Nayfach, S. et al. Metagenomic compendium of 189,680 DNA viruses from the human gut microbiome. Nat. Microbiol. 6, 960â970 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Gregory, A. C. et al. The gut virome database reveals age-dependent patterns of virome diversity in the human gut. Cell Host Microbe 28, 724â740.e8 (2020).
Google ScholarÂ
Nishijima, S. et al. Extensive gut virome variation and its associations with host and environmental factors in a population-level cohort. Nat. Commun. 13, 5252 (2022).
Google ScholarÂ
Shah, S. A. et al. Expanding known viral diversity in the healthy infant gut. Nat. Microbiol. 8, 986â998 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
Camarillo-Guerrero, L. F., Almeida, A., Rangel-Pineros, G., Finn, R. D. & Lawley, T. D. Massive expansion of human gut bacteriophage diversity. Cell 184, 1098â1109.e9 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Zuppi, M., Hendrickson, H. L., OâSullivan, J. M. & Vatanen, T. Phages in the gut ecosystem. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 11, 822562 (2022).
Google ScholarÂ
Borodovich, T., Shkoporov, A. N., Ross, R. P. & Hill, C. Phage-mediated horizontal gene transfer and its implications for the human gut microbiome. Gastroenterol. Rep. 10, goac012 (2022).
Google ScholarÂ
Schroven, K., Aertsen, A. & Lavigne, R. Bacteriophages as drivers of bacterial virulence and their potential for biotechnological exploitation. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 45, fuaa041 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Montassier, E. et al. Probiotics impact the antibiotic resistance gene reservoir along the human GI tract in a person-specific and antibiotic-dependent manner. Nat. Microbiol. 6, 1043â1054 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Federici, S., Nobs, S. P. & Elinav, E. Phages and their potential to modulate the microbiome and immunity. Cell. Mol. Immunol. 18, 889â904 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Minot, S. et al. The human gut virome: inter-individual variation and dynamic response to diet. Genome Res. 21, 1616â1625 (2011).
Google ScholarÂ
Shkoporov, A. N. et al. The human gut virome is highly diverse, stable, and individual specific. Cell Host Microbe 26, 527â541.e5 (2019).
Google ScholarÂ
Zuo, T. et al. Human-gut-DNA virome variations across geography, ethnicity, and urbanization. Cell Host Microbe 28, 741â751.e4 (2020).
Google ScholarÂ
Gulyaeva, A. et al. Discovery, diversity, and functional associations of crAss-like phages in human gut metagenomes from four Dutch cohorts. Cell Rep. 38, 110204 (2022).
Google ScholarÂ
Yang, K. et al. Alterations in the gut virome in obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Gastroenterology 161, 1257â1269.e13 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Clooney, A. G. et al. Whole-virome analysis sheds light on viral dark matter in inflammatory bowel disease. Cell Host Microbe 26, 764â778.e5 (2019).
Google ScholarÂ
Castellarin, M. et al. Fusobacterium nucleatum infection is prevalent in human colorectal carcinoma. Genome Res. 22, 299â306 (2012).
Google ScholarÂ
Haghi, F., Goli, E., Mirzaei, B. & Zeighami, H. The association between fecal enterotoxigenic B. fragilis with colorectal cancer. BMC Cancer 19, 879 (2019).
Google ScholarÂ
Bucher-Johannessen, C. et al. Long-term follow-up of colorectal cancer screening attendees identifies differences in Phascolarctobacterium spp. using 16S rRNA and metagenome sequencing. Front. Oncol. 13, 1183039 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
Scott, A. J. et al. International Cancer Microbiome Consortium consensus statement on the role of the human microbiome in carcinogenesis. Gut 68, 1624â1632 (2019).
Google ScholarÂ
Hannigan, G. D., Duhaime, M. B., Ruffin, M. T. 4th, Koumpouras, C. C. & Schloss, P. D. Diagnostic potential and interactive dynamics of the colorectal cancer virome. mBio 9, e02248â18 (2018).
Google ScholarÂ
Navarro, M., Nicolas, A., Ferrandez, A. & Lanas, A. Colorectal cancer population screening programs worldwide in 2016: an update. World J. Gastroenterol. 23, 3632 (2017).
Google ScholarÂ
Allison, J. E., Fraser, C. G., Halloran, S. P. & Young, G. P. Population screening for colorectal cancer means getting FIT: the past, present, and future of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin (FIT). Gut Liver 8, 117â130 (2014).
Google ScholarÂ
Rounge, T. B. et al. Evaluating gut microbiota profiles from archived fecal samples. BMC Gastroenterol. 18, 171 (2018).
Google ScholarÂ
Krigul, K. L., Aasmets, O., Lüll, K., Org, T. & Org, E. Using fecal immunochemical tubes for the analysis of the gut microbiome has the potential to improve colorectal cancer screening. Sci. Rep. 11, 19603 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Birkeland, E. et al. Profiling small RNAs in fecal immunochemical tests: is it possible? Mol. Cancer 22, 161 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
Thomas, A. M. et al. Metagenomic analysis of colorectal cancer datasets identifies cross-cohort microbial diagnostic signatures and a link with choline degradation. Nat. Med. 25, 667â678 (2019).
