
==== Front
J Cancer
J Cancer
jca
Journal of Cancer
1837-9664
Ivyspring International Publisher Sydney

10.7150/jca.98951
jcav15p5492
Research Paper
Comparative analysis of adhesion virulence protein FadA from gut-associated bacteria of colorectal cancer patients (F. nucleatum) and healthy individuals (E. cloacae)
Hussain Nadia 12
Muccee Fatima 3✉
Ashraf Naeem Mahmood 3
Afsar Tayyaba 4
Husain Fohad Mabood 5
Hamid Arslan 6
Razak Suhail 4✉
1 Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, Al Ain University, Al Ain Campus, Al Ain 64141, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
2 AAU Health and Biomedical Research Center, Al Ain University, Abu Dhabi Campus, Abu Dhabi P. O. Box 112612, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
3 School of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, University of Punjab, Lahore, 52254, Pakistan.
4 Department of Community Health Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
5 Department of Food Science and Nutrition, College of Food and Agriculture Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
6 University of Bonn, LIMES Institute (AG-Netea), Carl-Troll-Str. 31, 53115 Bonn, Germany.
✉ Corresponding author: Dr. Suhail Razak, Department of Community Health Sciences, College of Applied Medical Sciences, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; Email: Smarazi@ksu.edu.sa; Phone: +966582759500. Dr. Fatima Muccee, School of Biochemistry and Biotechnology, University of Punjab, Lahore, 52254, Pakistan; E-mail: fatima.sbb@pu.edu.pk; Phone: +923314767254.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interest exists.

2024
19 8 2024
15 17 54925505
27 5 2024
18 7 2024
© The author(s)
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). See http://ivyspring.com/terms for full terms and conditions.
Background: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a gastrointestinal disease linked with GIT microbial dysbiosis. The present study has targeted the comparative analysis of virulent factor FadA from gut-associated bacteria of CRC patients (F. nucleatum) and healthy individuals (E. cloacae).

Methods: For this purpose, FadA protein sequences of fifteen strains of F. nucleatum and four strains of E. cloacae, were retrieved from the UniProt database. These sequences were analysed through VirulentPred, PSLpred, ProtParam, PFP-FunDSeqE, PROTEUS Structure Prediction Server, SWISS-MODEL, SAVES validation server, MEME suite 5.5.0, CAVER Web tool, Webserver VaxinPAD, HPEPDOCK and HDOCK servers.

Results: FadA protein from F. nucleatum was found to exhibit significant differences as compared to E. nucleatum i.e. it exhibited helical configuration, cytoplasmic, periplasmic, outer-membrane and extracellular localisation, 2D structure comprising of 70-96% helix, 0% beta-sheet, 4-30% coils and 17-20 signal peptide residues, hydrophilicity, strongly acidic character and smaller number of antigenic epitopes. In contrast, FadA protein from E. nucleatum was found to have globular 3D configuration, cytoplasmic localisation, 2D structure (30-56% helix, 12-21% beta-sheet, 33-50% coils and 43 signal peptide residues), highly hydrophobic, slightly acidic and more number of antigenic epitopes. Docking analyses of virulent factors revealed their high binding affinities with previously reported inhibitory peptide and FAD-approved drug COX2.

Conclusion: The wide range of differences not only provided us the reason for the role of FadA protein as a virulent factor in F. nucleatum but also might help us in designing virulent FadA protein inhibiting strategies including peptide-based vaccine adjuvants and drugs designing, modification of tunnels and catalytic pockets to reduce substrate binding and FAD approved drugs selection. Inhibition of this virulent factor in CRC patients' gut bacteria might result in oncogenesis regression and reduced death rate.

Colorectal cancer
F. nucleatum
E. cloacae
FadA virulence factor
==== Body
pmcBackground

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second and third most abundant cancer concerning morbidity (9.2%) and diagnosis (6.1%) as per the research of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). According to a study, by 2030 CRC is expected to increase by 60% with 2.2 million new cases and 1.1 million deaths 1. It has contributed to 9, 35000 deaths caused by cancer. It is characterized by polyps in the rectum, change in bowel habits, constipation, diarrhoea, rectal bleeding, change in stool colour, shape, abdominal cramps, gas, pain, changed stool consistency, tenesmus, anaemia, loss of appetite and weight, nausea, vomiting, jaundice and fatigue 1. The risk factors include smoking, physical inactivity, obesity, unhealthy and improper diet routine, family history of diabetes, inflammatory bowel diseases, colon polyps, genetics, race, gender, age and gastrointestinal tract (GIT) microbiome 2, 3.

The composition of the GIT-associated microbial population always varies with oncogenesis. This dysbiosis always involves a shift toward pathogenic microbes including Fusobacterium nucleatum, Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, Bacteroides fragilis, Salmonella enterica, Streptococcus, Rothia, Faecalibacterium, Porphyromonas, Collinsella, Slackia, Alistipes, Porphyromonas, Prevotella, Methanobrevibacter, Gemella, Mogibacterium, Parvimonas, Peptostreptococcus, Solobacterium, Helicobacter, Klebsiella, Akkermansia and Thermanaerovibrio 4-14. Following bacteria have been reported to reduce in CRC patients i.e. Ruminococcus, Roseburia, Lactobacillus, Eubacterium, Clostridium, Anaerostipes, Bacteroides, Bifidobacterium, Citrobacter, Treponema, Serratia, Kluyvera and Cronobacter 10-20.

E. cloacae is reported as a harmless GIT commensal microbe normally found in healthy individuals 21. On the contrary, F. nucleatum is a commensal-turned and obligate pathogen associated with various GIT disorders 22. It potentiates the development and progression of CRC due to its enrichment in colorectal malignant tumour tissue 23-25. Being asaccharolytic, it metabolizes the peptides and amino acids into short-chain fatty acids and formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine 26. These metabolites attract myeloid cells in the tumour microenvironment thus contributing to tumour enrichment with myeloid cells. Additionally, metabolic products also promote vascularization and infiltration of immune cells in tumours 9. Being slightly capable of respiring aerobically, Fusobacterium successfully survives hypoxic tumour conditions 27. It increases oncogenic micro RNAs 28-30. It damages DNA and induces single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) by producing reactive oxygen species via its metabolite hydrogen sulfide 31. It suppresses tumour immune microenvironment via interference with functions of T-cells, macrophages, dendritic cells, neutrophils and natural killer cells (NKCs) 9, 32. Therefore, it can be considered one of the major non-invasive prognostic, diagnostic and therapy response biomarkers of CRC 9, 33-42.

