ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Microbiol., 27 May 2024

Sec. Evolutionary and Genomic Microbiology

Volume 15 - 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1356437

Causal relationships of gut microbiota, plasma metabolites, and metabolite ratios with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a Mendelian randomization study

  • JQ

    Jingrong Qian 1

  • WZ

    Wen Zheng 1

  • JF

    Jun Fang 2

  • SC

    Shiliang Cheng 1

  • YZ

    Yanli Zhang 1

  • XZ

    Xuewei Zhuang 1*

  • CS

    Chao Song 3*

  • 1. Department of Clinical Laboratory, Shandong Provincial Third Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China

  • 2. Department of Medical Engineering, Shandong Provincial Third Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China

  • 3. Department of Administration, Shandong Provincial Third Hospital, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China

Abstract

Background:

Recent studies have revealed changes in microbiota constitution and metabolites associated with tumor progression, however, no causal relation between microbiota or metabolites and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) has yet been reported.

Methods:

We download a microbiota dataset from the MiBioGen study, a metabolites dataset from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA) study, and a DLBCL dataset from Integrative Epidemiology Unit Open genome-wide association study (GWAS) project. Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was conducted using the R packages, TwoSampleMR and MR-PRESSO. Five MR methods were used: MR-Egger, inverse variance weighting (IVW), weighted median, simple mode, and weighted mode. Reverse MR analyses were also conducted to explore the causal effects of DLBCL on the microbiome, metabolites, and metabolite ratios. Pleiotropy was evaluated by MR Egger regression and MR-PRESSO global analyses, heterogeneity was assessed by Cochran’s Q-test, and stability analyzed using the leave-one-out method.

Results:

119 microorganisms, 1,091 plasma metabolite, and 309 metabolite ratios were analyzed. According to IVW analysis, five microorganisms were associated with risk of DLBCL. The genera Terrisporobacter (OR: 3.431, p = 0.049) andgenera Oscillibacter (OR: 2.406, p = 0.029) were associated with higher risk of DLBCL. Further, 27 plasma metabolites were identified as having a significant causal relationships with DLBCL, among which citrate levels had the most significant protective causal effect against DLBCL (p = 0.006), while glycosyl-N-tricosanoyl-sphingadienine levels was related to higher risk of DLBCL (p = 0.003). In addition, we identified 19 metabolite ratios with significant causal relationships to DLBCL, of which taurine/glutamate ratio had the most significant protective causal effect (p = 0.005), while the phosphoethanolamine/choline ratio was related to higher risk of DLBCL (p = 0.009). Reverse MR analysis did not reveal any significant causal influence of DLBCL on the above microbiota, metabolites, and metabolite ratios (p > 0.05). Sensitivity analyses revealed no significant heterogeneity or pleiotropy (p > 0.05).

Conclusion:

We present the first elucidation of the causal influence of microbiota and metabolites on DLBCL using MR methods, providing novel insights for potential targeting of specific microbiota or metabolites to prevent, assist in diagnosis, and treat DLBCL.

1 Introduction

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common subtype of invasive B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), comprising approximately 40% of all malignant lymphomas (Alaggio et al., 2022). In terms of characteristics and clinical prognosis, DLBCL is a highly heterogeneous malignant tumor. In recent years, although patient treatment response rates have improved, more than 40% of patients with DLBCL continue to develop refractory disease with poor survival prognosis (Vodicka et al., 2022). Therefore, more study is needed to discover novel biomarkers for evaluating risk classification and guiding the optimization of personalized treatment for patients with DLBCL.

Notably, the number of genes derived from gut microbiota genomes is approximately 150 times greater than the number of genes in the human genome. Specific interactions occur between microorganisms and their metabolites and host cells (Yoo et al., 2020), which influence tumor occurrence and progression by inducing gene mutations, effecting the immune system, and altering metabolite levels, leading to inflammatory responses, and interfering with cell apoptosis and proliferation (Lu et al., 2022). Yuan et al. (2021) reported differential changes in gut microbiota between 25 patients with untreated DLBCL and healthy individuals using 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Further, Yoon et al. (2023) found that 189 patients with DLBCL exhibited microbiota dysbiosis, and that Enterobacteriaceae numbers were related to treatment efficacy and febrile neutropenia. Furthermore, Lin et al. (2023) detected correlations of the numbers of different microbes with disease characteristics and host immune cells in 35 patients with DLBCL. Previous studies have primarily relied on observing cross-sectional data or animal models; hence, although some associations between gut microbiota or metabolites and DLBCL have been proposed, it is difficult to effectively eliminate the influences of factors, such as age, region, habits, and lifestyle, limiting the determination of causal inference between various factors and DLBCL (Rinninella et al., 2019).

Metabolites are small molecule or compounds generated or transformed by enzymes during metabolic processes. The metabolism of cells driven to proliferate or die undergoes corresponding changes. There are reports that metabolic disorders in B-cell lymphoma may promote uncontrolled tumor cell proliferation, leading to the use of metabolic phenotypes as biomarkers for early cancer detection and/or treatment response (Vander and DeBerardinis, 2017). Alfaifi et al. (2023) summarized the diagnostic and prognostic significance of metabolic biomarkers in DLBCL using mass spectrometry and nuclear magnetic resonance techniques; however, few studies to date have reported the use of specific metabolic markers for DLBCL risk assessment.

Mendelian randomization (MR) integrates summary data from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to determine causal influences of factors on outcomes, using genetic variation as instrumental variable, unaffected by confounding factors. MR analysis has been used to explore causal correlations between gut microbiota and various diseases, including autoimmune (Xu et al., 2021) and metabolic diseases (Sanna et al., 2019), as well as gastrointestinal tumors (Xie et al., 2023). In this study, we used MR analysis to investigate the potential causal effects of gut microbiota, plasma metabolites, and metabolite ratios on DLBCL, to provide data on potential early non-invasive diagnostic biomarkers and therapeutic targets for patients with DLBCL.

2 Methods

2.1 Dataset

The gut microbiota GWAS dataset was from the MiBioGen study, which explored genotype and 16S microbiome data from fecal samples from 18,340 participants (24 population cohorts) and conducted microbiota quantitative trait loci analysis to investigate the relationships between autosomal human genetic variation and the gut microbiome. And this study recorded 211 gut microbiota and 122,110 connected single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) datasets, with a minimum classification level of genera. A total of 131 genera were determined with average abundance >1%, including 12 unknown genera (Kurilshikov et al., 2021). Thus, our study included 119 gut microbiota genera for analysis. The metamaterials and metamaterial rates GWAS dataset was from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA), which recorded 1091 metamaterials and 309 metamaterial rates from 8299 individuals (Raina et al., 2019). The DLBCL GWAS summary dataset was from the Integrative Epidemiology Unit Open GWAS project.1 The “finn-b-C3-DLBCL” dataset, which included 218,792 participants (209 cases and 218,583 controls) was selected.

2.2 Selection of instrumental variables

First, SNPs strongly correlated with gut microbiota, plasma metabolites, and metabolite ratios were identified as instrumental variables (IVs) (p < 1e-05). To guarantee stable correlations between IVs and exposure factors, weak IVs were filtered out, based on an F value [F = [R2/(R2–1)] [(N – K – 1)/K]] > 10. Second, to avoid the impact of linkage disequilibrium between genetic variations on the results and maintain the independence of selected IVs, thresholds of SNP linkage disequilibrium (r2) ≤ 0.001 and genetic spacing ≥10,000 kb were set. Third, to avoid IVs related to the results, those associated with DLBCL were removed (p < 0.05). In addition, palindromic SNPs were removed, to ensure that the influence of SNPs on exposure factors corresponded to the influence of a specific allele of SNP on outcomes.

