International Journal of Molecular Medicine is an international journal devoted to molecular mechanisms of human disease.
International Journal of Oncology is an international journal devoted to oncology research and cancer treatment.
Covers molecular medicine topics such as pharmacology, pathology, genetics, neuroscience, infectious diseases, molecular cardiology, and molecular surgery.
Oncology Reports is an international journal devoted to fundamental and applied research in Oncology.
Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine is an international journal devoted to laboratory and clinical medicine.
Oncology Letters is an international journal devoted to Experimental and Clinical Oncology.
Explores a wide range of biological and medical fields, including pharmacology, genetics, microbiology, neuroscience, and molecular cardiology.
International journal addressing all aspects of oncology research, from tumorigenesis and oncogenes to chemotherapy and metastasis.
Multidisciplinary open-access journal spanning biochemistry, genetics, neuroscience, environmental health, and synthetic biology.
Open-access journal combining biochemistry, pharmacology, immunology, and genetics to advance health through functional nutrition.
Publishes open-access research on using epigenetics to advance understanding and treatment of human disease.
An International Open Access Journal Devoted to General Medicine.
Virulence factors, the molecular weapons used by pathogenic microorganisms to survive and proliferate within a host have been a subject of intense study since the inception of germ theory. While traditionally defined within the context of infectious disease as components that modulate host-microbe interactions to enhance host damage (1,2), the classification of these factors is becoming increasingly complex. A classic example is the AB toxin family, such as Diphtheria toxin, which possesses dual functions: An enzymatic ‘A’ fragment that drives pathogenicity and a receptor-binding ‘B’ fragment that facilitates delivery (3,4).
However, an increasing body of evidence suggests that similar microbial components produced by the commensal microbiome can influence the development and progression of non-infectious diseases, including cancer (5,6). The distinction between a helpful symbiont and a harmful pathogen is often fluid. In the context of cancer, a once-benign microbe may acquire ‘virulent’ behavior during dysbiosis, contributing to carcinogenesis (7). Rather than acting solely as direct carcinogens termed ‘oncomicrobes’ [for example, Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) and human papillomavirus (HPV)] numerous microorganisms function as ‘complicit microbes’. These facilitators [for example, Fusobacterium nucleatum (F. nucleatum)] do not necessarily initiate cancer but create a microenvironment conducive to tumor development (8,9).
The present review offers a unique perspective by moving beyond a catalogue of microbial species to focus on their functional machinery. It was examined how the microbiome's ‘toolkit’ actively participates in the ‘Hallmarks of Cancer’ framework proposed by Hanahan and Weinberg (10-12). This framework, which originally focused on host cell genetics, now formally recognizes the microbiome as a key enabling characteristic of the tumor microenvironment (TME) (10-12). Whether classified as oncomicrobes or complicit microbes, these organisms exploit an arsenal of virulence factors: Adhesins, toxins and enzymes to rewire host signaling, degrade physical barriers, and suppress immune responses.
The present review is organized by the functional class of the virulence factor rather than the specific microbe. A comprehensive summary of these factors categorized by their functional class is provided in Table I. Bacterial adhesins as the initiators of malignant interaction were first explored, followed by secreted toxins as molecular weapons. It was then detailed how degradative enzymes act as an extracellular ‘demolition crew’ and how viral oncoproteins hijack cellular machinery. Finally, structural components were analyzed, including extracellular vesicles and metabolites, as environmental modulators, before synthesizing these mechanisms into the ‘Evade-Endure-Colonize’ framework (illustrated in Fig. 1).
Bacterial adhesion represents the critical initiating event in the interplay between the microbiome and cancer. This molecular docking, mediated by surface proteins known as adhesins, provides the anchor necessary for colonization and the delivery of other virulence factors (13). Crucially, adhesion is not a passive process; binding triggers signaling events that can directly promote oncogenesis (14).
The FadA protein, a signature virulence factor of F. nucleatum, provides a direct link between a bacterial protein and a core cancer pathway. FadA binds to E-cadherin on colon epithelial cells (15), triggering the internalization of the E-cadherin/β-catenin complex. This releases β-catenin from the membrane, allowing it to translocate to the nucleus and activate the Wnt signaling pathway. This leads to the upregulation of oncogenes such as MYC and cyclin D1 (CCND1), fueling the uncontrolled proliferation characteristic of colorectal cancer (CRC) (16-19).
