OJU  Vol.9 No.3 , March 2019
Comparison of in Clinic-Based Fecal Microbiome Collection Techniques for Increase in Study Participation and Utilization of Microbiome Analysis
Abstract: We compared the collection techniques of fecal specimens for DNA extraction and fecal microbiome analysis by utilizing the glove from a standard-of-care digital rectal exam (DRE) and the rectal swab from a pre-prostate biopsy bacterial rectal culture collected in clinical care settings. DNA yield from the swab technique compared to the glove technique yielded similar amounts of DNA (18.1 vs. 13.1 ng/μL, p = 0.06), slightly favoring the swab technique. However, utilizing DNA yield cutoffs of 15 ng/μL (37% vs. 29%, p = 0.18) and 30 ng/μL (15% and 9%, p = 0.16), we identified no differences in yield between the swab versus glove technique, respectively. Absorbance values for overall DNA quality were significantly different in favor of the glove technique (mean 1.6 vs. 2.0, p < 0.001). Using an absorbance value of 1.5 as an indication of DNA quality, only 26% (19/91) met the cutoff value using the swab group compared to 47.3% (53/112) if the glove technique was used (p < 0.001). Similar results occurred for the RNA quality with an absorbance value cutoff of 2.0 (2.2% vs. 30.4%, p < 0.001). To increase sampling feasibility and improve population sampling, gloves used from a DRE may be utilized as a consistent and efficient fecal DNA collection technique for fecal microbiome analysis. DNA yield and quality from the glove technique are comparable to—if not better than—rectal swab collection.
Cite this paper: Besasie, B. , Shah, D. , Leach, R. and Liss, M. (2019) Comparison of in Clinic-Based Fecal Microbiome Collection Techniques for Increase in Study Participation and Utilization of Microbiome Analysis. Open Journal of Urology, 9, 51-61. doi: 10.4236/oju.2019.93006.

[1]   Golombos, D.M., Ayangbesan, A., O’Malley, P., Lewicki, P., Barlow, L., Barbieri, C.E., Chan, C., DuLong, C., Abu-Ali, G., Huttenhower, C. and Scherr, D.S. (2018) The Role of Gut Microbiome in the Pathogenesis of Prostate Cancer: A Prospective, Pilot Study. Urology, 111, 122-128.

[2]   Amirian, E.S., Petrosino, J.F., Ajami, N.J., Liu, Y., Mims, M.P. and Scheurer, M.E. (2013) Potential Role of Gastrointestinal Microbiota Composition in Prostate Cancer Risk. Infectious Agents and Cancer, 8, 42.

[3]   Sfanos, K.S., Yegnasubramanian, S., Nelson, W.G. and De Marzo, A.M. (2018) The Inflammatory Microenvironment and Microbiome in Prostate Cancer Development. Nature Reviews Urology, 15, 11-24.

[4]   Shrestha, E., White, J.R., Yu, S.H., Kulac, I., Ertunc, O., De Marzo, A.M., Yegnasubramanian, S., Mangold, L.A., Partin, A.W. and Sfanos, K.S. (2018) Profiling the Urinary Microbiome in Men with Positive versus Negative Biopsies for Prostate Cancer. Journal of Urology, 199, 161-171.

[5]   Feng, Q., Chen, W.D. and Wang, Y.D. (2018) Gut Microbiota: An Integral Moderator in Health and Disease. Frontiers in Microbiology, 9, 151.

[6]   Marchesi, J.R., Adams, D.H., Fava, F., Hermes, G.D., Hirschfield, G.M., Hold, G., Quraishi, M.N., Kinross, J., Smidt, H., Tuohy, K.M., et al. (2016) The Gut Microbiota and Host Health: A New Clinical Frontier. Gut, 65, 330-339.

[7]   Brennan, C.A. and Garrett, W.S. (2016) Gut Microbiota, Inflammation, and Colorectal Cancer. Annual Review of Microbiology, 70, 395-411.

[8]   Wu, W.K., Chen, C.C., Panyod, S., Chen, R.A., Wu, M.S., Sheen, L.Y. and Chang, S.C. (2018) Optimization of Fecal Sample Processing for Microbiome Study—The Journey from Bathroom to Bench. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association.

[9]   Han, M., Hao, L., Lin, Y., Li, F., Wang, J., Yang, H., Xiao, L., Kristiansen, K., Jia, H. and Li, J. (2018) A Novel Affordable Reagent for Room Temperature Storage and Transport of Fecal Samples for Metagenomic Analyses. Microbiome, 6, 43.

[10]   Human Microbiome Project C (2012) Structure, Function and Diversity of the Healthy Human Microbiome. Nature, 486, 207-214.

[11]   von Euler-Chelpin, M., Brasso, K. and Lynge, E. (2010) Determinants of Participation in Colorectal Cancer Screening with Faecal Occult Blood Testing. Journal of Public Health (Oxford), 32, 395-405.

[12]   Jones, R.B., Zhu, X., Moan, E., Murff, H.J., Ness, R.M., Seidner, D.L., Sun, S., Yu, C., Dai, Q., Fodor, A.A., et al. (2018) Inter-Niche and Inter-Individual Variation in Gut Microbial Community Assessment Using Stool, Rectal Swab, and Mucosal Samples. Scientific Reports, 8, 4139.

[13]   Budding, A.E., Grasman, M.E., Eck, A., Bogaards, J.A., Vandenbroucke-Grauls, C.M., van Bodegraven, A.A. and Savelkoul, P.H. (2014) Rectal Swabs for Analysis of the Intestinal Microbiota. PLoS ONE, 9, e101344.

[14]   Bassis, C.M., Moore, N.M., Lolans, K., Seekatz, A.M., Weinstein, R.A., Young, V.B., Hayden, M.K. and Program, C.D.C.P.E. (2017) Comparison of Stool versus Rectal swab Samples and Storage Conditions on Bacterial Community Profiles. BMC Microbiology, 17, 78.

[15]   Vogtmann, E., Chen, J., Kibriya, M.G., Chen, Y., Islam, T., Eunes, M., Ahmed, A., Naher, J., Rahman, A., Amir, A., et al. (2017) Comparison of Fecal Collection Methods for Microbiota Studies in Bangladesh. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 83, e00361-17.

[16]   Janda, J.M. and Abbott, S.L. (2007) 16S rRNA Gene Sequencing for Bacterial Identification in the Diagnostic Laboratory: Pluses, Perils, and Pitfalls. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 45, 2761-2764.

[17]   Jovel, J., Patterson, J., Wang, W., Hotte, N., O’Keefe, S., Mitchel, T., Perry, T., Kao, D., Mason, A.L., Madsen, K.L. and Wong, G.K. (2016) Characterization of the Gut Microbiome Using 16S or Shotgun Metagenomics. Frontiers in Microbiology, 7, 459.

[18]   In University of Texas Health Science Center, Nucleic Acid Sequencing Core.

[19]   In Michigan State University Genomic Core.

[20]   Jones, R.M., Devers, K.J., Kuzel, A.J. and Woolf, S.H. (2010) Patient-Reported Barriers to Colorectal Cancer Screening: A Mixed-Methods Analysis. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 38, 508-516.

[21]   Coronado, G.D., Schneider, J.L., Sanchez, J.J., Petrik, A.F. and Green, B. (2015) Reasons for Non-Response to a Direct-Mailed FIT Kit Program: Lessons Learned from a Pragmatic Colorectal-Cancer Screening Study in a Federally Sponsored Health Center. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 5, 60-67.