Phylogenetic biomarkers of overall survival, using LEfSe analysis
| Biomarker prediction . | Taxonomic rank* . | Bacterial taxon† . | Logarithmic LDA score . | Kruskal-Wallis (among classes) P value . | Median relative abundance‡ . | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dead (N = 36) . | Alive (N = 44) . | |||||
| Dead | 3 | Bacteria.Proteobacteria.Gammaproteobacteria | 4.15 | .042 | 0.0043 | 0.00039 |
| Dead | 4 | Bacteria.Proteobacteria.Gammaproteobacteria.Enterobacteriales | 4.13 | .083 | 0.002 | 0.00025 |
| Dead | 5 | Bacteria.Proteobacteria.Gammaproteobacteria.Enterobacteriales.Enterobacteriaceae | 4.13 | .083 | 0.002 | 0.00025 |
| Alive | 5 | Bacteria.Firmicutes.Clostridia.Clostridiales.Lachnospiraceae | 4.44 | .098 | 0.00035 | 0.0022 |
| Alive | 5 | Bacteria.Actinobacteria.Actinobacteria.Actinomycetales.Actinomycetaceae | 3.80 | .071 | 0.00017 | 0.00086 |
| Alive | 6 | Bacteria.Actinobacteria.Actinobacteria.Actinomycetales.Actinomycetaceae.Actinomyces | 3.81 | .068 | 0.00017 | 0.00083 |
| Biomarker prediction . | Taxonomic rank* . | Bacterial taxon† . | Logarithmic LDA score . | Kruskal-Wallis (among classes) P value . | Median relative abundance‡ . | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dead (N = 36) . | Alive (N = 44) . | |||||
| Dead | 3 | Bacteria.Proteobacteria.Gammaproteobacteria | 4.15 | .042 | 0.0043 | 0.00039 |
| Dead | 4 | Bacteria.Proteobacteria.Gammaproteobacteria.Enterobacteriales | 4.13 | .083 | 0.002 | 0.00025 |
| Dead | 5 | Bacteria.Proteobacteria.Gammaproteobacteria.Enterobacteriales.Enterobacteriaceae | 4.13 | .083 | 0.002 | 0.00025 |
| Alive | 5 | Bacteria.Firmicutes.Clostridia.Clostridiales.Lachnospiraceae | 4.44 | .098 | 0.00035 | 0.0022 |
| Alive | 5 | Bacteria.Actinobacteria.Actinobacteria.Actinomycetales.Actinomycetaceae | 3.80 | .071 | 0.00017 | 0.00086 |
| Alive | 6 | Bacteria.Actinobacteria.Actinobacteria.Actinomycetales.Actinomycetaceae.Actinomyces | 3.81 | .068 | 0.00017 | 0.00083 |
Statistically significant taxonomic predictors of mortality are reported; all remaining taxa were not significantly associated.
The following LEfSe parameters were used: conditioning regimen intensity was used for subclass comparisons, logarithmic LDA cutoff of 2.0, and α of 0.1 for Kruskal-Wallis testing among classes and for Wilcoxon testing between subclasses.
Taxonomic ranks correspond to the following divisions: 1, kingdom; 2, phylum; 3, class; 4, order; 5, family; 6, genus.
For each bacterial taxon, classification at each preceding level is denoted and separated by periods.
Median proportion of bacterial sequences belonging to the specified taxon.