F. nucleatum also employs Fap2, a protein with dual pro-cancer functions. Firstly, Fap2 acts as an immunomodulator by binding to the TIGIT receptor on natural killer (NK) cells and cytotoxic T cells, delivering an inhibitory signal that shields the tumor from immune destruction (20). Secondly, Fap2 functions as a lectin, binding to Gal-GalNAc sugar moieties overexpressed on cancer cells. This interaction allows F. nucleatum to ‘hitchhike’ on circulating tumor cells, facilitating their adhesion to endothelial cells at distant sites and promoting metastasis (21,22).
H. pylori employ a complementary pair of adhesins. BabA binds to Lewis b (Leb) antigens on healthy gastric cells, establishing the chronic infection required for delivering the CagA oncoprotein (23,24). As infection induces inflammation, the gastric environment changes, and H. pylori switches to SabA. SabA binds to sialyl-Lewis x (sLex) antigens, which are upregulated on inflamed tissue, creating a feedback loop that perpetuates chronic inflammation (25).
Streptococcus gallolyticus utilizes the PilG adhesin to bind collagen types I and IV, which are exposed in the disorganized TME but hidden in healthy tissue. This allows the bacterium to preferentially colonize colorectal tumors (26,27). Similarly, fimbrial adhesins such as FimA [Porphyromonas gingivalis (P. gingivalis) and FimH [adherent-invasive Escherichia coli (E. coli)] bind to host integrins and CEACAM6, respectively. These interactions activate Toll-like receptors (TLRs) or stabilize tumor cell adhesion, driving chronic inflammation and invasion (28-30).
Collectively, these adhesins demonstrate how microbes overcome the first hurdle of carcinogenesis: Physical persistence. However, they do more than simply hold on. By targeting molecules such as E-cadherin (FadA), TIGIT (Fap2) and CEACAM6 (FimH), these adhesins directly engage the ‘Proliferative Signaling’ and ‘Avoiding Immune Destruction’ Hallmarks. Within the ‘Evade-Endure-Colonize’ framework, adhesins serve as primary tools for the ‘Colonize’ phase, allowing microbes to establish a foothold in the tumor niche and physically bridge cancer cells to metastatic sites.
Beyond adhesion, microbes deploy secreted toxins, specialized weapons that manipulate host biology from a distance. These can be broadly categorized as genotoxins (which damage DNA) or modulating toxins (which hijack signaling) (31).
Colibactin, produced by pks+ E. coli, is a potent alkylating agent that creates DNA adducts, leading to double-strand breaks. It leaves a specific ‘mutational signature’ in human CRC genomes, serving as a molecular fingerprint of bacterial activity (32). Similarly, the CDT, found in H. pylori (gastric cancer) and E. coli (CRC), functions as a DNase. It translocates to the nucleus and cleaves chromosomal DNA, triggering cell cycle arrest and genomic instability (33,34).
H. pylori injects the CagA oncoprotein directly into host cells, where it disrupts cell polarity and promotes epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) (35). Concurrently, the secreted VacA toxin disrupts epithelial barrier integrity and suppresses local T-cell function (36,37), while Tipα binds to STAT3, driving inflammation and proliferation (38).
BFT is a metalloprotease that cleaves E-cadherin. This disrupts the intestinal barrier and activates Wnt signaling, while also recruiting T helper 17 (Th17) cells to establish a pro-tumorigenic inflammatory environment (39,40). In non-gastrointestinal cancers, Chlamydia trachomatis secretes CPAF, a protease that degrades pro-apoptotic proteins and cell cycle regulators, promoting survival in cervical cells (41,42). Additionally, CNF1 from E. coli activates Rho GTPases, driving cytoskeletal rearrangement and motility (43,44).
While diverse in mechanism, these toxins converge functionally to enable the ‘Genomic Instability’ and ‘Tumor-Promoting Inflammation’ Hallmarks. Genotoxins such as Colibactin and CDT directly mutagenize the host genome, providing the genetic variation required for tumor evolution (the Endure phase). Meanwhile, modulating toxins such as CagA and BFT dismantle cell-cell junctions and induce EMT. This plasticity is essential for cancer cells to detach from the primary tumor, initiating the Evade phase of metastasis.
While toxins target intracellular pathways, microbial degradative enzymes target the extracellular matrix (ECM), the physical barrier to invasion (45).
Gingipains, cysteine proteases from P. gingivalis, degrade collagen and fibronectin. In oral squamous cell carcinoma, this activity breaks down the basement membrane, paving the way for invasion (28,46). Similarly, hyaluronidases secreted by Staphylococcus and Clostridium species cleave hyaluronic acid. This ‘liquefies’ the ECM in diverse cancer settings - from skin and breast cancer to urogenital tract malignancies, reducing physical resistance to cancer cell migration and facilitating angiogenesis (47,48).
Collagenases from bacteria such as Clostridium histolyticum degrade the dense collagen scaffold of the ECM. In the TME, this activity assists cancer cells in breaching the tumor capsule and entering the vasculature (49). Interestingly, this mechanism is being explored therapeutically to ‘soften’ desmoplastic tumors (such as pancreatic cancer) to improve drug delivery (50).
These enzymes function as the tumor's ‘demolition crew’. By degrading the basement membrane and ECM, they directly enable the ‘activating invasion and metastasis’ Hallmark. In the metastatic cascade, these factors are critical for the transition from the ‘Evade’ phase (local invasion) to the ‘Endure’ phase (intravasation into blood vessels). Without this enzymatic assistance, tumor cells would remain physically confined regardless of their genetic mutations.
Oncoviruses employ a strategy of genetic integration and protein hijacking. Rather than damaging the cell from the outside, viral oncoproteins seize control of core cellular machinery (51,52).
The E6 and E7 proteins of high-risk HPV tear down the p53 and Retinoblastoma (Rb) tumor suppressors, respectively. This removes cell cycle checkpoints and prevents apoptosis, driving the uncontrolled proliferation observed in cervical and head-and-neck cancers (53,54). The HTLV-1 Tax protein functions as a transcriptional activator, driving the expression of IL-2 and its receptor to create a malignant autocrine loop in T-cell leukemias (55).
EBV's latent membrane protein 1 (LMP1) mimics a constitutively active CD40 receptor, driving survival signaling via NF-κB and MAPK pathways (56), while EBV Nuclear Antigen 1 ensures viral persistence and immune evasion (57). In liver cancer, HBV X protein and HCV Core protein act as promiscuous regulators, interacting with Wnt/β-catenin and generating reactive oxygen species to promote both proliferation and genomic instability (58-61).
Unlike bacteria that manipulate cells from the exterior, oncoviruses bypass the ‘Evade’ phase and jump directly to hijacking the cell's central command. By dismantling tumor suppressors (p53 and Rb) and mimicking growth signals (vGPCR and LMP1), these viral proteins directly enable the Hallmarks of ‘Enabling Replicative Immortality’ and ‘Sustaining Proliferative Signaling’. This allows the infected cell to bypass natural checkpoints, ensuring the survival and expansion required for the ‘Endure’ phase of malignancy.
Beyond proteins, the microbiome influences cancer through structural components and metabolic byproducts. These factors modulate the ‘soil’ of the TME (62).
LPS from Gram-negative bacteria activates TLR4, driving NF-κB-mediated inflammation. Previous evidence highlights the role of LPS in determining organotropism; circulating LPS can ‘prime’ the lungs for metastasis by upregulating inflammatory adhesion molecules, creating a receptive ‘pre-metastatic niche’ for breast cancer cells (63,64).
Fungal β-glucans: The microbiome is not limited to bacteria; the fungal ‘mycobiome’ is also a key resident of tumors. β-glucans, major structural components of the fungal cell wall, are potent immunomodulators recognized by host receptors such as Dectin-1(65). In pancreatic cancer, fungi such as Malassezia migrate to the pancreas, where their cell wall β-glucans activate the complement cascade. This activation promotes inflammation and has been shown to accelerate tumor progression (66).
Microbial extracellular vesicles (MEVs): An increasing area of research focuses on MEVs - nanosized lipid bilayers released by bacteria. These vesicles act as long-distance delivery vehicles for virulence factors. In lung cancer, MEVs have been shown to enter host cells and modulate signaling pathways that suppress immune surveillance and promote EMT (67). Recent findings indicate that MEVs can alter the lung microenvironment to favor tumor colonization, representing a novel mechanism of host-microbe communication (68).
Secondary bile acids: Gut bacteria metabolize primary bile acids into secondary forms such as deoxycholic acid. In the liver, high levels of hydrophobic bile acids can induce DNA damage and senescence in stellate cells, creating a pro-inflammatory environment that facilitates hepatocellular carcinoma and liver metastasis from CRC (69).
Short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S): While often protective, SCFAs such as butyrate can be co-opted by cancer cells as an energy source (Warburg effect) (70). Similarly, H2S produced by F. nucleatum promotes angiogenesis and fuels tumor cell mitochondrial metabolism (71).
While proteins act as targeted weapons, these structural and metabolic factors function as the ‘fertilizer’ for the TME. By maintaining chronic inflammation (LPS and β-glucans) and providing alternative fuel sources (SCFAs and H2S), they enable the ‘Tumor-Promoting Inflammation’ and ‘Deregulating Cellular Energetics’ hallmarks. Crucially, factors including circulating LPS and MEVs act as long-range signals that prepare distant organs for the ‘Colonize’ phase, establishing the pre-metastatic niche before tumor cells arrive.
The shift to a virulence factor-centric framework does more than reorganize the understanding of the microbiome's role in cancer; it provides a direct, mechanistic roadmap for intervention. This perspective aligns with the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goal 3, specifically Target 3.4, which calls for a one-third reduction in premature mortality from non-communicable diseases, with cancer being a primary target (72). By targeting the microbial drivers of malignancy, the ‘toolkit’ described in the present review, an entirely new front can be opened in this global effort.
As understanding deepens, the future of cancer diagnostics lies in assessing the functional threat posed by the microbiome rather than just its taxonomic composition. The presence of the pks genomic island (encoding Colibactin) or specific alleles of fadA or vacA could serve as powerful prognostic biomarkers (73,74). Detecting the DNA of these virulence factors in a tumor biopsy or ‘liquid biopsy’ could identify patients at high risk for metastasis. For example, quantifying F. nucleatum load via fadA detection in blood shows promise for screening and predicting recurrence in CRC. Furthermore, the composition of the gut microbiome is now a validated predictive biomarker for patient response to immune checkpoint inhibitors (75). The future will involve developing precisely defined microbial signatures to predict treatment responses and determine if microbiome modulation is required before therapy begins.
Targeting the microbial drivers of cancer represents a paradigm shift, offering therapies that complement and enhance traditional oncology. These strategies can be grouped into three main categories:
Disarming the pathogen (anti-virulence therapy): This precise approach aims to neutralize specific virulence factors without inducing broad-spectrum dysbiosis. Strategies include small molecule inhibitors designed to block the active sites of microbial enzymes, such as gingipains or bacterial collagenases, to prevent tissue invasion (76). Additionally, monoclonal antibodies could block critical adhesin-receptor interactions; for instance, blocking the Fap2 adhesin to prevent it from binding TIGIT on NK cells could restore antitumor immunity (77).
Precision microbiome editing: This strategy aims to selectively remove harmful ‘oncomicrobes’ or introduce beneficial ones. Bacteriophage therapy offers a highly specific method to eliminate bacteria such as F. nucleatum while leaving the beneficial microbiota unharmed (78). Furthermore, the development of preventative vaccines against oncogenic agents such as H. pylori or EBV remains a major goal for long-term cancer prevention (79).
Reshaping the ecosystem: This strategy aims to engineer the microbial community to support cancer therapy. This includes next-generation probiotics engineered to produce anti-inflammatory molecules or compete with pathogenic species (80). It also involves metabolic interventions, such as using prebiotics to favor butyrate-producing bacteria or drugs that inhibit the conversion of primary to secondary bile acids (81).
To translate these concepts into clinical reality, research must move from establishing correlations to proving causation. While animal models provide compelling evidence, a major hurdle remains in definitively proving that a specific microbial virulence factor is a driver, not just a ‘passenger’, in human cancer. This will necessitate sophisticated multi-omics analyses of large, longitudinal patient cohorts. Furthermore, recreating the complexity of the TME including hypoxia, immune cell infiltrate, and polymicrobial communities, through advanced co-culture systems and human tumor organoids will be essential for validating these new therapeutic targets.
The evidence presented in the present review reframes the role of the microbiome from a passive bystander to an active and versatile participant in cancer progression. By dissecting the microbial arsenal through the lens of its virulence factors, a clear picture emerges: The microbiome provides a functional ‘toolkit’ that cancer cells exploit to acquire and enhance the Hallmarks of Cancer. This analysis reveals a crucial pattern of functional convergence, where diverse microbes repeatedly target core host pathways including NF-κB, Wnt/β-catenin and p53 to facilitate the ‘Evade, Endure and Colonize’ phases of metastasis.
In essence, the tumor is not a solitary entity but a malignant ecosystem. Understanding its non-host members is a critical frontier in oncology. The intricate relationship between the microbiome and cancer is no longer a niche interest but a central theme in modern cancer biology. By continuing to unravel the functions of the microbial virulence toolkit, a powerful new pillar to our strategies for preventing and treating metastatic disease is ready to be introduced, directly contributing to the global goals of reducing cancer mortality.
Not applicable.
Funding: No funding was received.
Not applicable.
KV conceptualized the study, performed the literature search, and was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. BCP supervised the work and critically revised the manuscript for intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript. Data authentication is not applicable.
Not applicable.