2.3 MR analysis

Five MR methods [MR-Egger, inverse variance weighting (IVW), weighted median, simple mode, and weighted mode] were applied for analysis of the relationships of gut microbiota, plasma metabolites, and metabolite ratios with DLBCL. The IVW method uses meta-analysis integrated with Wald estimates for SNPs to evaluate the influence of exposure factors on an outcome. If there is no significant pleiotropy, the results of IVW will be unbiased (Burgess et al., 2016). MR Egger regression considers the potential heterogeneity of IVs and provides corrected estimates of causal effects, as well as an intercept term, to detect and correct bias (Bowden et al., 2015). The weighted median method provides a robust estimate of causal relationships, even when there are up to 50% invalid IVs (Hartwig et al., 2017). The weighted model method provides a comprehensive evaluation of the impact of different genotypes on outcomes by calculating the weighted average of each genotype, and better controls the influence of genotype frequency differences on the results, providing a robust and accurate analysis. If the results of analyses using these five MR methods were inconsistent, those obtained using the IVW method was used as the main evaluation result.

2.4 Sensitivity analysis

MR Egger and MR-Pleiotropy Residual Sum and Outlier (MR-PRESSO) tests were applied to examine pleiotropy and outliers, respectively; p > 0.05 indicated no significant pleiotropy. MR-PRESSO has higher accuracy than MR Egger analysis (Verbanck et al., 2018). Conchran’s Q-test was applied to assess the heterogeneity among IVs. The consistency of outliers and the overall results was analyzed using the leave-one-out method.

2.5 Reverse Mendelian randomization analysis

Reverse MR analysis was also conducted, using DLBCL as an exposure factor, and using gut microbiota, metabolites or metabolite ratios that were causally significantly related to DLBCL in MR analysis as outcomes, to explore whether DLBCL had a causal influence on microbiota and metabolites. Reverse MR analysis also used five methods (MR-Egger, IVW, weighted median, simple mode, and weighted mode), with pleiotropy and heterogeneity assessed using the MR Egger intercept test and the Cochran’s Q-test.

2.6 Statistical analysis

Statistical analyses were conducted in R software (version 4.1.2.). MR analysis was conducted using the R packages, TwoSampleMR (version 0.5.10) and MR-PRESSO (version 1.0). Visualize data using forest, scatter, funnel, and leave-one-out plots.

3 Results

3.1 Instrumental variables

We separately screened the IVs of 119 gut microbiota genera. According to the filtering criterion, p < 1e-05, IVs showing linkage disequilibrium in the microbiota (kb = 10,000 and r2 = 0.001) were removed. Further, IVs weakly correlated with exposure factors (F < 10) and possible confounding factors related to outcomes were also removed. Finally, 1,531 SNPs were included for analysis (Supplementary Excel S1). We also separately screened IVs for 1,091 plasma metabolite, and 309 metabolite ratios. According to the filtering criteria described above, 27,534 SNPs of plasma metabolite and 7,309 SNPs of metabolic ratios were included (Supplementary Excel S2).

3.2 MR analysis of gut microbiota

According to MR analysis using the IVW method, we detected causal relationships between 5 gut microbiota genera and DLBCL (Figure 1). Among them, the most significant was that the genus, Oscillibacter, was related to higher risk of DLBCL [odds ratio (OR): 2.406, 95 confidence interval (95%CI): 1.093–5.296, p = 0.029]. Further, application of the weighted median method yielded the same result (p = 0.002). Another gut microbiota genus, Terrisporobacter, was also related to higher risk of DLBCL (OR: 3.431, 95%CI: 1.005–11.708, p = 0.049). Conversely, the genera, Methanobrevibacter, Eubacterium coprostanoligenes group, and Slackia had causal protective effects against DLBCL (OR: 0.418, 95%CI: 0.215–0.814, p = 0.010; OR: 0.239, 95%CI: 0.080–0.714, p = 0.010; OR: 0.444, 95%CI: 0.198–0.995, p = 0.048). Meanwhile, according to the results of analysis using the weighted median method, the genera Methanobrevibacter and Eubacterium coprostanoligenes group were associated with low risk of DLBCL, similar to the results obtained using the IVW method (Table 1).

Figure 1

Table 1

ExposureMR methodNo. of SNPβSEOR95% CIp-value
TerrisporobacterWeighted mode51.5731.0514.8200.61437.8370.209
Weighted median51.3100.8093.7050.75918.0910.106
Inverse variance weighted51.2330.6263.4311.00511.7080.049
MR Egger51.0862.1682.9610.042207.5930.652
Simple mode51.5911.1194.9080.54744.0280.228
MethanobrevibacterWeighted mode8−1.0110.5440.3640.1251.0560.105
Weighted median8−0.9880.4190.3720.1640.8460.018
Inverse variance weighted8−0.8720.3400.4180.2150.8140.010
MR Egger8−0.0101.3460.9900.07113.8520.995
Simple mode8−1.0020.5820.3670.1171.1470.128
Eubacterium coprostanoligenes groupWeighted mode13−2.5891.2070.0750.0070.8000.053
Weighted median13−1.9780.7660.1380.0310.6220.010
Inverse variance weighted13−1.4310.5590.2390.0800.7140.010
MR Egger13−3.3702.1910.034<0.0012.5210.152
Simple mode13−2.6111.3120.0730.0060.9610.070
SlackiaWeighted mode9−0.7470.9390.4740.0752.9820.449
Weighted median9−0.7570.5830.4690.1491.4710.194
Inverse variance weighted9−0.8110.4110.4440.1980.9950.048
MR Egger9−3.2101.9120.0400.0011.7110.137
Simple mode9−0.7360.8490.4790.0912.5270.411
OscillibacterWeighted mode161.6660.7915.2931.12224.9640.052
Weighted median161.5050.4874.5061.73411.7070.002
Inverse variance weighted160.8780.4022.4061.0935.2960.029
MR Egger160.7971.4502.2190.13038.0020.591
Simple mode161.6660.7865.2931.13424.7090.051

Mendelian randomization analysis of associations between gut microbiota and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

MR, Mendelian randomization; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphisms; β, Beta; SE, standard error; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

In this study, no significant pleiotropy or outliers were detected using the MR Egger intercept test, MR-PRESSO test (Supplementary Table S1, p > 0.05), or scatter plot (Figure 2). Further, no significant heterogeneity was detected among the selected SNPs using the Cochran’s Q-test (Supplementary Table S1, p > 0.05) or funnel plot analysis (Supplementary Figure S1). In addition, the stability of MR results was analyzed by leave-one-out analysis (Supplementary Figure S2).

Figure 2

3.3 MR analysis of plasma metabolites

According to MR analysis by the IVW method, associations between 27 plasma metabolites and the risk of DLBCL were identified (Figure 3). The top five most significant metabolites associated with high risk of DLBCL were levels of glycosyl-N-tricosanoyl-sphingadienine (p = 0.003), 5-dodecenoate (p = 0.004), 4-hydroxyglutamate (p = 0.004), 3-ureidopropionate (p = 0.005), and 3-methyl-2-oxobutyrate (p = 0.015). Further, the top three metabolites were significantly correlated with causal protective effects against DLBCL, including those of citrate (p = 0.006), N-formylphenylalanine (p = 0.008), and androstenediol monosulfate (p = 0.010). Analysis using the weighted median method indicated that DHEAS, glycolithocolate, androstenediol monosulfate, 4-hydroxyglutamate, and methyl-4-hydroxybenzoate sulfate were associated with DLBCL, similar to the results produced using the IVW method (Table 2).

Figure 3

Table 2

ExposureMR methodNo. of SNPβSEOR95% CIp-value
Methionine sulfoxide levelsMR Egger25−0.9660.5620.3810.1271.1450.099
Weighted median25−0.5330.3470.5870.2971.1590.125
Inverse variance weighted25−0.5240.2600.5920.3560.9860.044
Weighted mode25−0.9810.6290.3750.1091.2860.132
Simple mode25−0.1460.6580.8640.2383.1380.827
DHEAS levelsMR Egger44−0.3960.3990.6730.3081.4720.327
Weighted median44−0.7130.3470.4900.2480.9690.040
Inverse variance weighted44−0.4890.2210.6130.3980.9460.027
Weighted mode44−0.7810.3380.4590.23680.8890.026
Simple mode44−0.9590.5520.3830.1301.1300.089
3-methyl-2-oxobutyrate levelsMR Egger220.0010.7181.0010.2454.0850.999
Weighted median220.5810.4171.7890.7904.0510.163
Inverse variance weighted220.7440.3052.1051.1593.8250.015
Weighted mode220.2840.7401.3290.3115.6710.705
Simple mode220.2030.8001.2260.2565.8780.802
2,3-dihydroxypyridine levelsMR Egger221.120.9833.0720.44721.1020.267
Weighted median220.5360.3881.7090.7993.6550.167
Inverse variance weighted220.6010.2801.821.0533.1600.032
Weighted mode220.5020.6041.6520.5065.3970.415
Simple mode220.5190.6661.6800.4556.2010.445
Glycolithocholate levelsMR Egger24−0.5970.4220.5520.2421.2600.172
Weighted median24−0.6900.3220.5020.2670.9420.032
Inverse variance weighted24−0.4940.2270.6100.3910.9520.029
Weighted mode24−0.8550.4490.4250.1761.0240.069
Simple mode24−0.8700.5780.4190.1351.30110.146
5-dodecenoate levelsMR Egger150.6550.7861.9240.4138.9740.420
Weighted median150.4670.5231.5940.5724.4420.372
Inverse variance weighted151.0360.3622.8171.3865.7260.004
Weighted mode150.4780.6071.6120.4915.2940.444
Simple mode151.9810.8887.2471.27141.3320.043
Alpha-hydroxyisovalerate levelsMR Egger230.5190.4351.6800.7163.9400.247
Weighted median230.1950.3071.2150.6662.2170.526
Inverse variance weighted230.4390.2161.5521.0162.3710.042
Weighted mode230.2440.3281.2760.6712.4270.465
Simple mode230.8310.5622.2950.7636.9050.153
N-methyl-2-pyridone-5-carboxamide levelsMR Egger150.3520.2331.4220.9012.2430.154
Weighted median150.3840.5661.4680.4844.4500.497
Inverse variance weighted150.3810.1761.4631.0362.0670.031
Weighted mode150.4040.2291.4970.9562.3440.099
Simple mode150.6950.5862.0030.6366.3130.255
4-ethylphenylsulfate levelsMR Egger23−0.5310.4580.5880.2401.4440.260
Weighted median23−0.3830.3850.6820.3201.4510.320
Inverse variance weighted23−0.5850.2580.5570.3360.9250.024
Weighted mode23−0.2620.4670.7690.3081.9200.580
Simple mode23−0.3080.6430.7350.2082.5910.636
5alpha-pregnan-3beta,20alpha-diol monosulfate levelsMR Egger28−0.6080.4740.5440.2151.3780.211
Weighted median28−0.2970.3240.7430.3941.4020.360
Inverse variance weighted28−0.4960.2180.6090.3970.9330.023
Weighted mode28−0.3980.4060.6720.3031.4890.336
Simple mode28−1.0520.5900.3490.1101.1100.086
Androstenediol monosulfate levelsMR Egger32−0.5790.4130.5600.2491.2590.171
Weighted median32−0.7730.3550.4610.2300.9260.030
Inverse variance weighted32−0.6070.2350.5450.3440.8630.010
Weighted mode32−0.7660.3720.4650.2240.9630.048
Simple mode32−0.8150.6030.4430.1361.4420.186
4-hydroxyglutamate levelsMR Egger250.0280.5211.0280.3712.8520.958
Weighted median250.8740.3462.3961.2174.7170.011
Inverse variance weighted250.7080.2492.0301.24613.3080.004
Weighted mode250.9250.5052.5220.9366.7910.080
Simple mode250.6620.6031.9390.5956.3180.283
N-formylphenylalanine levelsMR Egger31−1.1480.5450.3170.1090.9220.044
Weighted median31−0.3130.3410.7310.3741.4280.359
Inverse variance weighted31−0.6060.2290.5450.3480.8540.008
Weighted mode31−0.1750.6190.8390.2492.8260.779
Simple mode31−0.1750.6460.8390.2372.9770.788
Methyl-4-hydroxybenzoate sulfate levelsMR Egger21−1.3110.5800.2690.0870.8390.036
Weighted median21−0.8230.3790.4390.2090.9230.030
Inverse variance weighted21−0.6010.2890.5490.3110.9660.038
Weighted mode21−0.8330.5350.4350.1521.2410.135
Simple mode21−1.0590.6400.3470.0991.2160.114
Arabitol/xylitol levelsMR Egger240.4530.7641.5730.3527.0340.559
Weighted median240.5750.4211.7770.7784.0590.172
Inverse variance weighted240.6540.3081.9231.0513.5190.034
Weighted mode240.2720.7101.3120.3265.2810.706
Simple mode240.0500.8041.0510.2175.0850.951
Behenoyl dihydrosphingomyelin levelsMR Egger380.4270.4471.5330.6383.6800.346
Weighted median380.4970.3021.6430.9092.9690.100
Inverse variance weighted380.4510.1961.5701.0702.3050.021
Weighted mode380.7000.4982.0130.7585.3460.169
Simple mode380.4060.5691.5000.4924.5750.480
1-myristoyl-2-arachidonoyl-GPC levelsMR Egger240.9170.3342.5021.2994.8180.012
Weighted median240.4090.2631.5050.8982.5210.121
Inverse variance weighted240.4670.1951.5961.0882.3410.017
Weighted mode240.4600.2721.5840.9292.7000.105
Simple mode240.42100.6101.5240.4615.0360.497
Glycosyl-N-tricosanoyl-sphingadienine levelsMR Egger240.3890.5141.4750.5384.0440.458
Weighted median240.6590.3391.9330.9953.7560.052
Inverse variance weighted240.6910.2291.9961.2743.1260.003
Weighted mode240.7420.4612.1000.8515.1850.121
Simple mode240.7550.6102.1280.6447.0300.228
Ceramide levelsMR Egger30−0.7650.5060.4660.1731.2550.142
Weighted median30−0.3150.3180.7300.3911.3610.322
Inverse variance weighted30−0.4870.2190.6140.4000.9430.026
Weighted mode30−0.3390.44490.7130.29881.7020.452
Simple mode30−0.4460.5880.6400.2022.0250.454
Dihomo-linolenoylcarnitine levelsMR Egger34−0.1280.2690.8790.5201.4890.636
Weighted median34−0.3360.2070.7150.4771.0720.105
Inverse variance weighted34−0.3330.1510.7170.5330.9650.028
Weighted mode34−0.2950.2260.7450.4781.1610.202
Simple mode34−0.5220.3950.5930.2741.2860.195
8-methoxykynurenate levelsMR Egger24−0.1380.6550.8710.2413.1460.835
Weighted median24−0.4630.3270.6300.3321.1950.157
Inverse variance weighted24−0.5530.2510.5750.3520.9400.027
Weighted mode24−0.4550.5110.6340.2331.7280.383
Simple mode24−0.5000.5730.6060.1971.8630.391
4-methylhexanoylglutamine levelsMR Egger23−0.1700.3880.8440.3941.8050.666
Weighted median23−0.3910.2930.6760.3811.2010.182
Inverse variance weighted23−0.4720.2020.6240.4200.9260.019
Weighted mode23−0.4420.3700.6420.3111.3270.245
Simple mode23−0.6450.5230.5250.1881.4630.231
3-ureidopropionate levelsMR Egger230.3570.5351.4290.5014.0770.511
Weighted median230.6040.3801.8300.8693.8570.112
Inverse variance weighted230.7670.2722.1531.2643.6680.005
Weighted mode230.4350.4931.5440.5884.0590.388
Simple mode231.0820.6292.9500.859610.1240.100
Gamma-glutamylglutamine levelsMR Egger30−0.4890.4070.6130.2761.3600.239
Weighted median30−0.3610.2830.6970.4001.2150.203
Inverse variance weighted30−0.4120.2020.6620.4460.9830.041
Weighted mode30−0.2390.3510.7870.3951.5670.501
Simple mode30−0.0780.4640.9250.3722.2990.868
Citrate levelsMR Egger23−0.8180.7020.4420.1121.7470.257
Weighted median23−0.6970.3840.4980.2351.0580.070
Inverse variance weighted23−0.7880.2880.4550.2590.7990.006
Weighted mode23−1.0900.7350.3360.0801.4190.152
Simple mode23−1.0710.7510.3430.0791.4950.168
Cholesterol levelsMR Egger18−0.7500.6430.4720.1341.6660.261
Weighted median18−0.4660.4510.6280.2591.5190.302
Inverse variance weighted18−0.6290.3200.5330.2850.9980.049
Weighted mode18−0.4530.6250.6360.1872.1650.479
Simple mode18−0.5340.7080.5860.1462.3490.461
Androsterone sulfate levelsMR Egger35−0.2060.1250.8130.6371.0390.108
Weighted median35−0.1940.1120.8240.6611.0260.084
Inverse variance weighted35−0.2100.1030.8100.6620.9920.042
Weighted mode35−0.1850.1070.8310.6741.0260.094
Simple mode35−0.3360.3980.7140.3271.5600.405

