Cancer ResearchResearch PaperOpen Access

Frog gut bacterium clears colon tumors in mice with a single injection

A bacterium from a Japanese tree frog's gut cleared every colon tumor in mice after one IV dose, outperforming anti-PD-L1 and doxorubicin in the model.

Saturday, November 7, 2026 0 views
Published in Gut Microbes
a Japanese tree frog resting on a green leaf beside a petri dish of cream-colored bacterial colonies in a lab

Summary

Researchers in Japan collected bacteria from the intestines of two amphibians (a tree frog and a fire belly newt) and a lizard. They screened 45 strains for safety and tested nine against colon cancer in mice. One frog-derived strain, Ewingella americana, eliminated tumors in every treated mouse after a single intravenous injection. It outperformed an anti-PD-L1 antibody and liposomal doxorubicin, each given four times. Mice cured by the bacterium rejected a second tumor challenge, which suggests lasting immune memory. The bacterium appears to work two ways: it kills tumor cells directly and it rallies the host immune system. Weight loss was only temporary. The work is in mice only, but it suggests that animal gut microbiomes may hold untapped cancer therapies.

Detailed Summary

Bacteria-based cancer therapy is attractive because certain microbes home in on tumors, but most candidates are genetically engineered strains with safety risks, including mutations that could undo built-in safeguards. This study asks whether naturally occurring, unmodified gut bacteria from unusual hosts could offer potent antitumor activity without engineering. It also builds on the authors' earlier work with tumor-resident bacteria.

The team isolated 45 bacterial strains from the intestines of the Japanese tree frog (Dryophytes japonicus), the Japanese fire belly newt (Cynops pyrrhogaster) and the Japanese grass lizard (Takydromus tachydromoides). Each was given intravenously to BALB/c mice (200 µL at 5 × 10⁹ CFU/mL) as a tolerability screen. Nine acceptable strains, confirmed by 16S rRNA sequencing, moved on to efficacy testing in immunocompetent mice with Colon-26 tumors of about 200 mm³, each receiving a single tail-vein injection and followed for 40 days (n = 3 per group).

Of the nine strains, one (Priestia aryabhattai) had no effect, five significantly slowed tumor growth, and three (E. americana, Citrobacter portucalensis and Enterobacter ludwigii) produced active regression. All three regressors were facultative anaerobes, consistent with preferential colonization of hypoxic tumors. Regression with C. portucalensis and E. ludwigii appeared by day 3 but tumors recurred after day 8, and Rhodococcus qingshengii's early suppression faded after day 5. Only E. americana gave durable results, with 100% survival and a 100% complete response rate. A pilot dose range of 2 × 10⁷ to 1 × 10⁹ CFU identified 1 × 10⁹ CFU as best.

In a head-to-head comparison (n = 5 per group), one E. americana injection was compared with anti-PD-L1 antibody or liposomal doxorubicin, each given at 2.5 mg/kg four times every other day. Both drugs slowed tumor growth, but anti-PD-L1 produced only one complete response and neither drug eradicated tumors consistently. E. americana cleared tumors in all animals (p < 0.0001) and extended survival by at least 30 days versus PBS. In rechallenge experiments, 0 of 10 cured mice grew new tumors versus 10 of 10 naive controls, with immune memory lasting beyond 60 days.

The abstract describes a dual mechanism of direct tumor-cell killing plus activation of T cells, neutrophils and B cells. It also reports minimal pathogenicity at effective doses. In the paper's data, treated mice showed only a slight early weight dip that resolved, with no group differences by day 15. E. americana is generally antibiotic-susceptible, so toxicity could in principle be managed, though it can cause opportunistic infections in neonates and immunocompromised patients.

Caveats are substantial. All data come from one syngeneic mouse colon cancer model with very small groups, and the model's tumor biology differs from human cancer. Intravenous bacteria carry sepsis risk, and long-term toxicity, dosing in larger animals and effects in other tumor types remain untested. Clinical translation is a long way off.

Key Findings

  • Of 45 gut isolates from frogs, newts and a lizard, 9 passed IV safety screening and were tested against Colon-26 tumors in mice
  • Of the 9 strains, 1 had no effect, 5 suppressed tumor growth, and 3 (E. americana, C. portucalensis, E. ludwigii) caused tumor regression
  • A single IV dose of E. americana produced a 100% complete response rate and 100% survival (log-rank p<0.0001 vs PBS)
  • E. americana outperformed anti-PD-L1 and liposomal doxorubicin (4 doses each, 2.5 mg/kg), which yielded only one complete response in the anti-PD-L1 group (n=5)
  • A single E. americana dose extended survival by at least 30 days versus PBS controls
  • Rechallenge: 0/10 E. americana-cured mice grew new tumors vs 10/10 naive controls, with immune memory beyond 60 days
  • All three regression-inducing strains were facultative anaerobes, and body weight dipped only briefly, with no group differences by day 15

Methodology

Gut bacteria were isolated from two amphibian species and one reptile, identified by 16S rRNA sequencing and BLAST, and screened for acute IV tolerability in BALB/c mice. Efficacy was tested in immunocompetent BALB/c mice bearing Colon-26 tumors (about 200 mm³) after a single IV injection (200 µL, 5 × 10⁹ CFU/mL), with follow-up of 40 days (screening, n=3 per group) or 60 days (comparison versus anti-PD-L1 and liposomal doxorubicin, n=5 per group). Comparisons used Student's two-sided t-test and log-rank (Mantel–Cox) survival tests, with PBS controls and body weight monitoring for safety.

Study Limitations

Experiments used a single mouse colon carcinoma model with small group sizes (n=3 to 5), and the findings may not carry over to human tumors or other cancers. Intravenous bacteria pose risks of sepsis and inflammation, and E. americana is an opportunistic pathogen in neonates and immunocompromised patients, so long-term safety remains unproven. No conflicts of interest were stated in the portion of the paper available for this summary.

Enjoyed this summary?

Get the latest longevity research delivered to your inbox every week.

Enter your email to subscribe: