Detailed description page of SalivaDB

This page displays user query in tabular form.

SAL_22925 details
Primary information
SALIDSAL_22925
Biomarker nameSpirochaetes
Biomarker TypeNA
Sampling MethodPatients with OLP were divided into two groups: erosive OLP (n=10, group E) and non-erosive OLP (n=10, group NE). Ten healthy individuals were recruited (group C); and ten patients with RAU (group U) were recruited as a comparison
Collection MethodThe participants were asked to sit upright and approximately 2mLof un-stimulated whole saliva were collected. Saliva samples were kept in ice during collection, and transported to the laboratory within 2h.
Analysis MethodPyrosequencing of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene
Collection SiteUnstimulated Saliva
Disease CategoryHealthy
Disease/ConditionNA
Disease SubtypeNA
Fold Change/ ConcentrationNA
Up/DownregulatedNA
ExosomalNA
OrganismHomo sapiens
PMID32245419
Year of Publication2020
Biomarker ID203691
Biomarker CategoryMicrobe
SequenceNZ_JAFCSV000000000.1
Title of studyDysbiosis of saliva microbiome in patients with oral lichen planus
Abstract of studyBACKGROUND: Oral microbiota is not only important for maintaining oral health but also plays a role in various oral diseases. However, studies regarding microbiome changes in oral lichen planus (OLP) are very limited. To the best of our knowledge, there has been only two studies investigating salivary microbiome changes in OLP. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify the characteristic microbial profile in the saliva of OLP patients, with or without erosive lesions, and compare that with recurrent aphthous ulcer (RAU), a common oral immunological disorder that also shows multiple erosive/ulcerative lesions. Whole saliva samples were collected from 20 patients with OLP (erosive E, n = 10 and non-erosive NE, n = 10), 10 patients with RAU (U) and 10 healthy controls (C). DNA was extracted from the saliva samples, and the 16S rDNA gene V4 hypervariable region was analyzed using Illumina sequencing.RESULTS: We obtained 4949 operational taxonomic units (OTUs) from the V4 region in all saliva samples. Community composition analysis showed a clear decreased relative abundance of genera Streptococcus and Sphingomonas in saliva from RAU patients when compared to the other three groups. Relative abundance of Lautropia and Gemella were higher in E group, whereas relative abundance of Haemophilus and Neisseria were higher in NE group when compared to C group. Abiotrophia and Oribacterium were higher in OLP (combining E and NE groups), while Eikenella and Aggregatibacter were lower when compared to C group. There was statistically significance in α-diversity between E and RAU groups(p < 0.05). Significant differences in β-diversity were detected in bacteria between E and C; NE and C; as well as E and NE groups. The LDA effect size algorithm identified the g_Haemophilus might be the potential biomarker in NE group.CONCLUSIONS: We found that salivary microbiome in erosive OLP was significantly different from that found in RAU; and these changes may be related to the underlying disease process rather than presence of ulcerative/erosive lesions clinically. In addition, our findings in bacterial relative abundance in OLP were significantly different from the previously reported findings, which points to the need for further research in salivary microbiome of OLP.