F. nucleatum being an adhesive pathogen has multiple virulence factors contributing to its colonization of colorectal tissues and CRC incidence. The known virulence factors of F. nucleatum promote adhesion to intestinal epithelial cells via FadA 8. This factor has a strong connection with CRC due to its association with NF-Kb inflammatory response and cell adhesion and invasion of Fusobacterium 43. It enables the bacterium to get attached to fibroblasts, and endothelial and epithelial cells 22. To cause disease, FadA binds the EC5 domain (ASANWTLOYNDP) of the E-cadherin protein leading to its phosphorylation. This activates the Wnt signal in the Wnt/β- cadherin pathway. Wnt binds receptors and disrupts the destruction complex comprising of Axin, APC, GSK-3β, PP2A and Ck1α. This complex under normal circumstances targets β-catenin for ubiquitination and digestion by proteasome. Disruption of this complex inhibits phosphorylation of β-catenin resulting in its stability. The β-catenin gets accumulated in the cytosol and translocated to the nucleus. In the nucleus, β-catenin binds with TCF/LEF transcription factors and activates the transcription of genes involved in inflammation and other cancer-initiating activities 44.

The present study focused on comparative analysis of the FadA protein in F. nucleatum and E. cloacae at the levels of physicochemical properties, sub-cellular localization, conserved domains, antigenic epitopes, functional domains, 2D and 3D structures, the number of catalytic sites and tunnels that might help design strategies for inhibition of tumorigenic roles of F. nucleatum FadA protein.

Methodology

Retrieving the sequences of FadA protein in F. nucleatum and E. cloacae

Sequences of FadA protein in F. nucleatum and E. cloacae were retrieved from the UniProt database (https://www.uniprot.org, accessed on 11 Nov. 2022) 18. Sequences were retrieved for a total of fifteen strains of F. nucleatum and four strains of E. cloacae (Supplementary data Table 1).

Evaluation of virulence potential

To predict the virulence status of the FadA protein in bacteria documented in the present study VirulentPred tool (http://bioinfo.icgeb.res.in/virulent/, accessed on 13 Nov. 2022) has been consulted 45. This is a Support Vector Machine (SVM) based method. It was determined based on prediction scores. A positive score indicates virulence while a negative score shows the non-virulent nature of protein.

Phylogenetic tree construction

To analyze the phylogenetic relationship among present study bacteria, the Clustal Omega Multiple Sequence Alignment Tool was used for multiple sequence alignment 46. Alignment was followed by tree construction using MEGA version 7. Trees were inferred by the neighbour-joining method 47, 48. The evolutionary distances were computed using the Poisson correction method and are in the units of the number of amino acid substitutions per site 49.

Evaluation of sub-cellular localization

To predict the sub-cellular localization of proteins, the PSLpred tool (webs.iiitd.edu.in/raghava/pslpred/submit.html, accessed on 26 Nov. 2022) was used 50. The prediction approach used was based on a hybrid approach.

Evaluation of physicochemical properties

To determine the differences between FadA proteins of bacteria documented in the present study, the ProtParam tool (https://web.expasy.org/protparam/, accessed on 12 Dec. 2022) was used 51. Properties compared include the number of amino acids, molecular weight, theoretical isoelectric point (pI), half-life, instability index, aliphatic index, extinction coefficient and grand average of hydropathy (GRAVY) 51. The pI value helps in prediction of the acidity or alkalinity of the protein.

Prediction of functional domains

To predict the functional domains in FadA protein sequences of bacteria inhabiting normal and cancerous patients GIT, Functional domain or motif prediction (PFP-FunDSeqE) tool (www.csbio.sjtu.edu.cn/bioinf/PFP-FunDSeqE/#, accessed on 25 Nov. 2022) was used 52.

Prediction of 2D configuration

To predict the 2D configuration of the present study proteins, PROTEUS Structure Prediction Server 2.0 (www.proteus2.ca/proteus2/, accessed on 20 Dec. 2022) was used 53. This server helped us to determine the helix, beta sheet, coil content, signal peptide and membrane content of proteins 54.

Prediction of 3D configuration

To predict the 3D structure of bacterial proteins, a homology modelling server SWISS-MODEL (https://swissmodel.expasy.org, accessed on 12 Dec. 2022) was used 55.

Validation of 3D structures

To validate the 3D structures of FadA proteins predicted using the SWISS-MODEL, the SAVES validation server (https://saves.mbi.ucla.edu, accessed on 20 Dec. 2022) was used. Two programs of this server i.e. ERRAT and PROCHECK were used.

Prediction of conserved protein motifs

To predict the conserved protein motifs, Multiple Em for Motif Elicitation (MEME) suite 5.5.0 (https://meme.suite.org/meme/tools/meme, accessed on 21 Dec 2022) was used. A total of ten motifs were found using default values of all parameters. For ontology analysis of predicted motifs, Lambda Predict Protein (ƛPP) (https://embed.predictprotein.org/0, accessed on 23 Dec 2022) was used.

Assessment of catalytic pockets and tunnels

To assess the catalytic pockets and tunnels in FadA proteins of bacteria documented in the present study, the CAVER Web tool was used (https://loschmidt.chemi.muni.cz/caverweb, accessed on 20-21 Dec. 2022) 56.

Evaluation of immunomodulatory A-cell epitopes

Webserver VaxinPAD (https://webs.iiitd.edu.in/raghava/vaxinpad/batch.php, accessed on 25 - 27 Dec 2022) was used to explore the immunomodulatory A-cell epitopes in the FadA protein of F. nucleatum and E. cloacae 57.

Assessment of binding affinity of FadA with inhibitor peptide

To determine the binding affinity of FadA protein from virulent F. nucleatum bacteria with a previously reported inhibitor peptide ASANWTIQYND, peptide-protein docking web-server, HPEPDOCK (huanglab.phys.hust.edu.cn/hpepdock/, accessed on 26 & 27 Dec. 2022) was used 8, 58. To dock FadA protein with cyclooxygenase-2 (COX2), the HDOCK server (http://hdock.phys.hust.edu.cn/, accessed on 31 Dec, 2022) was used 59.

Results

Virulence status prediction

Sequences of the FadA protein retrieved from the UniProt database were analyzed for virulence status. All the sequences from E. cloacae were found to be non-virulent with negative scores while those from F. nucleatum showed virulent status with positive scores (Table 1).

Phylogeny

The optimal tree for the F. nucleatum strains with the sum of branch length 11.14917307 is shown in Supplementary Data Figure 1 (a). According to this tree, F. nucleatum IV and V, F. nucleatum II and III, F. nucleatum I and subsp. polymorphum 3 and F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1 and animalis D11 (I) were closely related as compared to others as they share the same clade with each other.

The optimal tree for the E. cloacae strains with the sum of branch length 3.79674773 is shown in Supplementary Data Figure 1 (b). According to this tree, E. cloacae I and IV are more closely related to each other as compared to others as they are originating from the same branch point. While E. cloacae III and II are distantly related to each other and from E. cloacae I and IV.

Sub-cellular localization prediction

Assessment of sub-cellular localization of FadA protein using PSLPred analysis tool revealed FadA protein to be localized in the cytoplasm in the case of all four strains of E. cloacae. in the case of colorectal cancer GIT bacteria, in addition to the cytoplasm (F. nucleatum (IV), F. nucleatum (VI), F. nucleatum 13_3C, F. nucleatum CTI-5, F. nucleatum subsp. Vincentii, F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1, F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I), F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II) and polymorphum 2) the protein was also found to be localized in periplasmic space (F. nucleatum (II) and F. nucleatum (III)), outer-membrane (F. nucleatum (I) and polymorphum 3) and extracellular membrane (F. nucleatum (V) and F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2) (Supplementary data Table 2).

