Challenges for case-control studies with microbiome data

Annals of Epidemiology

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2016, Pages 336-341.e1

  Brooks, J Paul ^a  

^a VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Bias; Control experiments; Microbiome; Normalization; Rare taxa

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CASE CONTROL STUDY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; FEMALE; GENETICS; HUMAN; MALE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MICROFLORA; NEEDS ASSESSMENT; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; QUALITY CONTROL;

BIODIVERSITY; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; EPIDEMIOLOGIC METHODS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MICROBIOTA; NEEDS ASSESSMENT; QUALITY CONTROL;

EID: 84996587632     PISSN: 10472797     EISSN: 18732585     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2016.03.009     Document Type: Note

References (28)

1. [1] Jones, M.B., Highlander, S.K., Anderson, E.L., Li, W., Dayrit, M., Klitgord, N., et al. Library preparation methodology can influence genomic and functional predictions in human microbiome research. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 112 (2015), 14024–14029.
2. [2] Fettweis, J.M., Serrano, M.G., Sheth, N.U., Mayer, C.M., Glascock, A.L., Brooks, J.P., et al., Vaginal Microbiome Consortium. Species-level classification of the vaginal microbiome. BMC Genomics, 13, 2012, S17.
3. [3] Fettweis, J.M., Brooks, J.P., Serrano, M.G., Sheth, N.U., Girerd, P.H., Edwards, D.J., et al., the Vaginal Microbiome Consortium. Differences in vaginal microbiome in African American women versus women of European ancestry. Microbiology 160 (2014), 2272–2282.
4. [4] Ravel, J., Wommack, K.E., All hail reproducibility in microbiome research. Microbiome, 2, 2014, 8.
5. [5] Hong, S.H., Bunge, J., Leslin, C., Jeon, S., Epstein, S.S., Polymerase chain reaction primers miss half of rRNA microbial diversity. ISME J 3 (2009), 1365–1373.
6. [6] Pinto, A.J., Raskin, L., PCR biases distort bacterial and archaeal community structure in pyrosequencing datasets. PLoS One, 7, 2012, e43093.
7. [7] Ahn, J.H., Kim, B.Y., Song, J., Weon, H.Y., Effects of PCR cycle number and DNA polymerase type on the 16s rRNA gene pyrosequencing analysis of bacterial communities. J Microbiol 50 (2012), 1071–1074.
8. [8] Brooks, J.P., Edwards, D.J., H, M.D. Jr., Rivera, M.C., Fettweis, J.M., Serrano, M.G., et al., Vaginal Microbiome Consortium. The truth about metagenomics: quantifying and counteracting bias in 16s rRNA studies. BMC Microbiol, 15, 2015, 66.
9. [9] Wesolowski-Andersen, A., Bahl, M.I., Carvalho, V., Kristiansen, K., Sicheritz-Ponten, T., Gupta, R., et al. Choice of bacterial DNA extraction method from fecal material influences community structure as evaluated by metagenomic analysis. Microbiome, 2, 2014, 19.
10. [10] Probst, A.J., Weinmaier, T., DeSantis, T.Z., Domingo, J.W., Ashbolt, N., New perspectives on microbial community distortion after whole-genome amplification. PLoS One, 10, 2015, e0124158.
11. [11] Huse, S.M., Welch, D.M., Morrison, H.G., Sogin, M.L., Ironing out the wrinkles in the rare biosphere through improved OTU clustering. Environ Microbiol 12 (2010), 1889–1898.
12. [12] Kunin, V., Engelbrektson, A., Ochman, H., Hugenholtz, P., Wrinkles in the rare biosphere: pyrosequencing errors can lead to artificial inflation of diversity estimates. Environ Microbiol 12 (2010), 118–123.
13. [13] Paulson, J.N., Stine, O.S., Bravo, H.C., Pop, M., Differential abundance analysis for microbial marger-gene surveys. Nat Methods 10 (2013), 1200–1202.
14. [14] McMurdie, P.J., Holmes, S., Waste not, want not: why rarefying microbiome data is inadmissible. PLoS Comput Biol, 10, 2014, e1003531.
15. [15] Weiss, S.J., Xu, Z., Amir, A., Peddada, S., Bittinger, K., Gonzalez, A., et al. Effects of library size variance, sparsity, and compositionality on the analysis of microbiome data. PeerJ, 3, 2015, e1408.
16. [16] Lagier, J.C., Armougom, F., Million, M., Hugon, P., Pagnier, I., Robert, C., et al. Microbial culturomics: paradigm shift in the human gut microbiome study. Clin Microbiol Infect 18 (2012), 1185–1193.
17. [17] Salter, S.J., Cox, M.J., Turek, E.M., Calus, S.T., Cookson, W.O., Moffatt, M.F., et al. Reagent and laboratory contamination can critically impact sequence-based microbiome analyses. BMC Biol, 12, 2014, 87.
18. [18] Jervis-Bardy, J., Leong, L.E., Marri, S., Smith, R.J., Choo, J.M., Smith-Vaughan, H.C., et al. Deriving accurate microbiota profiles from human samples with low bacterial content through post-sequencing processing of Illumina MiSeq data. Microbiome, 3, 2015, 19.
19. [19] Haas, B.J., Gevers, D., Earl, A.M., Feldgarden, M., Ward, D.V., Giannoukos, G., et al., The Human Microbiome Consortium. Chimeric 16S rRNA sequence formation and detection in Sanger and 454-pyrosequenced PCR amplicons. Genome Res 21 (2011), 494–504.
20. [20] The Human Microbiome Consortium. Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome. Nature 486 (2012), 207–214.
21. [21] The Human Microbiome Consortium. A framework for human microbiome research. Nature 486 (2012), 215–221.
22. [1] Fettweis, J.M., Serrano, M.G., Sheth, N.U., Mayer, C.M., Glascock, A.L., Brooks, J.P., et al. Vaginal Microbiome Consortium, G. A. Buck, Species-level classification of the vaginal microbiome. BMC Genomics, 13, 2012, S17.
23. [2] Brooks, J.P., Edwards, D.J., H, M.D. Jr., Rivera, M.C., Fettweis, J.M., Serrano, M.G., et al., Vaginal Microbiome Consortium. The truth about metagenomics: quantifying and counteracting bias in 16s rRNA studies. BMC Microbiol, 15, 2015, 66.
24. [3] The Human Microbiome Consortium. Structure, function and diversity of the healthy human microbiome. Nature 486 (2012), 207–214.
25. [4] The Human Microbiome Consortium. A framework for human microbiome research. Nature 486 (2012), 215–221.
26. [5] R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. 2015 Available at: http://cran.r-project.org.
27. [6] Wickham, H., ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. 2009, Springer, New York.
28. [7] Lemon, J., Plotrix: a package in the red light district of R. R News 6 (2006), 8–12.