Not applicable.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
During the preparation of this work, artificial intelligence tools were used to improve the readability and language of the manuscript or to generate images, and subsequently, the authors revised and edited the content produced by the artificial intelligence tools as necessary, taking full responsibility for the ultimate content of the present manuscript.
|
Casadevall A and Pirofski LA: Virulence factors and their mechanisms of action: The view from a damage-response framework. J Water Health. 7 (Suppl 1):S2–S18. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Méthot PO and Alizon S: What is a pathogen? Toward a process view of host-parasite interactions. Virulence. 5:775–785. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Cherubin P, Quiñones B and Teter K: Cellular recovery from exposure to sub-optimal concentrations of AB toxins that inhibit protein synthesis. Sci Rep. 8(2494)2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Song J: Bacterial AB toxins and host-microbe interactions. Adv Microb Physiol. 81:67–109. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Ong HS and Yim HCH: Microbial factors in inflammatory diseases and cancers. Adv Exp Med Biol. 1024:153–174. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Aggarwal N, Kitano S, Puah GRY, Kittelmann S, Hwang IY and Chang MW: Microbiome and human health: Current understanding, engineering, and enabling technologies. Chem Rev. 123:31–72. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Dzutsev A, Badger JH, Perez-Chanona E, Roy S, Salcedo R, Smith CK and Trinchieri G: Microbes and Cancer. Annu Rev Immunol. 35:199–228. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
El Tekle G, Andreeva N and Garrett WS: The role of the microbiome in the etiopathogenesis of colon cancer. Annu Rev Physiol. 86:453–478. 2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Sepich-Poore GD, Zitvogel L, Straussman R, Hasty J, Wargo JA and Knight R: The microbiome and human cancer. Science. 371(eabc4552)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Hanahan D and Weinberg RA: The hallmarks of cancer. Cell. 100:57–70. 2000.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Hanahan D and Weinberg RA: Hallmarks of cancer: The next generation. Cell. 144:646–674. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Hanahan D: Hallmarks of cancer: New dimensions. Cancer Discov. 12:31–46. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Di Martino P: Bacterial adherence: Much more than a bond. AIMS Microbiol. 4:563–566. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Pizarro-Cerdá J and Cossart P: Bacterial adhesion and entry into host cells. Cell. 124:715–727. 2006.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Fardini Y, Wang X, Témoin S, Nithianantham S, Lee D, Shoham M and Han YW: Fusobacterium nucleatum adhesin FadA binds vascular-endothelial cadherin and alters endothelial integrity. Mol Microbiol. 82:1468–1480. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Rubinstein MR, Wang X, Liu W, Hao Y, Cai G and Han YW: Fusobacterium nucleatum promotes colorectal carcinogenesis by modulating E-cadherin/β-catenin signaling via its FadA adhesin. Cell Host Microbe. 14:195–206. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Guo P, Tian Z, Kong X, Yang L, Shan X, Dong B, Ding X, Jing X, Jiang C, Jiang N and Yu Y: FadA promotes DNA damage and progression of Fusobacterium nucleatum-induced colorectal cancer through up-regulation of chk2. J Exp Clin Cancer Res CR. 39(202)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Dadgar-Zankbar L, Elahi Z, Shariati A, Khaledi A, Razavi S and Khoshbayan A: Exploring the role of Fusobacterium nucleatum in colorectal cancer: Implications for tumor proliferation and chemoresistance. Cell Commun Signal. 22(547)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Rezasoltani S, Shams E, Piroozkhah M, Aidi Y, Azizmohammad Looha M, Bagheri P, Behzadi Andouhjerdi R, Sadeghi A, Rejali L and Nazemalhosseini-Mojarad E: FadA antigen of Fusobacterium nucleatum: implications for ceRNA network in colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps progression. Discov Oncol. 16(58)2025.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Gur C, Ibrahim Y, Isaacson B, Yamin R, Abed J, Gamliel M, Enk J, Bar-On Y, Stanietsky-Kaynan N, Coppenhagen-Glazer S, et al: Binding of the Fap2 protein of fusobacterium nucleatum to human inhibitory receptor TIGIT protects tumors from immune cell attack. Immunity. 42:344–355. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Abed J, Emgård JE, Zamir G, Faroja M, Almogy G, Grenov A, Sol A, Naor R, Pikarsky E, Atlan KA, et al: Fap2 mediates fusobacterium nucleatum colorectal adenocarcinoma enrichment by binding to tumor-expressed Gal-GalNAc. Cell Host Microbe. 20:215–225. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Parhi L, Alon-Maimon T, Sol A, Nejman D, Shhadeh A, Fainsod-Levi T, Yajuk O, Isaacson B, Abed J, Maalouf N, et al: Breast cancer colonization by Fusobacterium nucleatum accelerates tumor growth and metastatic progression. Nat Commun. 11(3259)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Rad R, Gerhard M, Lang R, Schöniger M, Rösch T, Schepp W, Becker I, Wagner H and Prinz C: The Helicobacter pylori blood group antigen-binding adhesin facilitates bacterial colonization and augments a nonspecific immune response. J Immunol. 168:3033–3041. 2002.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Ohno T, Vallström A, Rugge M, Ota H, Graham DY, Arnqvist A and Yamaoka Y: Effects of blood group antigen-binding adhesin expression during helicobacter pylori infection of mongolian gerbils. J Infect Dis. 203:726–735. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Ong LL and Lin CH: Adhesion, infection, and therapeutic treatment of Helicobacter pylori: A review on current aspects and future promise. Discov Appl Sci. 6(323)2024. | |
|
Pasquereau-Kotula E, Martins M, Aymeric L and Dramsi S: Significance of Streptococcus gallolyticus subsp. gallolyticus association with colorectal cancer. Front Microbiol. 9(614)2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Abdulamir AS, Hafidh RR and Abu Bakar F: The association of Streptococcus bovis/gallolyticus with colorectal tumors: The nature and the underlying mechanisms of its etiological role. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 30(11)2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Chopra A, Bhat SG and Sivaraman K: Porphyromonas gingivalis adopts intricate and unique molecular mechanisms to survive and persist within the host: A critical update. J Oral Microbiol. 12(1801090)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Sheikh A and Fleckenstein JM: Interactions of pathogenic Escherichia coli with CEACAMs. Front Immunol. 14(1120331)2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Nguyen D, Smolchek RA, Uruena JM, Sawyer WG and Jobin C: 70274 TL1 team approach to investigating the adhesin gene fimH in adherent invasive E. coli induced inflammation and colorectal cancer development. J Clin Transl Sci. 5 (Suppl 1):S107–S108. 2021. | |
|
Ivleva EA and Grivennikov SI: Microbiota-driven mechanisms at different stages of cancer development. Neoplasia. 32(100829)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Sadeghi M, Mestivier D and Sobhani I: Contribution of pks+ Escherichia coli (E. coli) to Colon Carcinogenesis. Microorganisms. 12(1111)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Guerra L, Cortes-Bratti X, Guidi R and Frisan T: The biology of the cytolethal distending toxins. Toxins (Basel). 3:172–190. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Lai YR, Chang YF, Ma J, Chiu CH, Kuo ML and Lai CH: From DNA damage to cancer progression: potential effects of cytolethal distending toxin. Front Immunol. 12(760451)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Ansari S and Yamaoka Y: Helicobacter pylori virulence factor cytotoxin-associated gene A (CagA)-mediated gastric pathogenicity. Int J Mol Sci. 21(7430)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Boncristiano M, Paccani SR, Barone S, Ulivieri C, Patrussi L, Ilver D, Amedei A, D'Elios MM, Telford JL and Baldari CT: The helicobacter pylori vacuolating toxin inhibits T cell activation by two independent mechanisms. J Exp Med. 198:1887–1897. 2003.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Palframan SL, Kwok T and Gabriel K: Vacuolating cytotoxin A (VacA), a key toxin for Helicobacter pylori pathogenesis. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2(92)2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Suganuma M, Watanabe T, Sueoka E, Lim IK and Fujiki H: Role of TNF-α-inducing protein secreted by helicobacter pylori as a tumor promoter in gastric cancer and emerging preventive strategies. Toxins (Basel). 13(181)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Fang Y, Yan C, Zhao Q, Xu J, Liu Z, Gao J, Zhu H, Dai Z, Wang D and Tang D: The roles of microbial products in the development of colorectal cancer: A review. Bioengineered. 12:720–735. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Wu S, Rhee KJ, Albesiano E, Rabizadeh S, Wu X, Yen HR, Huso DL, Brancati FL, Wick E, McAllister F, et al: A human colonic commensal promotes colon tumorigenesis via activation of T helper type 17 T cell responses. Nat Med. 15:1016–1022. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Patton MJ, McCorrister S, Grant C, Westmacott G, Fariss R, Hu P, Zhao K, Blake M, Whitmire B, Yang C, et al: Chlamydial protease-like activity factor and type III secreted effectors cooperate in inhibition of p65 nuclear translocation. mBio. 7:e01427–16. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Waguia Kontchou C, Gentle IE, Weber A, Schoeniger A, Edlich F and Häcker G: Chlamydia trachomatis inhibits apoptosis in infected cells by targeting the pro-apoptotic proteins Bax and Bak. Cell Death Differ. 29:2046–2059. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Guo Y, Wang J, Zhou K, Lv J, Wang L, Gao S, Keller ET, Zhang ZS, Wang Q and Yao Z: Cytotoxic necrotizing factor 1 promotes bladder cancer angiogenesis through activating RhoC. FASEB J. 34:7927–7940. 2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Travaglione S, Fabbri A and Fiorentini C: The Rho-activating CNF1 toxin from pathogenic E. coli: A risk factor for human cancer development? Infect Agent Cancer. 3(4)2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Radisky ES: Extracellular proteolysis in cancer: Proteases, substrates, and mechanisms in tumor progression and metastasis. J Biol Chem. 300(107347)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Gnanasekaran J, Binder Gallimidi A, Saba E, Pandi K, Eli Berchoer L, Hermano E, Angabo S, Makkawi HA, Khashan A, Daoud A, et al: Intracellular porphyromonas gingivalis promotes the tumorigenic behavior of pancreatic carcinoma cells. Cancers (Basel). 12(2331)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Alfano M, Canducci F, Nebuloni M, Clementi M, Montorsi F and Salonia A: The interplay of extracellular matrix and microbiome in urothelial bladder cancer. Nat Rev Urol. 13:77–90. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Parnigoni A, Moretto P, Viola M, Karousou E, Passi A and Vigetti D: Effects of hyaluronan on breast cancer aggressiveness. Cancers (Basel). 15(3813)2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Ding X, Ting NLN, Wong CC, Huang P, Jiang L, Liu C, Lin Y, Li S, Liu Y, Xie M, et al: Bacteroides fragilis promotes chemoresistance in colorectal cancer, and its elimination by phage VA7 restores chemosensitivity. Cell Host Microbe. 33:941–956.e10. 2025.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Ebelt ND, Zamloot V, Zuniga E, Passi KB, Sobocinski LJ, Young CA, Blazar BR and Manuel ER: Collagenase-expressing salmonella targets major collagens in pancreatic cancer leading to reductions in immunosuppressive subsets and tumor growth. Cancers (Basel). 3(3565)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Elkhalifa AME, Nabi SU, Shah OS, Bashir SM, Muzaffer U, Ali SI, Wani IA, Alzerwi NAN, Elderdery AY, Alanazi A, et al: Insight into oncogenic viral pathways as drivers of viral cancers: Implication for effective therapy. Curr Oncol. 30:1924–1944. 2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Schiller JT and Lowy DR: An introduction to virus infections and human cancer. Recent Results Cancer Res. 217:1–11. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Pešut E, Đukić A, Lulić L, Skelin J, Šimić I, Milutin Gašperov N, Tomaić V, Sabol I and Grce M: Human papillomaviruses-associated cancers: An update of current knowledge. Viruses. 13(2234)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Skelin J, Sabol I and Tomaić V: Do or Die: HPV E5, E6 and E7 in cell death evasion. Pathogens. 11(1027)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Azran I, Schavinsky-Khrapunsky Y and Aboud M: Role of Tax protein in human T-cell leukemia virus type-I leukemogenicity. Retrovirology. 1(20)2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Sides MD, Klingsberg RC, Shan B, Gordon KA, Nguyen HT, Lin Z, Takahashi T, Flemington EK and Lasky JA: The epstein-barr virus latent membrane protein 1 and transforming growth factor-β1 synergistically induce epithelial-mesenchymal transition in lung epithelial cells. Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol. 44:852–862. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Münz C: Epstein-barr virus nuclear antigen 1: From immunologically invisible to a promising T cell target. J Exp Med. 199:1301–1304. 2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Yang SZ, Zhang LD, Zhang Y, Xiong Y, Zhang YJ, Li HL, Li XW and Dong JH: HBx protein induces EMT through c-Src activation in SMMC-7721 hepatoma cell line. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 382:555–560. 2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Wang F, Song H, Xu F, Xu J, Wang L, Yang F, Zhu Y and Tan G: Role of hepatitis B virus non-structural protein HBx on HBV replication, interferon signaling, and hepatocarcinogenesis. Front Microbiol. 14(1322892)2023.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Li T, Li D, Cheng L, Wu H, Gao Z, Liu Z, Jiang W, Gao YH, Tian F, Zhao L and Wang S: Epithelial-mesenchymal transition induced by hepatitis C virus core protein in cholangiocarcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 17:1937–1944. 2010.