Physicochemical properties prediction

Analysis of the physicochemical properties of FadA proteins revealed a wide range of variations in proteins of F. nucleatum from E. cloacae. In E. cloacae, the pI was observed in the range of 5.97 to 6.90 while in the case of F. nucleatum, the minimum and highest values of pI were observed to be 4.06 and 6.94, respectively. The highest deviation was observed in the case of F. nucleatum I, F. nucleatum II, F. nucleatum III, F. nucleatum IV, F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 2 and F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 3 (Table 2). F. nucleatum II, F. nucleatum III and F. nucleatum IV showed a very unusual value of half-life i.e. 2 min., as compared to all other bacteria documented in the present study. High deviation of instability index from E. cloacae, was observed in the case of F. nucleatum II (40.2), F. nucleatum V (46.80), F. nucleatum VI (48.33), F. nucleatum 13_3C (52.95), F. nucleatum CTI-5 (49.32), F. nucleatum subsp. vincentii (51.94), F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1 (47.92), F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 I (50.36), F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 II (50.37), F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2 (46.13), F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 2 (43.71) and F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 3 (69.24). As far as the aliphatic index is concerned, F. nucleatum I (82.79), F. nucleatum II (77.45), F. nucleatum III and F. nucleatum IV (75.79), F. nucleatum V (81.41) and F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 3 (75.32) exhibited variation from that of E. cloacae. F. nucleatum III and F. nucleatum IV (2980), F. nucleatum V and F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2 (11460), F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 II (12950), polymorphum 2 (4470) and polymorphum 3 (1490) was observed to exhibit variation in extinction coefficient values than the GIT inhabiting bacteria from healthy individuals. All the bacteria from CRC patients' gut were found to have very different values of GRAVY i.e. ranging from -0.440 to -1.460 as compared to bacteria from healthy individuals (Table 2).

Functional domains prediction

Functional domain analyses also revealed a large degree of variation of FadA proteins between F. nucleatum and E. cloacae strains. Two fold types were found in E. cloacae protein i.e. NAD(P)-binding Rossmann-fold and (TIM)-barrel. On the other hand, four different types of fold were observed in F. nucleatum strains i.e. 4 helical up and down bundle, DNA-binding 3-helical bundle, EF-hand and 4-helical cytokines (Table 3).

Two-dimensional structures prediction

The 2D structure of F. nucleatum FadA protein was markedly different from that of E. cloacae. i. e. the α-helix content was significantly higher in F. nucleatum (70-96%) as compared to E. cloacae (30-56%). No beta sheets were observed in F. nucleatum while E. cloacae secondary structure exhibited 12-21% beata sheets. Coil content was extremely lower in F. nucleatum (4-16%) than E. cloacae (33-50%). Only E. cloacae III exhibited signal peptide (17%) content while the majority of the F. nucleatum strains were found to have signal peptide content i.e. 14-19% (Table 4, Supplementary data Figure 2).

Three-dimensional structures prediction

Significant diversity was found between the FadA protein of F. nucleatum and E. cloacae at the level of 3D configuration as is evident from Figure 1. The globular structure was found in E. cloacae proteins while only a helical folding pattern was observed in the case of F. nucleatum. Validation of these structures using Procheck and ERRAT scores is described in detail in Supplementary Data Table 3.

Catalytic pockets and tunnels prediction

All the bacteria except F. nucleatum II and F. nucleatum III were found to exhibit catalytic pockets and tunnels. The highest number of tunnels was observed in E. cloacae II (Table 5, Figure 2).

Prediction of conserved motifs

Conserved motif analysis revealed that all the bacteria documented in the present study except F. nucleatum II, F. nucleatum III, F. nucleatum IV and F. nucleatum V exhibited the conserved regions (Figure 3, Supplementary data Table 4).

A-cell epitopes prediction

Epitope assessment revealed that a sufficient number of antigenic peptides were present in FadA protein from healthy individuals' GIT. i.e. E. cloacae I (52), II (40), III (28) and IV (18). However, in most of the bacteria from CRC patients GIT, FadA was found to have very few epitopes like F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 2 (1), F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 3 (6) and F. nucleatum I (4) or no epitopes i.e. F. nucleatum II and III. Others were found to have epitopes in the range of 12-20 (Supplementary data Table 5).

Docking of FadA protein inhibitor peptide

Docking analysis of F. nucleatum FadA proteins with inhibitor peptide showed that all the proteins from virulent bacteria tend to bind with this peptide. Good binding affinity is reflected by the docking energy scores ranging from -136.574 for F. nucleatum II to -209.754 for F. nucleatum 13_3C (Figure 4, Table 6).

Docking of FadA protein with COX2

Docking analysis of F. nucleatum FadA protein with FDA-approved anti-inflammatory drug COX2 revealed a high binding affinity of FadA with this drug with good energy scores ranging from -204.87 to -286.12 (Figure 5).

Discussion

In present study, FadA protein is compared among the two groups of GIT bacteria. In one group (F. nucleatum), this protein causes pathogenicity while in other (E. cloacae) it is non-virulent. F. nucleatum is reported to occur abundantly in gut of CRC patients. Present research analyzed the distinguishing characteristics of FadA which might contribute to its virulent character in F. nucleatum.

FadA has been found virulent in all the strains of F. nucleatum documented in the present study as compared to that of E. cloacae which is consistent to previous findings 21, 22.

According to the present study, E. cloacae-associated FadA protein is localized in the cytoplasm while in six strains of F. nucleatum, the localization is different. Marked deviation in half-life was observed in F. nucleatum II-IV i.e. 2 min. as compared to > 10 hours in other cases. In cases of E. cloacae, an instability index below 40 suggests their poor in-vitro stability as compared to F. nucleatum 60. An aliphatic index is a measure of protein thermostability 61. In the present work, FadA in the bacteria from GIT of both the normal and diseased individuals was found to be thermostable. GRAVY values indicated the hydrophilic nature of F. nucleatum FadA as compared to most of the E. cloacae which were hydrophobic with GRAVY score > 0 62. In most cases of F. nucleatum, the pI of the FadA virulence factor was observed strongly acidic as compared to slightly acidic pI in cases of E. cloacae-associated FadA.

In the present study, healthy individuals associated with bacterial FadA protein have been found to comprise NAD(P)-binding Rossmann-fold and (TIM)-barrel domains. On the other hand, CRC patients' associated bacteria FadA factors were found to consist of four helical up and down bundles, EF-hand and DNA-binding 3-helical bundle. This finding of the helical domain was consistent with literature where the FadA protein monomer of F. nucleatum has been reported as alpha-helical which gives rise to a hair-pin-like structure 63.

As far as the 2D configuration is concerned, no beta-sheet content, large number of helix residues and low coil content was observed in F. nucleatum FadA protein as compared to that of E. cloacae. Eight strains of F. nucleatum versus only one strain of E. cloacae were found to contain signal peptides. The length of signal peptides ranged between 17-20 residues in F. nucleatum protein. Signal peptide comprising eighteen amino acids i.e. MKKFLLLAVLAVSASAFA has been reported in the FadA protein 64.

Differences between 3D configurations of FadA proteins of two groups of bacteria documented in the present study were understandable. F. nucleatum FadA contained only a helical configuration, while from E. cloacae the globular structure was observed.

The number of tunnels was comparable between FadA proteins of two types of bacteria in the present study, however, only E. cloacae (II) exhibited twenty-six tunnels. Different parameters of catalytic pockets were also analyzed. i. e. druggability, length and bottleneck radius. The binding tendency of a catalytic site of protein for a drug is referred to as druggability. FadA in case of F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 2, F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 3 and E. cloacae (I), were found to a good therapeutic target drugs with druggability scores closer to 1 65. In all other cases, the FadA was not found to be a druggable protein. Tunnel length and curvature reflected the substrate specificity of the protein. Parameters of tunnel and curvature might be used to reduce FadA activity through the inhibition of its substrate binding and catalysis.

Being virulent, FadA from F. nucleatum can be the most appropriate vaccine target against this pathogenic bacterium. Identification of antigenic epitopes could be proven helpful in this regard. In the present study, A-cell epitopes were found to be higher in number in E. cloacae i.e. ranging from 18-52 as compared to F. nucleatum i.e. 0-20. No epitopes were observed in F. nucleatum II and III. Overall, the presence of a variety of epitopes in cases of F. nucleatum VI, F. nucleatum subsp. Vincentii, F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1, F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I) AND (II) and F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2 is consistent with earlier literature reporting antigenic heterogeneity in different strains of F. nucleatum 66. A protein containing a large number of A-cell epitopes is capable of stimulating the immune system in the host. So, FadA in E. cloacae I, II and III with antigenic peptides 52, 40 and 28, respectively might boost the immune system. The epitopes predicted in virulent FadA from F. nucleatum strains might also be used for designing peptide-based vaccine adjuvants after getting insight into their antigenic potential 57.

According to the literature, the FadA gene is highly conserved not only among different strains of F. nucleatum but also among other oral species of Fusobacterium. Hence, our findings are in agreements with previous reports 64, 67, 69.

Inhibitory peptides might be the promising candidates as immunotherapeutic agents. In the present study, FadA protein from F. nucleatum has been docked with an already reported peptide comprising of eleven amino acid residues i.e. ASANWTIQYND. This peptide has been derived from the EC5 protein and is designated as the inhibitory one 8. docking analysis revealed the strong binding affinity of FadA proteins with this peptide. Keeping in view, the involvement of FadA protein in inflammation, this protein has been evaluated for binding tendency with an FDA-approved anti-inflammatory drug COX2 68. The docking analysis results with energy scores of -224.60 to -286.12 reflected the high binding affinity of FadA virulent factor with COX2. Hence, this drug might be used for successful inhibition of F. nucleatum-associated FadA protein.

This study is limited to in-silico comparison of FadA protein among the healthy and CRC patients gut bacteria. Its findings are significant because they highlighted the pathogenicity associated properties of protein in F. nucleatum. However, validity of these findings should be confirmed in future via experimental studies. For this purpose, fecal samples of healthy and CRC patients will be collected and used for isolation of gut associated bacteria 70. Bacteria will be targeted for FadA protein extraction and analysis.

Conclusion

Wide range of differences observed in FadA protein not only justifies the virulence associated with F. nucleatum-derived FadA but also suggests multiple strategies to inhibit the oncogenic potential of this protein. Present study revealed that due to the high instability index, F. nucleatum FadA protein tends to remain stable in-vitro, so these proteins can be easily studied and mutated in the laboratory. Tunnels and different attributes of catalytic sites explored might be used to design the drugs targeting FadA virulence factors. Antigenic peptides of virulent FadA proteins might be targeted for peptide-based vaccine designing. Divergence of 2D and 3D structure between virulent and non-virulent FadA protein might help to inactivate the virulency form of this protein through site-directed mutation induction leading to configuration alterations in active regions.

The authors extend their appreciation to the Researchers Supporting Project number (RSPD2024R729), King Saud University, Riyadh Saudi Arabia for funding this project.

Funding statement

The authors are grateful to the Researchers Supporting Project number (RSPD2024R729), King Saud University, Riyadh Saudi Arabia for funding this project. The funding body had no role in the study design.

Availability of data and materials

The sequences of FadA protein documented in present study are available at (https://www.uniprot.org) database.

Authors contributions

All authors substantially contributed to the study. NH, FM, HS, SR, TA, and NMA designed the study. NH, FM, HS and SR collected the prime data for the study and FM and MSM analyzed it. FMH, NMA, TA, NH, and HS wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors analyzed the results and proofread the manuscript.

Figure 1 Comparative analysis of 3D configuration of adhesion virulence factor FadA between the F. nucleatum strains belonging to colorectal cancer patients and E. cloacae strains belonging to healthy individuals. a: F. nucleatum (I), b: F. nucleatum (II), c: F. nucleatum (III), d: F. nucleatum (IV), e: F. nucleatum (V), f: F. nucleatum (VI), g: F. nucleatum 13_3C, h: F. nucleatum CTI-5, i: F. nucleatum subsp. Vincentii, j: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1, k: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I), l: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II), m: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2, n: F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 1, o: F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 1, p: Enterobacter cloacae (I), q: Enterobacter cloacae (II), r: Enterobacter cloacae (III), s: Enterobacter cloacae (IV).

Figure 2 Prediction of catalytic pockets and tunnels using CAVER Web tool in bacteria documented in present study. a: F. nucleatum (I), b: F. nucleatum (IV), c: F. nucleatum (V), d: F. nucleatum (VI), e: F. nucleatum 13_3C, f: F. nucleatum CTI-5, g: F. nucleatum subsp. Vincentii, h: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1, i: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I), j: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II), k: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2, l: F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 1, m: F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 1, n: Enterobacter cloacae (I), o: Enterobacter cloacae (II), p: Enterobacter cloacae (III), q: Enterobacter cloacae (IV), yellow part: catalytic pocket, multiple colors region = multiple tunnels.

Figure 3 Location of conserved motifs with corresponding combined match p-value for FadA protein of F. nucleatum and E. cloacae, predicted using MEME suite. Each colored block is depicting strength and position of each motif site. Height of block is directly proportional to significance of predicted site. Different motif sites are represented using different colors.

Figure 4 Docking of FadA virulence factor from different strains of F. nucleatum with inhibitory peptide ASANWTIQYND reported in literature. FadA protein and inhibitory peptide are represented in brown and yellow colors, respectively. a: F. nucleatum (I), b: F. nucleatum (II), c: F. nucleatum (III), d: F. nucleatum (IV), e: F. nucleatum (V), f: F. nucleatum (VI), g: F. nucleatum 13_3C, h: F. nucleatum CTI-5, i: F. nucleatum subsp. Vincentii, j: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1, k: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I), l: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II), m: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2, n: F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 1, o: F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 1.