Mendelian randomization analysis of associations between plasma metabolites and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

MR, Mendelian randomization; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphisms; β, Beta; SE, standard error; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

No significant pleiotropy or outliers were detected using the MR Egger intercept test, MR-PRESSO test (Supplementary Table S2, p > 0.05), or scatter plot (Figures 4, 5). Further, there were no significant heterogeneity (p > 0.05) among selected SNPs, according to the Cochran’s Q-test (Supplementary Table S2, p > 0.05) and funnel plots analysis (Supplementary Figures S3, S4). The stability of MR results was analyzed using leave-one-out analysis (Supplementary Figure S5).

Figure 4

Figure 5

3.4 MR analysis of metabolite ratio

MR analysis using the IVW method indentified 19 metabolite ratios as associated with the risk of DLBCL (Figure 6). Among them, serine/alpha tocopherol, glutamate/glutamine, uridine/cytidine, adenosine 5′-diphosphate/glycerate, glycine/phosphate, cholate/bilirubin, cholate/adenosine 5′-monophosphate, glutarate (C5-DC)/caprylate (8:0), taurine/cysteine, tyrosine/pyruvate, phosphoethanolamine/choline, and serine/threonine were associated with a higher risk of DLBCL (p < 0.05). Notably, s-adenosylhomocysteine/5-methyluridine, adenosine 5′-monophosphate/proline, taurine/glutamate, phosphate/linoleoyl-arachidonoyl-glycerol (18:2–20:4), succinate/proline, phosphate/EDTA, and adenosine 5′–diphosphate/mannitol to sorbitol had a causal protective effects against DLBCL (p < 0.05). Further, analysis using the weighted median method indicated that s-adenosylhomocysteine/5-methyluridine, taurine/glutamate, and phosphate/EDTA were associated with low risk of DLBCL, consistent with the results generated by IVW analysis (Table 3).

Figure 6

Table 3

ExposureMR methodNo. of SNPβSEOR95% CIp-value
S-adenosylhomocysteine/ 5-methyluridineMR Egger21−0.3000.5510.7410.2522.1800.592
Weighted median21−0.8820.3160.4140.2230.7690.005
Inverse variance weighted21−0.5730.2410.5640.3510.9040.017
Weighted mode21−0.7670.3290.4640.2440.8850.030
Simple mode21−0.7670.4930.4640.1771.2210.136
Adenosine 5′-monophosphate / prolineMR Egger21−0.9230.6120.3970.1201.3200.148
Weighted median21−0.5650.4090.5680.2551.2680.168
Inverse variance weighted21−0.5960.2840.5510.3160.9620.036
Weighted mode21−1.1040.7360.3310.0781.4030.149
Simple mode21−0.7680.7920.4640.0982.1900.344
Serine / alpha-tocopherolMR Egger281.4140.5464.1111.40911.9950.016
Weighted median280.5970.3281.8170.9563.4530.068
Inverse variance weighted280.6080.2491.8361.1262.9940.015
Weighted mode280.6500.4951.9160.7265.0550.200
Simple mode280.2960.6161.3440.4024.4920.635
Glutamate / glutamineMR Egger251.2930.5893.6421.14811.5590.039
Weighted median250.6850.3641.9840.9734.0480.059
Inverse variance weighted250.5690.2741.7661.0313.0250.038
Weighted mode250.8100.5962.2480.6987.2330.187
Simple mode250.6930.6911.9990.5167.7490.326
Uridine / cytidineMR Egger210.6250.5821.8680.5975.8450.296
Weighted median210.1090.3911.1150.5182.4000.781
Inverse variance weighted210.5540.2741.7401.0162.9800.044
Weighted mode210.0750.5721.0780.3513.3090.897
Simple mode210.1770.6231.1940.3524.0500.779
Adenosine 5′-diphosphate/ glycerateMR Egger160.8270.7692.2860.50610.3260.301
Weighted median160.6440.3761.9040.9113.9790.087
Inverse variance weighted160.5650.2681.7601.0422.9730.035
Weighted mode161.0160.6472.7620.7779.8190.137
Simple mode161.0030.7132.7250.67411.0230.180
Glycine / phosphateMR Egger260.3500.2531.4180.8642.3290.180
Weighted median260.1540.1971.1670.7931.7170.434
Inverse variance weighted260.3870.1681.4721.0592.0470.021
Weighted mode260.2050.1971.2270.8331.8070.310
Simple mode260.5120.56131.6690.5565.0150.370
Cholate / bilirubinMR Egger260.1680.4971.1830.4473.1330.738
Weighted median260.4810.3361.6170.8373.1240.152
Inverse variance weighted260.4960.2441.6411.0182.6470.042
Weighted mode260.5010.3441.6510.8413.2410.158
Simple mode260.7850.5492.1930.7486.4350.165
Cholate / adenosine 5′-monophosphateMR Egger220.2520.4301.2860.5542.9890.565
Weighted median220.5080.3461.6610.8433.2730.142
Inverse variance weighted220.5540.2361.7411.0952.7670.019
Weighted mode220.4500.4771.5690.6163.9940.356
Simple mode221.3920.5704.0231.31512.3070.024
Taurine / glutamateMR Egger17−1.3710.8620.2540.0471.3750.132
Weighted median17−0.9730.4720.3780.1500.9530.039
Inverse variance weighted17−0.9710.3460.3790.1920.7460.005
Weighted mode17−1.2990.7480.2730.0631.1810.102
Simple mode17−1.3750.7500.2530.0581.0980.085
Glutarate (C5-DC) / caprylate (8:0)MR Egger250.8680.4182.3831.0505.4060.049
Weighted median250.6260.3701.8710.9063.8610.090
Inverse variance weighted250.5280.2351.6951.0702.6850.025
Weighted mode250.6230.3791.8640.8883.9160.113
250.4910.5441.6340.56364.7440.375
Taurine / cysteineMR Egger200.0380.7011.0390.2634.1050.957
Weighted median200.7630.4462.1440.8945.1420.087
Inverse variance weighted200.7170.3182.0481.0973.8230.024
Weighted mode200.8810.6772.4120.6399.0990.209
Simple mode200.8810.7432.4120.56310.3410.250
Phosphate / linoleoyl-arachidonoyl-glycerol (18:2–20:4)MR Egger23−0.6210.4120.5370.2401.2040.146
Weighted median23−0.5280.2900.5900.3351.0410.068
Inverse variance weighted23−0.4330.2040.6480.4340.9680.034
Weighted mode23−0.5120.3060.5990.3291.0930.109
Simple mode23−0.4820.5390.6170.2151.7750.380
Tyrosine / pyruvateMR Egger240.5290.4261.6970.7363.9140.228
Weighted median240.4420.3641.5560.7633.1750.224
Inverse variance weighted240.5010.2361.6511.0412.6200.033
Weighted mode240.4560.3761.5780.7563.290.237
Simple mode240.2450.5511.2770.4343.7630.661
Succinate / prolineMR Egger15−0.7520.62050.4710.1401.5870.246
Weighted median15−0.4930.4320.6110.2621.4250.254
Inverse variance weighted15−0.6640.3070.5150.2820.9400.031
Weighted mode15−0.3220.6020.7240.2232.3560.601
Simple mode15−0.0910.7180.9120.2233.7310.900
Phosphate / EDTAMR Egger20−0.5031.2170.6050.0566.5710.684
Weighted median20−1.2650.4870.2820.1090.7320.009
Inverse variance weighted20−0.7850.3700.4560.2210.9410.034
Weighted mode20−1.5700.6030.2080.0640.6780.018
Simple mode20−1.5700.7300.2080.0500.8700.045
Adenosine 5′-diphosphate / mannitol to sorbitolMR Egger19−0.4540.5740.6350.2061.9570.440
Weighted median19−0.4970.3370.6080.3141.1780.140
Inverse variance weighted19−0.5270.2380.5900.3700.9420.027
Weighted mode19−0.9720.5980.3790.1171.2210.121
Simple mode19−0.9720.6470.3790.1071.3440.150
Phosphoethanolamine / cholineMR Egger221.1310.8293.0980.61015.7270.188
Weighted median220.5930.4121.8090.8084.0530.150
Inverse variance weighted220.7630.2912.1451.2133.7940.009
Weighted mode220.2350.6381.2650.3624.4160.716
Simple mode220.9830.7142.6730.66010.8250.183
Serine / threonineMR Egger250.4150.4051.5140.6853.3470.316
Weighted median250.3110.2911.3650.7722.4120.284
Inverse variance weighted250.4280.1981.5341.0412.2620.031
Weighted mode250.3850.2761.4700.8562.5250.175
Simple mode250.5660.4721.7620.6984.4480.242

Mendelian randomization analysis of association between metabolite ratios and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

MR, Mendelian randomization; SNP, single nucleotide polymorphisms; β, Beta; SE, standard error; OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval.

No horizontal significant pleiotropy or outliers were detected by MR Egger intercept test, MR-PRESSO test (Supplementary Table S3, p > 0.05), or scatter plot (Figures 7, 8). Further, no heterogeneity among the selected SNPs was found by Cochran’s Q-test (Supplementary Table S3, p > 0.05) or funnel plot analysis (Supplementary Figures S6, S7). In addition, the stability of MR results was analyzed using leave-one-out plots (Supplementary Figure S8).

Figure 7

Figure 8

4 Reverse Mendelian randomization analysis

Reverse MR analysis identified no significant causal influence of DLBCL on the gut microbiota, metabolites, or metabolite ratios described above (Supplementary Tables S4–S6, p > 0.05). No significant pleiotropy or heterogeneity was detected by MR Egger intercept test and Cochran’s Q-test (Supplementary Table S7, p > 0.05).

5 Discussion

Recent, research has identified relationships among gut microbiota, plasma metabolites, and the development of lymphoma (Uribe-Herranz et al., 2021). To our knowledge, this study represents the first MR analysis based on new large-scale GWAS data to identify the causal effects of gut microbiota, plasma metabolites, and metabolites ratios on DLBCL. We report causal relationship of 5 gut microbiota genera, 27 plasma metabolites, and 19 metabolite ratios with DLBCL, providing a reference for potential future interventions and treatments to reduce the risk of DLBCL.

Interactions between the gut flora and the host immune-metabolic system are complex, and can have local and systemic effects on the host (Lozenov et al., 2023; Riazati et al., 2023). Clinical studies or experimental animal studies have demonstrated a relationship between gut microbial composition and disease, and found that dysbiosis appears to be a precursor to carcinogenesis. Using MR analysis, our study is the first to determine that the Terrisporobacter and Oscillibacter genera represent high-risk flora for DLBCL development, which have potential as specific markers or therapeutic targets. Terrisporobacter are anaerobic bacteria, often detected in postoperative patients suffering from comorbidities, such as cirrhosis, abscess, bone infections, and bloodstream infections (Cheng et al., 2016), and are positively associated with sepsis risk (Chen et al., 2023). In addition, invasive fungal disease (IFD) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with hematologic malignancies. Gavriilaki et al. reported that 19 subjects receiving chimeric antigen receptor T cells and two subjects undergoing gene therapy did not develop IFD, whereas subjects with primary refractory/recurrent lymphoma undergoing autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) developed IFD, which was associated with poor outcomes in patients receiving allogeneic HCT (Gavriilaki et al., 2023). Therefore, detection of bacteria or fungi in patients with DLBCL and co-infections warrants attention, to assist in improved patient management. Of interest, there have been reports that intestinal flora may be involved in tumorigenesis and progression through the production of oncogenic exotoxins, oncogenic metabolites, and chronic inflammatory responses. Further, Oscillibacter has been reported as closely associated with tumor progression and treatment efficacy. Yu et al. (2023) found that a decrease in the Oscillibacter population was associated with reduced GFb and STAT3 expression, and increased levels of TNFa, IFNg, and CXCR4, and that Oscillibacter transplantation in conjunction with anticancer immune responses contributed to inhibition of colorectal cancer progression. In addition, Liu et al. (2022) found that increased relative abundance of Oscillibacter in feces was correlated with decreased triglyceride levels, while Oscillibacter is also reported to be associated with serum metabolite levels related to intestinal flora (Thingholm et al., 2019). Wang et al. (2023) reported that changes in lipid levels in patients with DLBCL were correlated with prognosis and influenced by rituximab efficacy. In addition, preliminary clinical trials demonstrated that the gut microbiota can influence tumor immunotherapy efficacy by enhancing intra-tumoral infiltration of CD8+ effector T cells or promoting T cell growth and cytokine production. Xu et al. confirmed that intestinal flora composition differed was significantly between patients with DLBCL and healthy controls, as well as between DLBCL patients before and after treatment with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (R-CHOP), and patients in complete and incomplete remission after treatment. Further, intestinal flora composition is correlated with patient immune status and inflammatory factors; in particular, the presence of Lactobacillus fermentum during chemotherapy may be associated with better efficacy (Xu et al., 2024). The roles of Terrisporobacter or Oscillibacter in DLBCL development, and their metabolic and therapeutic impacts, requires further in depth exploration, and additional relevant clinical trials.

Through MR analysis, we also identified a causal association of three microorganisms protective against DLBCL. In response to identification of Eubacterium coprostanoligenes group as beneficial, we also found that patients with higher Eubacterium coprostanoligenes group abundance exhibited better progression-free survival. In addition, Yuan et al. (2023) used Eubacterium coprostanoligenes group and Prevotella in construction of a model to estimate the risk of recurrence in patients with hypopharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, and found that lower abundance of Eubacterium coprostanoligenes group was associated with higher recurrence and metastasis rates. Eubacterium_coprostanoligenes_group refers to a group of anaerobic Gram-positive bacteria involved in cholesterol transformation and regulation of cholesterol levels. Cholesterol level reduction is reported to inhibit tumor growth and metastasis (Chimento et al., 2018; Huang et al., 2020), while elevated cholesterol levels are correlated with breast cancer recurrence, which can be reduced by the administration of statins. In addition, cholesterol metabolites may promote tumor metastasis by interacting with T cells and neutrophils (Baek et al., 2017). The relationship between Eubacterium coprostanoligenes group and cholesterol in DLBCL warrants in depth exploration in the future to provide new insights to inform targeted therapy.

In recent years, infection with a number of agents, such as Epstein–Barr virus (EBV), human herpesvirus 8, and human immunodeficiency virus infection, has been strongly associated with the risk of developing NHL. Identifying possible pathogens correlated with NHL and understanding the relationship between NHL and pathogens is crucial for disease prevention and screening. Siqueira et al. (2023) showed that there is viral diversity in NHL. Joo et al. (2021) found that Eubacterium coprostanoligenes was significantly increased in patients with low HBV DNA, suggesting a relationship between gut flora composition and chronic HBV infection load. More importantly, HIV-infected patients have been identified as at increased risk for hematologic neoplasms, of which DLBCL is the most common type. Although little is known about the pathogenesis of HIV-associated DLBCL, Huguet et al. (2023) reported an improved rate of complete remission in patients treated with conventional chemotherapy combined with antiretroviral therapy. Direct or indirect interactions between intestinal bacteria and the intestinal mucosal immune system can modulate physiological immune response. Slackia has been reported as potentially related to adaptive immune activation, as it is positively correlating with IF13 production, as well as the T-cell cytokines, IL-10, IFN-γ, and IL-17, which contribute to memory T cells activations (Margiotta et al., 2021). Regarding Methanobrevibacter, there are reports that adjuvants can overcome tolerance to tumor-associated melanoma antigens and induce CD8+ T cell responses (Krishnan et al., 2010). Together, these studies suggest that focusing on the management and modification of patient intestinal flora during consultations with clinicians may help to reduce the risk of DLBCL development and improve patient outcomes.

Changes in metabolism lead to metabolic phenotypes, which can serve as biomarkers for early detection of cancer and treatment optimization (Luengo et al., 2017). There is an urgent need for identification of metabolites that can be assessed using non-invasive body fluid samples (such as blood, urine, etc.) as biomarkers to help diagnose lymphoma. Hexokinase 2 (HK2) is an important regulator involved in glucose metabolism, and is associated with carcinogenesis in various malignant tumors. Zhao et al. reported that HK2 exerts a malignant biological effect on DLBCL cells through ERK1/2 signaling (Zhao et al., 2023). In this study, we detected causal relationships of plasma metabolites and metabolite ratios with DLBCL, particularly the metabolism of amino acids. Some hematological tumors are reported to exhibit high asparagines consumption rates, which maintains malignant tumor cell growth. Asparagine is associated with mTORC1 activity and can regulate the uptake of amino acids, such as serine. Many tumor cells rely heavily on serine to support a functional nucleotide library, which facilitates cell proliferation (Eraslan et al., 2021). Our data also indicate that serine/threonine and serine/α-tocopherol ratios are causally related to high risk of DLBCL. Fouad Choueiry et al. conducted a metabolomics and gene expression study and found that alanine, cysteine, aspartic acid, glutamic acid, and methionine metabolism were all dysregulated in ibrutinib-resistant activated B cell-DLBCL (Choueiry et al., 2021). Our study also revealed that 4-hydroxyglutamate levels, glutamate/glutamine ratio, glutarate (C5-DC)/caprylate (8:0) ratio, and taurine/cysteine ratio were associated with high risk of DLBCL. Additionally, we identified a causal effect of phosphoethanolamine/choline ratio on DLBCL risk. Xiong et al. (2017) identified a direct correlation between MYC overexpression and dysregulation of choline metabolism, and reported that MYC disrupts choline metabolism and hinders lymphoma cell necroptosis in a mitochondrial autophagy-dependent manner, by activating phosphohistidine transferase 1 choline-α. Further study is needed to explore the role and clinical value of metabolites in DLBCL occurrence and progression.

Our research has multiple strengths. First, our study was the first to apply MR analysis to investigate the causal effects of gut microbiota, plasma metabolites, and metabolite ratios in DLBCL. Compared with traditional retrospective clinical studies, MR analysis is more reliable, because it reduces bias caused by confounding factors. The candidate gut bacteria and plasma metabolites identified in this study provide a foundation for subsequent research into the underlying mechanisms, which could help to discover novel diagnostic biomarkers and personalized treatment strategies for patients with DLBCL. Second, SNPs related to gut microbiota and metabolites were sourced from a large GWAS dataset, ensuring the reliability of the screened IVs. Additionally, the statistical processing capability of R software and corresponding sensitivity analyses reduced the effects of bias on our results, ensuring their stability and reliability. Nevertheless, this study has some limitations. Most subjects included in the GWAS were of European ethnicity, which may led to some bias. Further, the minimum classification level included in the gut microbiota dataset was genus, preventing investigation into causal correlations at the species level. In addition, we were unable to perform subgroup analysis, for example, by stratifying germinal center B-cell like and activated B-cell like disease subtypes. Further research is needed to elucidate the relationships of gut microbiota, plasma metabolites, and metabolite ratios with DLBCL, and to explore the role of gut microbiota and metabolites on the gut barrier, host immune responses, and homeostasis.

6 Conclusion

In summary, our study applied MR analysis to determine the causal effects of 5 gut microbiota, 27 plasma metabolites, and 19 metabolite ratios on DLBCL. Our research findings have potential to provide new directions to inform the prevention, auxiliary diagnosis, and treatment cure of DLBCL, by targeting gut microbiota or metabolites. Further research to determine the underlying mechanisms involved is warranted.

Statements

Data availability statement

Publicly available datasets were analyzed in this study. This data can be found here: gut microbiota: https://mibiogen.gcc.rug.nl/; diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: https://gwas.mrcieu.ac.uk/. The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article and supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Ethics statement

Ethical approval was not required for the study involving humans in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent to participate in this study was not required from the participants or the participants’ legal guardians/next of kin in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.

Author contributions

JQ: Data curation, Project administration, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. WZ: Methodology, Software, Writing – original draft. JF: Data curation, Formal analysis, Visualization, Writing – original draft. SC: Investigation, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing. YZ: Investigation, Resources, Visualization, Writing – review & editing. XZ: Project administration, Writing – review & editing. CS: Conceptualization, Project administration, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This work was supported by grants from the Shandong Province Medical and Health Technology Project (grant numbers 202311001247); Shandong Provincial Third Hospital Research and Cultivation Fund (grant numbers Q2023003).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1356437/full#supplementary-material

SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE S1

Funnel plots of causal estimates for genetically predicted gut microbiota on diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) risk.

SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE S2

Leave-one-out plots of causal estimates for genetically predicted microbiota on diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) risk.

SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE S3

Funnel plots of causal estimates for genetically predicted protective plasma metabolites on diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) risk.

SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE S4

Funnel plots of causal estimates for genetically predicted plasma metabolites contributing to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) risk.

SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE S5

Leave-one-out plots of causal estimates for genetically predicted plasma metabolites on diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) risk.

SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE S6

Funnel plots of causal estimates for genetically predicted protective metabolite ratios on diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) risk.

SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE S7

Funnel plots of causal estimates for genetically predicted metabolite ratios contributing to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) risk.

SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE S8

Leave-one-out plots of causal estimates for genetically predicted metabolite ratios on diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) risk.

Footnotes

1.^https://gwas.mrcieu.ac.uk/, Updated to November 2023.

References

  • 1

    AlaggioR.AmadorC.AnagnostopoulosI.AttygalleA. D.AraujoI.BertiE.et al. (2022). The 5th edition of the World Health Organization classification of Haematolymphoid Tumours: lymphoid neoplasms. Leukemia36, 17201748. doi: 10.1038/s41375-022-01620-2

  • 2

    AlfaifiA.RefaiM. Y.AlsaadiM.BahashwanS.MalhanH.Al-KahiryW.et al. (2023). Metabolomics: a new era in the diagnosis or prognosis of B-cell non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Diagnostics13:861. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics13050861

  • 3

    BaekA. E.YuY. A.HeS.WardellS. E.ChangC. Y.KwonS.et al. (2017). The cholesterol metabolite 27 hydroxycholesterol facilitates breast cancer metastasis through its actions on immune cells. Nat. Commun.8:864. doi: 10.1038/s41467-017-00910-z

  • 4

    BowdenJ.DaveyS. G.BurgessS. (2015). Mendelian randomization with invalid instruments: effect estimation and bias detection through egger regression. Int. J. Epidemiol.44, 512525. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyv080

  • 5

    BurgessS.DudbridgeF.ThompsonS. G. (2016). Combining information on multiple instrumental variables in Mendelian randomization: comparison of allele score and summarized data methods. Stat. Med.35, 18801906. doi: 10.1002/sim.6835

  • 6

    ChenJ. H.ZengL. Y.ZhaoY. F.TangH. X.LeiH.WanY. F.et al. (2023). Causal effects of gut microbiota on sepsis: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Front. Microbiol.14:1167416. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1167416

  • 7

    ChengM. P.DomingoM. C.LevesqueS.YansouniC. P. (2016). A case report of a deep surgical site infection with Terrisporobacter glycolicus/T. Mayombei and review of the literature. BMC Infect. Dis.16:529. doi: 10.1186/s12879-016-1865-8

  • 8

    ChimentoA.CasaburiI.AvenaP.TrottaF.De LucaA.RagoV.et al. (2018). Cholesterol and its metabolites in tumor growth: therapeutic potential of statins in cancer treatment. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)9:807. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2018.00807

  • 9

    ChoueiryF.SinghS.SircarA.LaliotisG.SunX.ChavdoulaE.et al. (2021). Integration of metabolomics and gene expression profiling elucidates IL4I1 as modulator of Ibrutinib resistance in ABC-diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Cancers13:2146. doi: 10.3390/cancers13092146

  • 10

    EraslanZ.PapatzikasG.CazierJ. B.KhanimF. L.GuntherU. L. (2021). Targeting asparagine and serine metabolism in germinal centre-derived B cells non-Hodgkin lymphomas (B-NHL). Cells10:2589. doi: 10.3390/cells10102589

  • 11

    GavriilakiE.DolgyrasP.Dimou-MpesikliS.PoulopoulouA.EvangelidisP.EvangelidisN.et al. (2023). Risk factors, prevalence, and outcomes of invasive fungal disease post hematopoietic cell transplantation and cellular therapies: a retrospective monocenter real-life analysis. Cancers15:3529. doi: 10.3390/cancers15133529

  • 12

    HartwigF. P.DaveyS. G.BowdenJ. (2017). Robust inference in summary data Mendelian randomization via the zero modal pleiotropy assumption. Int. J. Epidemiol.46, 19851998. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyx102

  • 13

    HuangB.SongB. L.XuC. (2020). Cholesterol metabolism in cancer: mechanisms and therapeutic opportunities. Nat. Metab.2, 132141. doi: 10.1038/s42255-020-0174-0

  • 14

    HuguetM.NavarroJ. T.MoltoJ.RiberaJ. M.TapiaG. (2023). Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the HIV setting. Cancers15:3191. doi: 10.3390/cancers15123191

  • 15

    JooE. J.CheongH. S.KwonM. J.SohnW.KimH. N.ChoY. K. (2021). Relationship between gut microbiome diversity and hepatitis B viral load in patients with chronic hepatitis B. Gut Pathog.13:65. doi: 10.1186/s13099-021-00461-1

  • 16

    KrishnanL.DeschateletsL.StarkF. C.GurnaniK.SprottG. D. (2010). Archaeosome adjuvant overcomes tolerance to tumor-associated melanoma antigens inducing protective CD8 T cell responses. Clin. Dev. Immunol.2010:578432, 113. doi: 10.1155/2010/578432

  • 17

    KurilshikovA.Medina-GomezC.BacigalupeR.RadjabzadehD.WangJ.DemirkanA.et al. (2021). Large-scale association analyses identify host factors influencing human gut microbiome composition. Nat. Genet.53, 156165. doi: 10.1038/s41588-020-00763-1

  • 18

    LinZ.MaoD.JinC.WangJ.LaiY.ZhangY.et al. (2023). The gut microbiota correlatewith the disease characteristics and immune status of patients with untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Front. Immunol.14:1105293. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2023.1105293

  • 19

    LiuX.TongX.ZouY.LinX.ZhaoH.TianL.et al. (2022). Mendelian randomization analyses support causal relationships between blood metabolites and the gut microbiome. Nat. Genet.54, 5261. doi: 10.1038/s41588-021-00968-y

  • 20

    LozenovS.KrastevB.NikolaevG.Peshevska-SekulovskaM.PeruhovaM.VelikovaT. (2023). Gut microbiome composition and its metabolites are a key regulating factor for malignant transformation, metastasis and antitumor immunity. Int. J. Mol. Sci.24:5978. doi: 10.3390/ijms24065978

  • 21

    LuH.XuX.FuD.GuY.FanR.YiH.et al. (2022). Butyrate-producing Eubacterium rectale suppresses lymphomagenesis by alleviating the TNF-induced TLR4/MyD88/NF-kappaB axis. Cell Host Microbe30, 11391150.e7. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2022.07.003

  • 22

    LuengoA.GuiD. Y.VanderH. M. (2017). Targeting metabolism for cancer therapy. Cell Chem Biol24, 11611180. doi: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2017.08.028

  • 23

    MargiottaE.CaldiroliL.CallegariM. L.MiragoliF.ZanoniF.ArmelloniS.et al. (2021). Association of sarcopenia and gut microbiota composition in older patients with advanced chronic kidney disease, investigation of the interactions with uremic toxins. Inflamm. Oxid. Stress Toxins13:472. doi: 10.3390/toxins13070472

  • 24

    RainaP.WolfsonC.KirklandS.GriffithL. E.BalionC.CossetteB.et al. (2019). Cohort profile: the Canadian longitudinal study on aging (CLSA). Int. J. Epidemiol.48, 17521753. doi: 10.1093/ije/dyz173

  • 25

    RiazatiN.KableM. E.StephensenC. B. (2023). Association of intestinal bacteria with immune activation in a cohort of healthy adults. Microbiol Spectr11:e0102723. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.01027-23

  • 26

    RinninellaE.RaoulP.CintoniM.FranceschiF.MiggianoG.GasbarriniA.et al. (2019). What is the healthy gut microbiota composition? A changing ecosystem across age, environment, diet, and diseases. Microorganisms7:14. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms7010014

  • 27

    SannaS.van ZuydamN. R.MahajanA.KurilshikovA.VichV. A.VosaU.et al. (2019). Causal relationships among the gut microbiome, short-chain fatty acids and metabolic diseases. Nat. Genet.51, 600605. doi: 10.1038/s41588-019-0350-x

  • 28

    SiqueiraJ. D.SoaresE. A.SoaresM. A. (2023). Abstract 1216: Virome characterization in different types of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer Res.83:1216. doi: 10.1158/1538-7445.AM2023-1216

  • 29

    ThingholmL. B.RuhlemannM. C.KochM.FuquaB.LauckeG.BoehmR.et al. (2019). Obese individuals with and without type 2 diabetes show different gut microbial functional capacity and composition. Cell Host Microbe26, 252264.e10. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2019.07.004

  • 30

    Uribe-HerranzM.Klein-GonzalezN.Rodriguez-LobatoL. G.JuanM.de LarreaC. F. (2021). Gut microbiota influence in hematological malignancies: from genesis to cure. Int. J. Mol. Sci.22:1026. doi: 10.3390/ijms22031026

  • 31

    VanderH. M.DeBerardinisR. J. (2017). Understanding the intersections between metabolism and cancer biology. Cell168, 657669. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2016.12.039

  • 32

    VerbanckM.ChenC. Y.NealeB.DoR. (2018). Detection of widespread horizontal pleiotropy in causal relationships inferred from Mendelian randomization between complex traits and diseases. Nat. Genet.50, 693698. doi: 10.1038/s41588-018-0099-7

  • 33

    VodickaP.KlenerP.TrnenyM. (2022). Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): early patient management and emerging treatment options. Onco. Targets. Ther.15, 14811501. doi: 10.2147/OTT.S326632

  • 34

    WangF.LuL.ChenH.YueY.SunY.YanF.et al. (2023). Altered serum lipid levels are associated with prognosis of diffuse large B cell lymphoma and influenced by utility of rituximab. Ann. Hematol.102, 393402. doi: 10.1007/s00277-023-05092-x

  • 35

    XieN.WangZ.ShuQ.LiangX.WangJ.WuK.et al. (2023). Association between gut microbiota and digestive system cancers: a bidirectional two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Nutrients15:2937. doi: 10.3390/nu15132937

  • 36

    XiongJ.WangL.FeiX. C.JiangX. F.ZhengZ.ZhaoY.et al. (2017). MYC is a positive regulator of choline metabolism and impedes mitophagy-dependent necroptosis in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood Cancer J.7:e0. doi: 10.1038/bcj.2017.61

  • 37

    XuQ.NiJ. J.HanB. X.YanS. S.WeiX. T.FengG. J.et al. (2021). Causal relationship between gut microbiota and autoimmune diseases: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Front. Immunol.12:746998. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.746998

  • 38

    XuZ. F.YuanL.ZhangY.ZhangW.WeiC.WangW.et al. (2024). The gut microbiome correlated to chemotherapy efficacy in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients. Hematol. Rep.16, 6375. doi: 10.3390/hematolrep16010007

  • 39

    YooJ. Y.GroerM.DutraS.SarkarA.McSkimmingD. I. (2020). Gut microbiota and immune system interactions. Microorganisms8:1587. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms8101587

  • 40

    YoonS. E.KangW.ChoiS.ParkY.ChalitaM.KimH.et al. (2023). The influence of microbial dysbiosis on immunochemotherapy-related efficacy and safety in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood141, 22242238. doi: 10.1182/blood.2022018831

  • 41

    YuH.LiX. X.HanX.ChenB. X.ZhangX. H.GaoS.et al. (2023). Fecal microbiota transplantation inhibits colorectal cancer progression: reversing intestinal microbial dysbiosis to enhance anti-cancer immune responses. Front. Microbiol.14:1126808. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1126808

  • 42

    YuanX.LauH. C.ShenY.HuangQ.HuangH.ZhangM.et al. (2023). Tumour microbiota structure predicts hypopharyngeal carcinoma recurrence and metastasis. J. Oral Microbiol.15:2146378. doi: 10.1080/20002297.2022.2146378

  • 43

    YuanL.WangW.ZhangW.ZhangY.WeiC.LiJ.et al. (2021). Gut microbiota in untreated diffuse large B cell lymphoma patients. Front. Microbiol.12:646361. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.646361

  • 44

    ZhaoH.XiangG.ShaoT.WangM.DaiW. (2023). HK2 contributes to the proliferation, migration, and invasion of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma cells by enhancing the ERK1/2 signaling pathway. Open Life Sci18:20220726. doi: 10.1515/biol-2022-0726

Summary

Keywords

gut microbiota, plasma metabolites, metabolite ratios, DLBCL, Mendelian randomization

Citation

Qian J, Zheng W, Fang J, Cheng S, Zhang Y, Zhuang X and Song C (2024) Causal relationships of gut microbiota, plasma metabolites, and metabolite ratios with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a Mendelian randomization study. Front. Microbiol. 15:1356437. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2024.1356437

Received

15 December 2023

Accepted

08 May 2024

Published

27 May 2024

Volume

15 - 2024

Edited by

Guolong Zhang, Oklahoma State University, United States

Reviewed by

George Grant, Independent Researcher, Aberdeen, United Kingdom

Akihiko Oka, Shimane University, Japan

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Xuewei Zhuang, ; Chao Song,

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Figures

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Article metrics