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Mani H, Yen JH, Hsu HJ, Chang CC and Liou JW: Hepatitis C virus core protein: Not just a nucleocapsid building block, but an immunity and inflammation modulator. Tzu Chi Med J. 34:139–147. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Pérez Escriva P, Correia Tavares Bernardino C and Letellier E: De-coding the complex role of microbial metabolites in cancer. Cell Rep. 44(115358)2025.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Wu X, Qian S, Zhang J, Feng J, Luo K, Sun L, Zhao L, Ran Y, Sun L, Wang J and Xu F: Lipopolysaccharide promotes metastasis via acceleration of glycolysis by the nuclear factor-κB/snail/hexokinase3 signaling axis in colorectal cancer. Cancer Metab. 9(23)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Li S, Xu X, Jiang M, Bi Y, Xu J and Han M: Lipopolysaccharide induces inflammation and facilitates lung metastasis in a breast cancer model via the prostaglandin E2-EP2 pathway. Mol Med Rep. 11:4454–4462. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Batbayar S, Lee DH and Kim HW: Immunomodulation of fungal β-Glucan in host defense signaling by dectin-1. Biomol Ther (Seoul). 20:433–445. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Wang H, Capula M, Krom BP, Yee D, Giovannetti E and Deng D: Of fungi and men: Role of fungi in pancreatic cancer carcinogenesis. Ann Transl Med. 8(1257)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Ke J, Zhang CJ, Wang LZ, Xie FS, Wu HY, Li T, Bian CW and Wu RL: Lipopolysaccharide promotes cancer cell migration and invasion through METTL3/PI3K/AKT signaling in human cholangiocarcinoma. Heliyon. 10(e29683)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Jang JY, Seo JH, Choi JJ, Ryu HJ, Yun H, Ha DM and Yang J: Insight into microbial extracellular vesicles as key communication materials and their clinical implications for lung cancer (Review). Int J Mol Med. 56:1–11. 2025.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Nguyen TT, Ung TT, Kim NH and Jung YD: Role of bile acids in colon carcinogenesis. World J Clin Cases. 6:577–588. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Donohoe DR, Collins LB, Wali A, Bigler R, Sun W and Bultman SJ: The Warburg effect dictates the mechanism of butyrate-mediated histone acetylation and cell proliferation. Mol Cell. 48:612–626. 2012.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Davies J, Mayer MJ, Juge N, Narbad A and Sayavedra L: Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron enhances H2S production in Bilophila wadsworthia. Gut Microbes. 16(2431644)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 3). U N West Eur. Goal 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/health/. | |
|
El Khadir M, Alaoui Boukhris S, Benajah DA, El Rhazi K, Ibrahimi SA, El M, Harmouch T, Nejjari C, Mahmoud M, Benlemlih M and Bennani B: VacA and CagA status as biomarker of two opposite end outcomes of helicobacter pylori infection (Gastric Cancer and Duodenal Ulcer) in a moroccan population. PLoS One. 12(e0170616)2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Zuraik AA, Daboul Y, Awama MA, Yazigi H, Kayasseh MA and Georges M: Rapid detection of FadA in Fusobacterium nucleatum using the quantitative LAMP colorimetric phenol red method in stool samples from colorectal cancer patients. Sci Rep. 14(13739)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Yan J, Yang L, Ren Q, Zhu C, Du H, Wang Z, Qi Y, Xian X and Chen D: Gut microbiota as a biomarker and modulator of antitumor immunotherapy outcomes. Front Immunol. 15(1471273)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Olsen I and Potempa J: Strategies for the inhibition of gingipains for the potential treatment of periodontitis and associated systemic diseases. J Oral Microbiol: Aug 18, 2014 (Epub ahead of print). doi: 10.3402/jom.v6.24800. | |
|
Tsao LC, Force J and Hartman ZC: Mechanisms of therapeutic antitumor monoclonal antibodies. Cancer Res. 81:4641–4651. 2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Hibstu Z, Belew H, Akelew Y and Mengist HM: Phage therapy: A different approach to fight bacterial infections. Biologics. 16:173–186. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Kohli AS, Sanyal S, Kaushal RS and Dwivedi M: An insight into immunological therapeutic approach against cancer: Potential anticancer vaccines. Curr Genomics. 26:175–190. 2025.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Abouelela ME and Helmy YA: Next-generation probiotics as novel therapeutics for improving human health: Current trends and future perspectives. Microorganisms. 12(430)2024.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar | |
|
Anwer EKE, Ajagbe M, Sherif M, Musaibah AS, Mahmoud S, ElBanbi A and Abdelnaser A: Gut microbiota secondary metabolites: Key roles in GI tract cancers and infectious diseases. Biomedicines. 13(100)2025.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar |