Research Appraisalobservational

Artificial intelligence-driven donor-recipient gut microbiome matching for optimized fecal microbiota transplantation

Cell reportsSu, Qi, Chen, Sizhe, Lau, Louis Hs et al.26 May 2026DOI

Clinical Snapshot

85CEBM
Evidence: Moderateobservational

PICO Framework

P — Population515 FMT procedures across 30 cohorts involving patients with 12 different gastrointestinal diseases
I — InterventionMOZAIC framework for donor-recipient microbiome matching using multi-dimensional microbiota features
C — ComparatorStandard FMT donor selection without microbiome matching
O — OutcomesPost-FMT microbiome convergence, clinical response rates, and prediction accuracy for FMT outcomes

Bottom Line

This large multi-cohort study demonstrates that microbiome convergence between donor and recipient predicts FMT clinical success across multiple gastrointestinal diseases. The MOZAIC framework achieved high accuracy (AUC 0.88) in predicting microbiome convergence and 78.7% accuracy for clinical outcomes, with retrospective modeling suggesting a 1.44-fold improvement in response rates. While promising for precision FMT matching, the cross-sectional design limits causal inference, and real-world implementation requires significant sequencing infrastructure. The findings support microbiome-guided donor selection as a strategy to optimize FMT efficacy, though prospective validation studies are needed before clinical adoption. This research could inform Australian FMT guidelines and improve treatment outcomes for conditions like recurrent C. difficile infection and inflammatory bowel disease.

Evidence: Moderate

Key Findings

  • P Value: Not reported in abstract

  • Effect Size: 1.44-fold improvement in clinical response rates (49.4% to 71.0%)

  • Primary Outcome: Post-FMT microbiome convergence prediction and clinical response

  • Nnt Or Sensitivity: AUC 0.88 for microbiome convergence prediction, 78.7% accuracy for clinical outcomes

  • Confidence Interval: Not reported in abstract

Clinical Application

Requires metagenome sequencing infrastructure and bioinformatics expertise, potentially limiting immediate widespread adoption Relevant to Australian FMT programs; could inform TGA regulatory framework for FMT donor selection and improve PBS cost-effectiveness Patients requiring FMT for various gastrointestinal conditions including CDI, IBD, and other microbiome-related disorders

Abstract

Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has emerged as a promising therapy for gastrointestinal diseases, yet its clinical efficacy remains individually variable. Here, we analyze multi-kingdom and functional profiles in pre- and post-FMT metagenomes from 515 FMTs across 30 cohorts and 12 diseases, in which 94 metagenomes from 44 FMTs are newly collected. We reveal a robust association between clinical efficacy and post-FMT microbiome convergence of recipients toward donors, across diseases. To predict post-FMT microbial convergence, we develop MOZAIC (Microbiome Matching Optimization via Artificial Intelligence), a framework that integrates multi-dimensional donor-recipient microbiota features. MOZAIC achieves an average area under the curve (AUC) of 0.88 and accuracy/recall >0.80 in forecasting microbiome convergence, with 78.7% accuracy in predicting clinical outcomes, and retrospectively simulates a 1.44-fold improvement (from 49.4% to 71.0%) in clinical response rates over baseline. This study establishes microbiome convergence as a key mediator of FMT and provides a scalable tool for precision matching in microbiota-based therapies.

References

  1. 1.Su, Q., Chen, S., Lau, L. H., Lui, R. N., Wang, Y., Xu, Z., Cheung, C. P., Ching, J. Y. L., Shen, X., Peng, Y., Tun, H. M., Ianiro, G., Rubin, D., Chang, E. B., Chan, F. K. L., & Ng, S. C. (2026). Artificial intelligence-driven donor-recipient gut microbiome matching for optimized fecal microbiota transplantation. Cell Reports, 45(6), 117301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2026.117301
Share:XLinkedIn

This content is for educational purposes for healthcare professionals only and does not constitute clinical advice. Clinical decisions should be based on individual patient assessment, current guidelines, and appropriate specialist consultation. Editorial Standards · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service