Figure 5 Docking of FadA virulence factor from different strains of F. nucleatum with COX2 anti-inflammatory protein FadA and Cox2 are represented in brown and yellow colors, respectively. a: F. nucleatum (I), b: F. nucleatum (II), c: F. nucleatum (III), d: F. nucleatum (IV), e: F. nucleatum (V), f: F. nucleatum (VI), g: F. nucleatum 13_3C, h: F. nucleatum CTI-5, i: F. nucleatum subsp. Vincentii, j: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1, k: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I), l: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II), m: F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2, n: F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 1, o: F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 1.

Table 1 Virulence status of adhesion virulence factor (FadA) in bacteria documented in present study predicted on the basis of VirulentPred tool

#	Bacterium	Prediction score	Virulent / Non-virulent	
Bacteria from CRC patients	
1	F. nucleatum I	0.5539	Virulent	
2	F. nucleatum II	1.0496	Virulent	
3	F. nucleatum III	1.0588	Virulent	
4	F. nucleatum IV	1.1012	Virulent	
5	F. nucleatum V	1.1172	Virulent	
6	F. nucleatum VI	1.1403	Virulent	
7	F. nucleatum 13_3C	1.0511	Virulent	
8	F. nucleatum CTI-5	1.0936	Virulent	
9	F. nucleatum subsp. vincentii	1.1082	Virulent	
10	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1	1.1398	Virulent	
11	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I)	1.1275	Virulent	
12	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II)	1.1280	Virulent	
13	F.nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2	1.1111	Virulent	
14	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 1	0.9287	Virulent	
15	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 1	1.1545	Virulent	
Bacteria from healthy human	
1	E. cloacae I	-1.018	Non-virulent	
2	E. cloacae II	-1.009	Non-virulent	
3	E. cloacae III	-0.962	Non-virulent	
4	E. cloacae IV	-0.979	Non-virulent	

Table 2 Prediction of physicochemical properties of FadA protein from GIT bacteria of colorectal cancer patients and healthy individuals using ProtParam analysis tool

#	Bacterium	No. of amino acids	Molecular weight	Theoretical pI	Half life
(hours)	Instability index	Aliphatic index	Ext. coefficient	GRAVY	
Bacteria from CRC patients	
1	F. nucleatum I	129	14391.04	4.85	>10 hr	28.47	82.79	7450	-0.577	
2	F. nucleatum II	47	5111.48	4.06	2 min	40.42	77.45	1490	-0.636	
3	F. nucleatum III	57	6343.76	4.13	2 min	36.36	75.79	2980	-0.740	
4	F. nucleatum IV	57	6343.76	4.13	2 min	36.36	75.79	2980	-0.740	
5	F. nucleatum V	85	10700.26	6.94	>10 hr	46.80	81.41	11460	-1.460	
6	F. nucleatum VI	132	15735.05	5.20	>10 hr	48.33	88.71	14440	-0.873	
7	F. nucleatum 13_3C	131	15660.98	5.31	>10 hr	52.95	89.39	14440	-0.878	
8	F. nucleatum CTI-5	102	12023.82	5.21	>10 hr	49.32	84.22	11460	-0.825	
9	F. nucleatum subsp. vincentii	125	14926.11	5.16	>10 hr	51.94	88.24	14440	-0.890	
10	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1	134	15931.30	5.20	>10 hr	47.92	88.88	14440	-0.855	
11	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I)	128	15249.47	5.31	>10 hr	50.36	81.64	14440	-0.963	
12	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II)	103	12663.44	5.28	>10 hr	50.37	82.43	12950	-1.261	
13	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2	83	10338.80	6.00	>10 hr	46.13	83.49	11460	-1.431	
14	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 2	122	14037.03	4.98	>10 hr	43.71	97.62	4470	-0.440	
15	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 3	126	13818.63	4.53	>10 hr	69.24	75.32	1490	-0.498	
Bacteria from healthy human	
1	E. cloacae I	387	40808.08	6.50	>10 hr	28.84	90.13	15470	0.106	
2	E. cloacae II	729	79759.34	6.21	>10 hr	32.67	93.68	69330	-0.080	
3	E. cloacae III	252	26511.52	5.97	>10 hr	28.23	88.41	8480	0.099	
4	E. cloacae IV	135	14481.69	6.35	>10 hr	33.57	91.11	6990	0.061	
pI = isoelectric point, GRAVY = grand average of hydropathicity

Table 3 Functional domains predicted of FadA protein from GIT bacteria of colorectal cancer patients and healthy individuals using PFP-FunDSeqE tool

#	Bacterium	Predicted fold type	
Bacteria from CRC patients	
1	F. nucleatum I	4 helical up and down bundle	
2	F. nucleatum II	4 helical up and down bundle	
3	F. nucleatum III	4 helical up and down bundle	
4	F. nucleatum IV	DNA-binding 3-helical bundle	
5	F. nucleatum V	EF-hand	
6	F. nucleatum VI	4-helical cytokines	
7	F. nucleatum 13_3C	4-helical cytokines	
8	F. nucleatum CTI-5	4 helical up and down bundle	
9	F. nucleatum subsp. vincentii	4 helical up and down bundle	
10	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1	4 helical up and down bundle	
11	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I)	4-helical cytokines	
12	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II)	DNA-binding 3-helical bundle	
13	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2	EF-hand	
14	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 2	DNA-binding 3-helical bundle	
15	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 3	DNA-binding 3-helical bundle	
Bacteria from healthy individuals	
1	E. cloacae I	NAD(P)-binding Rossmann-fold	
2	E. cloacae II	(TIM)-barrel	
3	E. cloacae III	NAD(P)-binding Rossmann-fold	
4	E. cloacae IV	NAD(P)-binding Rossmann-fold	

Table 4 Prediction of secondary structure of FadA protein in present study bacteria

#	Bacterium	Helix
% (residues)	Beta sheet
% (residues)	Coil content
% (residues)	Signal peptide
% (residues)	
Bacteria from CRC patients	
1	F. nucleatum I	95 (123)	0 (0)	5 (6)	14 (18)	
2	F. nucleatum II	87 (41)	0 (0)	13 (6)	0 (0)	
3	F. nucleatum III	89 (51)	0 (0)	11 (6)	0 (0)	
4	F. nucleatum IV	94 (103)	0 (0)	6 (7)	0 (0)	
5	F. nucleatum V	92 (78)	0 (0)	8 (7)	0 (0)	
6	F. nucleatum VI	93 (123)	0 (0)	7 (9)	14 (19)	
7	F. nucleatum 13_3C	95 (124)	0 (0)	5 (7)	15 (19)	
8	F. nucleatum CTI-5	84 (86)	0 (0)	16 (16)	19 (19)	
9	F. nucleatum subsp. vincentii	93 (116)	0 (0)	7 (9)	0 (0)	
10	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1	92 (123)	0 (0)	8 (11)	14 (19)	
11	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I)	89 (114)	0 (0)	11 (14)	15 (19)	
12	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II)	94 (97)	0 (0)	6 (6)	0 (0)	
13	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2	94 (78)	0 (0)	6 (5)	0 (0)	
14	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 2	96 (117)	0 (0)	4 (5)	14 (17)	
15	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 3	70 (88)	0 (0)	30 (38)	16 (20)	
Bacteria from healthy individuals	
1	E. cloacae I	36 (141)	19 (74)	44 (172)	0	
2	E. cloacae II	56 (405)	12 (86)	33 (238)	0	
3	E. cloacae III	37 (92)	21 (53)	42 (107)	17 (43)	
4	E. cloacae IV	30 (41)	19 (26)	50 (68)	0	

