumour microenvironment. Bacteria may contribute to the development of CRC metastasis by signalling through me-tabolites, promoting epithelial-mesenchymal transition, creating an immunosuppressive microenvironment and through the impairment of the gut-vascular barrier. Host immunity and intestinal microbiome symbiosis play a key role in determining innate and adaptive immune responses at the local and systemic level. How this gut-systemic axis might contribute to the development of CRC metastasis is however unclear. Several clinical tri-als are investigating the impact of microbiome-targeted interventions on the systemic inflammatory response, treatment-related complications, and side effects. This review examines pre-clinical and clinical studies which have examined the role of microbes in relation to CRC metastasis, the mechanisms which may contribute to tumour dissemination, and directions for future work.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available