Table 3.
Mean ratio estimates (MER)a obtained by zero-inflated negative binomial model of taxa abundances by estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status with adjustment for total counts, age and race/ethnicity (model 2, MER)
| ER− vs ER+ | PR− vs PR+ | HER2+ vs HER2− | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MER |
p value |
MER |
p value |
MER |
p value |
|||
| p__Bacteroidetes | ||||||||
| f__Rikenellaceae | .039 | .0060 | ||||||
| f__Rikenellaceae | g__Alistipes | 4.953 | .0075 | |||||
| p__Euryarchaeota | ||||||||
| f_Methanobacteriaceae | g_Methanobrevibacter | .001 | .0039 | |||||
| p__Firmicutes | ||||||||
| f__Enterococcaceae | g__Enterococcus | .045 | .0037 | 59.538 | .0012 | |||
| f__Turicibacteraceae | g__Turicibacter | .034 | .0092 | .114 | .0031 | .157 | .0050 | |
| f__Chistenseneitaceae | g_ | .085 | .0002 | |||||
| f__Clostridiaceae | g__Clostridium | .184 | .0015 | .165 | .0023 | |||
| f__Clostridiaceae | g__SMB53 | .214 | .0046 | |||||
| f__Lachnospiraceae | g__Blautia | .409 | .0085 | |||||
| f__Lachnospiraceae | g__Coprococcus | .405 | .0077 | |||||
| f__Lachnospiraceae | g__[Ruminococcus] | .287 | .0002 | |||||
| f__Veillonellaceae | g__Acidaminococcus | 244.94 | .0003 | |||||
| f__Veillonellaceae | g__Veillonella | .074 | .0003 | |||||
| f__Erysipelotrichaceae | g__Clostridium | .058 | .0051 | |||||
| p__Proteobacteria | ||||||||
| f__Desulfovibrionaceae | g__Desulfovibrio | .059 | .0005 | |||||
| f__Pasteurellaceae | g_Haemophilus | .014 | < .0001 | |||||
aMER > 1 means higher taxa in ER− than ER+, PR− than PR+, and HER2+ than HER2− group; ER+, PR+, and HER2− was the respective reference group