Table 5 Pockets and tunnels identified and tunnels parameters of FadA protein of F. nucleatum and E. cloacae

Tunnels ID	Bacterium	Pocket score	Pocket Volume	Pocket Druggability	Bottle neck radius [Å]	Length [Å]	Curvature	Throughput	
1	

F. nucleatum I	100	614	0.24	3.4	1.5	1.0	0.96	
2	2.7	5.9	1.2	0.90	
3	2.2	10.1	1.4	0.83	
4	1.8	11.6	1.2	0.79	
5	2.1	14.6	1.7	0.78	
1	
F. nucleatum IV	100	699	0.11	2.2	2.0	1.0	0.93	
2	1.3	6.2	1.2	0.78	
3	1.0	11.3	1.3	0.57	
1	
F. nucleatum V	100	470	0.03	2.4	1.5	1.0	0.95	
2	1.1	6.4	1.3	0.67	
3	1.2	11.2	1.3	0.64	
4	0.9	19.1	1.3	0.37	
1	
F. nucleatum VI	100	913	0.44	1.9	2.0	1.0	0.93	
2	1.1	7.8	1.1	0.65	
3	0.9	14.7	1.7	0.41	
4	0.9	17.1	1.6	0.38	
1	F. nucleatum 13_3C	100	769	0.06	2.1	1.4	1.0	0.95	
2	1.0	13.2	1.3	0.43	
3	1.0	17.3	1.5	0.43	
1	F. nucleatum CTI-5	100	906	0.21	1.6	2.4	1.0	0.87	
1	
F. nucleatum subsp. vincentii	100	788	0.61	1.7	1.4	1.0	0.90	
2	1.6	7.7	1.4	0.78	
3	1.0	13.1	1.4	0.41	
4	0.9	16.4	2.1	0.29	
1	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1	100	882	0.26	2.1	2.0	1.0	0.91	
2	1.5	3.9	1.0	0.83	
3	1.0	12.6	1.6	0.44	
1	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I)	100	748	0.68	1.4	4.4	1.1	0.83	
2	1.6	4.8	1.0	0.83	
3	1.5	13.1	1.3	0.66	
1	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II)	100	598	0.38	2.2	5.2	1.6	0.91	
2	1.4	9.2	1.6	0.82	
3	1.2	10.6	1.5	0.74	
4	0.9	15.5	1.5	0.40	
1	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2	100	664	0.10	2.3	2.5	1.0	0.94	
1	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 2	100	984	0.89	1.7	2.0	1.1	0.90	
2	1.9	7.8	1.2	0.83	
3	2.2	8.4	1.1	0.83	
4	1.2	10.2	1.3	0.69	
1	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 3	100	418	0.82	2.0	2.9	1.1	0.93	
2	1.7	8.5	1.2	0.82	
3	1.5	11.2	1.1	0.68	
4	1.0	14.1	1.4	0.51	
5	0.9	12.6	1.2	0.46	
I	E. cloacae I	100	1474	0.89	2.5	1.4	1.1	0.94	
2	1.5	7.5	1.2	0.77	
3	0.9	8.6	1.2	0.65	
4	0.9	13.0	1.4	0.53	
1	E. cloacae II	99	1230	0.25	3.5	7.8	1.1	0.93	
2	3.3	18.6	1.3	0.87	
3	3.3	31.6	1.4	0.81	
4	2.9	25.6	1.4	0.80	
5	2.2	19.6	1.5	0.79	
6	3.3	43.0	1.9	0.77	
7	3.3	48.2	1.9	0.76	
8	3.3	57.4	2.2	0.74	
9	3.3	64.2	2.0	0.72	
10	1.2	17.7	1.5	0.72	
11	1.9	79.5	2.9	0.56	
12	0.9	17.1	1.2	0.52	
13	1.3	28.2	1.5	0.52	
14	1.3	33.2	1.2	0.47	
15	1.4	79.7	2.0	0.45	
16	1.0	79.1	2.4	0.43	
17	0.9	63.4	2.2	0.29	
18	1.1	89.0	3.2	0.29	
19	1.0	72.2	2.2	0.26	
20	1.0	74.4	2.3	0.25	
21	1.0	35.7	1.3	0.23	
22	0.9	97.0	2.1	0.23	
23	1.0	74.2	2.4	0.23	
24	0.9	100.5	2.1	0.22	
25	0.9	101.4	2.1	0.21	
26	0.9	117.7	1.8	0.06	
1	E. cloacae III	100	987	0.63	2.5	1.5	1.0	0.94	
2	2.3	8.7	1.4	0.84	
3	1.6	8.3	1.2	0.82	
4	1.0	6.9	1.3	0.75	
5	1.0	5.9	1.0	0.67	
6	1.0	19.1	1.6	0.50	
7	0.9	13.3	1.5	0.49	
1	E. cloacae IV	100	824	0.30	3.0	1.0	1.0	0.95	
2	1.8	12.2	1.5	0.83	
3	1.3	8.9	1.1	0.72	
4	1.1	6.9	1.2	0.71	

Table 6 Energy scores indicating binding affinities of F. nucleatum FadA proteins with reported inhibitor peptide, predicted using HPEPDOCK 2.0 and COX2, predicted using HDOCK server

#	Bacterium from CRC patients GIT	Energy score (Inhibitory peptide)	Energy score (COX2)	
1	F. nucleatum I	-168.848	-263.89	
2	F. nucleatum II	-136.574	-204.87	
3	F. nucleatum III	-147.910	-224.60	
4	F. nucleatum IV	-182.402	-246.10	
5	F. nucleatum V	-174.946	-251.38	
6	F. nucleatum VI	-157.704	-257.04	
7	F. nucleatum 13_3C	-209.754	-242.70	
8	F. nucleatum CTI-5	-196.507	-263.34	
9	F. nucleatum subsp. vincentii	-188.468	-224.70	
10	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 7_1	-169.531	-286.12	
11	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (I)	-172.986	-261.27	
12	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis D11 (II)	-187.876	-258.17	
13	F. nucleatum subsp. animalis 11_3_2	-168.314	-263.60	
14	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 2	-185.352	-231.14	
15	F. nucleatum subsp. polymorphum 3	-154.926	-242.45
==== Refs
1 Paschke S Jafarov S Staib L Kreuser ED Maulbecker-Armstrong C Roitman M Are colon and rectal cancer two different tumor entities?. A proposal to abandon the term colorectal cancer International journal of molecular sciences 2018 19 2577 30200215
2 Bray F Ferlay J Soerjomataram I Siegel RL Torre LA Jemal A Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries CA: a cancer journal for clinicians 2018 68 394 424 30207593
3 Wong MCS Huang J Lok V Wang J Fung F Ding H Differences in incidence and mortality trends of colorectal cancer worldwide based on sex, age, and anatomic location Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology 2021 19 955 66 e61 32088300
4 Sobhani I Tap J Roudot-Thoraval F Roperch JP Letulle S Langella P Microbial dysbiosis in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients PloS one 2011 6 e16393 21297998
5 Zhang S Kong C Yang Y Cai S Li X Cai G Human oral microbiome dysbiosis as a novel non-invasive biomarker in detection of colorectal cancer Theranostics 2020 10 11595 33052235
6 Kalasabail S Engelman J Zhang LY El-Omar E Yim HCH A Perspective on the Role of Microbiome for Colorectal Cancer Treatment Cancers 2021 13 4623 34572850
7 Hernández-Luna MA Lopez-Briones S Luria-Pérez R The four horsemen in colon cancer Journal of Oncology 2019 2019 5636272 31662752
8 Rubinstein MR Wang X Liu W Hao Y Cai G Han YW Fusobacterium nucleatum promotes colorectal carcinogenesis by modulating E-cadherin/β-catenin signaling via its FadA adhesin Cell host & microbe 2013 14 195 206 23954158
9 Kostic AD Chun E Robertson L Glickman JN Gallini CA Michaud M Fusobacterium nucleatum potentiates intestinal tumorigenesis and modulates the tumor-immune microenvironment Cell host & microbe 2013 14 207 15 23954159
10 Marchesi JR Dutilh BE Hall N Peters WHM Roelofs R Boleij A Towards the human colorectal cancer microbiome PloS one 2011 6 e20447 21647227
11 Shah MS DeSantis TZ Weinmaier T McMurdie PJ Cope JL Altrichter A Leveraging sequence-based faecal microbial community survey data to identify a composite biomarker for colorectal cancer Gut 2018 67 882 91 28341746
12 Richard ML Liguori G Lamas B Brandi G Da Costa G Hoffmann TW Mucosa-associated microbiota dysbiosis in colitis associated cancer Gut microbes 2018 9 131 42 28914591
13 Wang T Cai G Qiu Y Fei N Zhang M Pang X Structural segregation of gut microbiota between colorectal cancer patients and healthy volunteers The ISME journal 2012 6 320 9 21850056
14 Yu J Feng Q Wong SH Zhang D yi Liang Q Qin Y Metagenomic analysis of faecal microbiome as a tool towards targeted non-invasive biomarkers for colorectal cancer Gut 2017 66 70 8 26408641
15 Zhu Q Jin Z Wu W Gao R Guo B Gao Z Analysis of the intestinal lumen microbiota in an animal model of colorectal cancer PloS one 2014 9 e90849 24603888
16 Chen W Liu F Ling Z Tong X Xiang C Human intestinal lumen and mucosa-associated microbiota in patients with colorectal cancer PloS one 2012 7 e39743 22761885
17 Meehan CJ Beiko RG A phylogenomic view of ecological specialization in the Lachnospiraceae, a family of digestive tract-associated bacteria Genome biology and evolution 2014 6 703 13 24625961
18 Wu CH Apweiler R Bairoch A Natale DA Barker WC Boeckmann B The Universal Protein Resource (UniProt): an expanding universe of protein information Nucleic acids research 2006 34 D187 D91 16381842
19 Dai Z Coker OO Nakatsu G Wu WKK Zhao L Chen Z Multi-cohort analysis of colorectal cancer metagenome identified altered bacteria across populations and universal bacterial markers Microbiome 2018 6 1 12 29291746
20 Candela M Guidotti M Fabbri A Brigidi P Franceschi C Fiorentini C Human intestinal microbiota: cross-talk with the host and its potential role in colorectal cancer Critical reviews in microbiology 2011 37 1 14 20874522
21 Keller R Pedroso MZ Ritchmann R Silva RM Occurrence of virulence-associated properties in Enterobacter cloacae Infection and immunity 1998 66 645 9 9453621
22 Han YW Fusobacterium nucleatum: a commensal-turned pathogen Current opinion in microbiology 2015 23 141 7 25576662
23 Sun CH Li BB Wang B Zhao J Zhang XY Li TT The role of Fusobacterium nucleatum in colorectal cancer: from carcinogenesis to clinical management Chronic diseases and translational medicine 2019 5 178 87 31891129
24 He Z Tian W Wei Q Xu J Involvement of Fusobacterium nucleatum in malignancies except for colorectal cancer: A literature review Frontiers in Immunology 2022 13 968649 36059542
25 Rafique A Koh YS Association of Fusobacterium nucleatum in the Progression of Colorectal Cancer Journal of Bacteriology and Virology 2021 51 39 53
26 Vander Heiden MG Cantley LC Thompson CB Understanding the Warburg effect: the metabolic requirements of cell proliferation science 2009 324 1029 33 19460998
27 Kapatral V Anderson I Ivanova N Reznik G Los T Lykidis A Genome sequence and analysis of the oral bacterium Fusobacterium nucleatum strain ATCC 25586 Journal of bacteriology 2002 184 2005 18 11889109
28 Guo S Chen J Chen F Zeng Q Liu WL Zhang G Exosomes derived from Fusobacterium nucleatum-infected colorectal cancer cells facilitate tumour metastasis by selectively carrying miR-1246/92b-3p/27a-3p and CXCL16 Gut 2021 70 1507 19
29 Feng Y Zeng D Tong Y Lu X Dun G Tang B Alteration of microRNA-4474/4717 expression and CREB-binding protein in human colorectal cancer tissues infected with Fusobacterium nucleatum PLoS One 2019 14 e0215088 30951563
30 Borowsky J Haruki K Lau MC Dias Costa A Väyrynen JP Ugai T Association of Fusobacterium nucleatum with specific T-cell subsets in the colorectal carcinoma microenvironment Clinical Cancer Research 2021 27 2816 26 33632927
31 Yoshida Y Suwabe K Nagano K Kezuka Y Kato H Yoshimura F Identification and enzymic analysis of a novel protein associated with production of hydrogen sulfide and L-serine from L-cysteine in Fusobacterium nucleatum subsp. nucleatum ATCC 25586 Microbiology 2011 157 2164 71 21493682
32 Hilmi M Neuzillet C Lefèvre JH Svrcek M Vacher S Benhaim L Prognostic Value of Fusobacterium nucleatum after Abdominoperineal Resection for Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma Cancers 2022 14 1606 35406380