Google ScholarÂ
Van Doorslaer, K. et al. The Papillomavirus Episteme: a major update to the papillomavirus sequence database. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, D499âD506 (2017).
Google ScholarÂ
Lopez, J. K. M. et al. Genomes of bacteriophages belonging to the orders Caudovirales and Petitvirales identified in fecal samples from Pacific flying fox (Pteropus tonganus) from the kingdom of Tonga. Microbiol. Resour. Announc. 11, e00038â22 (2022).
Google ScholarÂ
Jansen, D. et al. Community types of the human gut virome are associated with endoscopic outcome in ulcerative colitis. J. Crohns Colitis 17, 1504â1513 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
Tang, Q. et al. Current sampling methods for gut microbiota: a call for more precise devices. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 10, 151 (2020).
Google ScholarÂ
Gudra, D. et al. A widely used sampling device in colorectal cancer screening programmes allows for large-scale microbiome studies. Gut 68, 1723â1725 (2019).
Google ScholarÂ
Masi, A. C. et al. Using faecal immunochemical test (FIT) undertaken in a national screening programme for large-scale gut microbiota analysis. Gut 70, 429â431 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Bin Jang, H. et al. Taxonomic assignment of uncultivated prokaryotic virus genomes is enabled by gene-sharing networks. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 632â639 (2019).
Google ScholarÂ
Minot, S. et al. Rapid evolution of the human gut virome. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 12450â12455 (2013).
Google ScholarÂ
Ramos-Barbero, M. D. et al. Characterization of crAss-like phage isolates highlights Crassvirales genetic heterogeneity and worldwide distribution. Nat. Commun. 14, 4295 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
Yutin, N. et al. Discovery of an expansive bacteriophage family that includes the most abundant viruses from the human gut. Nat. Microbiol. 3, 38â46 (2018).
Google ScholarÂ
Zhang, M., Zhang, T., Yu, M., Chen, Y.-L. & Jin, M. The life cycle transitions of temperate phages: regulating factors and potential ecological implications. Viruses 14, 1904 (2022).
Google ScholarÂ
Arnau, V. et al. Inference of the life cycle of environmental phages from genomic signature distances to their hosts. Viruses 15, 1196 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
Sutcliffe, S. G., Reyes, A. & Maurice, C. F. Bacteriophages playing nice: lysogenic bacteriophage replication stable in the human gut microbiota. iScience 26, 106007 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
Dikareva, E. et al. An extended catalog of integrated prophages in the infant and adult fecal microbiome shows high prevalence of lysogeny. Front. Microbiol. 14, 1254535 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
Luo, X.-Q. et al. Viral community-wide auxiliary metabolic genes differ by lifestyles, habitats, and hosts. Microbiome 10, 190 (2022).
Google ScholarÂ
Asnicar, F. et al. Microbiome connections with host metabolism and habitual diet from 1098 deeply phenotyped individuals. Nat. Med. (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
DeMarini, D. M. Genotoxicity of tobacco smoke and tobacco smoke condensate: a review. Mutat. Res. Mutat. Res. 567, 447â474 (2004).
Google ScholarÂ
Joehanes, R. et al. Epigenetic signatures of cigarette smoking. Circ. Cardiovasc. Genet. 9, 436â447 (2016).
Google ScholarÂ
Johansen, J. et al. Centenarians have a diverse gut virome with the potential to modulate metabolism and promote healthy lifespan. Nat. Microbiol. 8, 1064â1078 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research. In Diet, Nutrition, Physical Activity and Cancer: A Global Perspective dietandcancerreport.org (2018).
Murphy, J., Mahony, J., Ainsworth, S., Nauta, A. & van Sinderen, D. Bacteriophage orphan DNA methyltransferases: insights from their bacterial origin, function, and occurrence. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 79, 7547â7555 (2013).
Google ScholarÂ
Schulfer, A. et al. Fecal viral community responses to high-fat diet in mice. mSphere (2020).
Kværner, A. S. et al. The CRCbiome study: a large prospective cohort study examining the role of lifestyle and the gut microbiome in colorectal cancer screening participants. BMC Cancer 21, 930 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Xiao, L., Zhang, F. & Zhao, F. Large-scale microbiome data integration enables robust biomarker identification. Nat. Comput. Sci. 2, 307â316 (2022).
Google ScholarÂ
Pardini, B. et al. A fecal MicroRNA signature by small RNA sequencing accurately distinguishes colorectal cancers: results from a multicenter study. Gastroenterology 165, 582â599.e8 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
Brunvoll, S. H. et al. Validation of repeated self-reported n-3 PUFA intake using serum phospholipid fatty acids as a biomarker in breast cancer patients during treatment. Nutr. J. 17, 94 (2018).
Google ScholarÂ
Carlsen, M. H. et al. Evaluation of energy and dietary intake estimates from a food frequency questionnaire using independent energy expenditure measurement and weighed food records. Nutr. J. 9, 37 (2010).
Google ScholarÂ
Andersen, L. F. et al. Evaluation of three dietary assessment methods and serum biomarkers as measures of fruit and vegetable intake, using the method of triads. Br. J. Nutr. 93, 519â527 (2005).
Google ScholarÂ
Matvaretabellen. https://www.matvaretabellen.no/.
Shams-White, M. M. et al. Operationalizing the 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) Cancer Prevention Recommendations: a standardized scoring system. Nutrients 11, 1572 (2019).
Google ScholarÂ
Shams-White, M. M. et al. Further guidance in implementing the standardized 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) Score. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 29, 889â894 (2020).
Google ScholarÂ
Helsedirektoratet (The Norwegian Directorate of Health). Anbefalinger Om Kosthold, Ernæring Og Fysisk Aktivitet (Recommendations for Diet. Nutrition and Physical Activity). https://www.helsedirektoratet.no/rapporter/anbefalinger-om-kosthold-ernaering-og-fysisk-aktivitet (2014).
Global Recommendations on Physical Activity for Health (World Health Organization, Geneva, 2010).
Piercy, K. L. et al. The physical activity guidelines for Americans. JAMA 320, 2020â2028 (2018).
Google ScholarÂ
Kværner, A. S. et al. Associations of the 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute of Cancer Research (WCRF/AICR) cancer prevention recommendations with stages of colorectal carcinogenesis. Cancer Med. 12, 14806â14819 (2023).
Google ScholarÂ
Kieser, S., Brown, J., Zdobnov, E. M., Trajkovski, M. & McCue, L. A. ATLAS: a Snakemake workflow for assembly, annotation, and genomic binning of metagenome sequence data. BMC Bioinform. 21, 257 (2020).
Google ScholarÂ
Bushnell, B. BBMap: BBMap short read aligner, and other bioinformatic tools. SourceForge https://sourceforge.net/projects/bbmap/ (2022).
Nurk, S., Meleshko, D., Korobeynikov, A. & Pevzner, P. A. metaSPAdes: a new versatile metagenomic assembler. Genome Res. 27, 824â834 (2017).
Google ScholarÂ
Guo, J. et al. VirSorter2: a multi-classifier, expert-guided approach to detect diverse DNA and RNA viruses. Microbiome 9, 37 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Nayfach, S. et al. CheckV assesses the quality and completeness of metagenome-assembled viral genomes. Nat. Biotechnol. 39, 578â585 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Woodcroft, B. J. Galah – More scalable dereplication for metagenome assembled genomes https://github.com/wwood/galah. (2023).
Hyatt, D. et al. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinform. 11, 119 (2010).
Google ScholarÂ
Cook, R. et al. INfrastructure for a PHAge REference Database: identification of large-scale biases in the current collection of cultured phage genomes. PHAGE 2, 214â223 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Mihara, T. et al. Linking virus genomes with host taxonomy. Viruses 8, 66 (2016).
Google ScholarÂ
Pandolfo, M., Telatin, A., Lazzari, G., Adriaenssens, E. M. & Vitulo, N. MetaPhage: an automated pipeline for analyzing, annotating, and classifying bacteriophages in metagenomics sequencing data. mSystems 7, e00741â22 (2022).
Google ScholarÂ
Shannon, P. et al. Cytoscape: a software environment for integrated models of biomolecular interaction networks. Genome Res. 13, 2498â2504 (2003).
Google ScholarÂ
Shaffer, M. et al. DRAM for distilling microbial metabolism to automate the curation of microbiome function. Nucleic Acids Res. 48, 8883â8900 (2020).
Google ScholarÂ
Mistry, J. et al. Pfam: the protein families database in 2021. Nucleic Acids Res. 49, D412âD419 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Thannesberger, J. et al. Viruses comprise an extensive pool of mobile genetic elements in eukaryote cell cultures and human clinical samples. FASEB J. 31, 1987â2000 (2017).
Google ScholarÂ
Aramaki, T. et al. KofamKOALA: KEGG Ortholog assignment based on profile HMM and adaptive score threshold. Bioinform. Oxf. Engl. 36, 2251â2252 (2020).
Google ScholarÂ
Zhang, H. et al. dbCAN2: a meta server for automated carbohydrate-active enzyme annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 46, W95âW101 (2018).
Google ScholarÂ
Brister, J. R., Ako-adjei, D., Bao, Y. & Blinkova, O. NCBI viral genomes resource. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, D571âD577 (2015).
Google ScholarÂ
Dixon, P. VEGAN, a package of R functions for community ecology. J. Veg. Sci. 14, 927â930 (2003).
Google ScholarÂ
Mallick, H. et al. Multivariable association discovery in population-scale meta-omics studies. PLOS Comput. Biol. 17, e1009442 (2021).
Google ScholarÂ
Olejnik, S. & Algina, J. Generalized Eta and Omega squared statistics: measures of effect size for some common research designs. Psychol. Methods 8, 434â447 (2003).
Google ScholarÂ