33 Castellarin M Warren RL Freeman JD Dreolini L Krzywinski M Strauss J Fusobacterium nucleatum infection is prevalent in human colorectal carcinoma Genome research 2012 22 299 306 22009989
34 Flanagan L Schmid J Ebert M Soucek P Kunicka T Liska V Fusobacterium nucleatum associates with stages of colorectal neoplasia development, colorectal cancer and disease outcome European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases 2014 33 1381 90 24599709
35 Ito M Kanno S Nosho K Sukawa Y Mitsuhashi K Kurihara H Association of Fusobacterium nucleatum with clinical and molecular features in colorectal serrated pathway International journal of cancer 2015 137 1258 68 25703934
36 Fukugaiti MH Ignacio A Fernandes MR Ribeiro Júnior U Nakano V Avila-Campos MJ High occurrence of Fusobacterium nucleatum and Clostridium difficile in the intestinal microbiota of colorectal carcinoma patients Brazilian Journal of Microbiology 2015 46 1135 40 26691472
37 Li YY Ge QX Cao J Zhou YJ Du YL Shen B Association of Fusobacterium nucleatum infection with colorectal cancer in Chinese patients World journal of gastroenterology 2016 22 3227 27004000
38 Wong SH Kwong TNY Chow TC Luk AKC Dai RZW Nakatsu G Quantitation of faecal Fusobacterium improves faecal immunochemical test in detecting advanced colorectal neoplasia Gut 2017 66 1441 8 27797940
39 Suehiro Y Sakai K Nishioka M Hashimoto S Takami T Higaki S Highly sensitive stool DNA testing of Fusobacterium nucleatum as a marker for detection of colorectal tumours in a Japanese population Annals of clinical biochemistry 2017 54 86 91 27126270
40 Guo S Li L Xu B Li M Zeng Q Xiao H A simple and novel fecal biomarker for colorectal cancer: ratio of Fusobacterium nucleatum to probiotics populations, based on their antagonistic effect Clinical chemistry 2018 64 1327 37 29914865
41 Proença MA Biselli JM Succi M Severino FE Berardinelli GN Caetano A Relationship between Fusobacterium nucleatum, inflammatory mediators and microRNAs in colorectal carcinogenesis World journal of gastroenterology 2018 24 5351 30598580
42 Tunsjø HS Gundersen G Rangnes F Noone JC Endres A Bemanian V Detection of Fusobacterium nucleatum in stool and colonic tissues from Norwegian colorectal cancer patients European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases 2019 38 1367 76 31025134
43 Queen J Domingue JC White JR Stevens C Udayasuryan B Nguyen TTD Comparative Analysis of Colon Cancer-Derived Fusobacterium nucleatum Subspecies: Inflammation and Colon Tumorigenesis in Murine Models Mbio 2022 13 e02991 21
44 Fardini Y Wang X Témoin S Nithianantham S Lee D Shoham M Fusobacterium nucleatum adhesin FadA binds vascular endothelial cadherin and alters endothelial integrity Molecular microbiology 2011 82 1468 80 22040113
45 Garg A Gupta D VirulentPred: a SVM based prediction method for virulent proteins in bacterial pathogens BMC bioinformatics 2008 9 1 12 18173834
46 Sievers F Higgins DG The clustal omega multiple alignment package Methods Mol Biol 2021 2231 3 16 33289883
47 Kumar S Stecher G Tamura K MEGA7: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 7.0 for bigger datasets Molecular biology and evolution 2016 33 1870 4 27004904
48 Saitou N Nei M The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees Molecular biology and evolution 1987 4 406 25 3447015
49 Zuckerkandl E Pauling L Evolutionary divergence and convergence in proteins Evolving genes and proteins: Elsevier 1965 p. 97-166
50 Bhasin M Garg A Raghava GPS PSLpred: prediction of subcellular localization of bacterial proteins Bioinformatics 2005 21 2522 4 15699023
51 Gasteiger E Hoogland C Gattiker A Wilkins MR Appel RD Bairoch A Protein identification and analysis tools on the ExPASy server Methods Mol Biol 1999 112 531 52 10027275
52 Shen HB Chou KC Predicting protein fold pattern with functional domain and sequential evolution information Journal of Theoretical Biology 2009 256 441 6 18996396
53 Montgomerie S Cruz JA Shrivastava S Arndt D Berjanskii M Wishart DS PROTEUS2: a web server for comprehensive protein structure prediction and structure-based annotation Nucleic acids research 2008 36 W202 W9 18483082
54 Montgomerie S Sundararaj S Gallin WJ Wishart DS Improving the accuracy of protein secondary structure prediction using structural alignment BMC bioinformatics 2006 7 1 13 16393334
55 Waterhouse A Bertoni M Bienert S Studer G Tauriello G Gumienny R SWISS-MODEL: homology modelling of protein structures and complexes Nucleic acids research 2018 46 W296 W303 29788355
56 Stourac J Vavra O Kokkonen P Filipovic J Pinto G Brezovsky J Caver Web 1.0: identification of tunnels and channels in proteins and analysis of ligand transport Nucleic acids research 2019 47 W414 W22 31114897
57 Nagpal G Chaudhary K Agrawal P Raghava GPS Computer-aided prediction of antigen presenting cell modulators for designing peptide-based vaccine adjuvants Journal of translational medicine 2018 16 1 15 29316942
58 Zhou P Jin B Li H Huang SY HPEPDOCK: a web server for blind peptide-protein docking based on a hierarchical algorithm Nucleic acids research 2018 46 W443 W50 29746661
59 Yan Y Tao H He J Huang SY The HDOCK server for integrated protein-protein docking Nature protocols 2020 15 1829 52 32269383
60 Gamage DG Gunaratne A Periyannan GR Russell TG Applicability of instability index for in vitro protein stability prediction Protein and Peptide Letters 2019 26 339 47 30816075
61 Ikai A Thermostability and aliphatic index of globular proteins The Journal of Biochemistry 1980 88 1895 8 7462208
62 Magdeldin S Yoshida Y Li H Maeda Y Yokoyama M Enany S Murine colon proteome and characterization of the protein pathways BioData mining 2012 5 1 14 22297131
63 Nithianantham S Xu M Yamada M Ikegami A Shoham M Han YW Crystal structure of FadA adhesin from Fusobacterium nucleatum reveals a novel oligomerization motif, the leucine chain Journal of Biological Chemistry 2009 284 3865 72 18996848
64 Han YW Ikegami A Rajanna C Kawsar HI Zhou Y Li M Identification and characterization of a novel adhesin unique to oral fusobacteria Journal of bacteriology 2005 187 5330 40 16030227
65 Alzyoud L Bryce RA Al Sorkhy M Atatreh N Ghattas MA Structure-based assessment and druggability classification of protein-protein interaction sites Scientific reports 2022 12 1 18 34992227
66 Bashir A Miskeen AY Bhat A Fazili KM Ganai BA Fusobacterium nucleatum European Journal of Cancer Prevention 2015 24 373 85 25569450
67 Xu M FadA from Fusobacterium nucleatum utilizes both secreted and nonsecreted forms for functional oligomerization for attachment and invasion of host cells Journal of Biological Chemistry 2007 282 34 25000 25009 17588948
68 Huang S Rapid detection of nusG and fadA in Fusobacterium nucleatum by loop-mediated isothermal amplification Journal of Medical Microbiology 2016 65 8 760 769 27339262
69 Chen Y More than just a periodontal pathogen-the research progress on Fusobacterium nucleatum Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology 2022 12 815318 35186795
70 Li ZM Effects of stool sample preservation methods on gut microbiota biodiversity: New original data and systematic review with meta-analysis Clinical Microbiology 2023 11 3 e0429722
