This test is most useful if any of these apply to you.
Most stool tests look for bugs you should not have in your gut. This one measures a bacterium you always have, but in a quantity that tells you whether your gut ecosystem is in balance.
E. faecalis (Enterococcus faecalis) is a normal resident of the human intestine. The reason to pay attention to its count is that overgrowth, not mere presence, is what consistently shows up in people with colorectal cancer, active Crohn disease, primary sclerosing cholangitis, and microbiome disruption from antibiotics or hospitalization.
E. faecalis is a tough, oxygen-tolerant bacterium that lives in the mouth and gut of most healthy people. In a balanced microbiome it is typically described as subdominant, making up only a small fraction of the overall bacterial community. It earns its reputation as a pathobiont (a normal resident that can turn problematic) when it expands beyond that small share.
Stool PCR measures bacterial DNA directly from a stool sample, usually by amplifying a species-specific gene. Some labs report a relative abundance score, others a copy number per gram of stool. What you are reading is bacterial load, not symptoms, and not whether the organism is actively causing harm.
This is a research-grade measurement. There are no universally agreed-upon clinical cutpoints separating normal from abnormal. Most published evidence comes from case-control studies comparing patient groups, not from large healthy-population reference ranges. That makes a single reading useful as a starting point but never as a standalone diagnosis.
Stool E. faecalis is often higher in people with colorectal cancer than in healthy controls. In a 650-person case-control study, the count was about 2.2 times higher in people with colorectal cancer than in healthy people. A smaller study found the average copy number in cancer cases was roughly 12 times higher than in healthy controls, with people who had polyps falling in between. That said, when researchers pool many shotgun metagenomic studies together, E. faecalis is not among the most consistently CRC-enriched fecal species (those tend to be organisms like Fusobacterium nucleatum, Parvimonas micra, and Peptostreptococcus stomatis), so the fecal signal for E. faecalis specifically is less replicated than the tissue-based signal.
| Who Was Studied | What Was Compared | What They Found |
|---|---|---|
| 650 adults with and without colorectal cancer | Stool E. faecalis count by qPCR | About 2.2 times higher in cancer cases than in healthy controls |
| People across cancer, polyps, and healthy controls | Copy number per gram of stool | Roughly 12 times higher in cancer than healthy, with polyp counts between the two |
| Cohort of people with and without colorectal cancer | Stool qPCR abundance of CRC-enriched bacteria | E. faecalis was more prevalent in cancer cases than controls |
What this means for you: a higher count is a signal worth watching, not a cancer diagnosis. Some prospective work suggests fecal E. faecalis levels can be unstable over time and are not always clearly tied to large adenomas or cancer in individuals. The connection at the population level is real, but it does not translate cleanly into individual risk prediction yet. Standard colorectal cancer screening (FIT, Cologuard, or colonoscopy) remains the first line.
In Crohn disease and ulcerative colitis, stool E. faecalis is consistently higher than in healthy controls. In Crohn disease specifically, higher counts track with disease activity scores and fecal calprotectin, a separate marker of gut inflammation. A study of people with inflammatory bowel disease found a statistically significant positive correlation between high-level E. faecalis colonization and the Crohn Disease Activity Index (R = 0.31, P = 0.01), as well as with fecal calprotectin (P = 0.016).
If you have IBD, a rising E. faecalis count alongside rising calprotectin or symptoms can add weight to the picture of active inflammation. It is not a substitute for established markers like calprotectin, but it can support the trend.
Primary sclerosing cholangitis (a chronic disease that scars the bile ducts) shows a particularly strong gut-liver connection. In a 337-person study, people with this condition who had high stool enterococci abundance had a lower probability of survival without needing a liver transplant. Higher fecal cytolysin, a toxin produced by some E. faecalis strains, was also linked to lower overall survival.
This is one of the clearest cases where the gut bacterium appears to influence an organ outside the intestine. It points to the broader idea that what is happening in your stool can quietly shape what is happening in your liver, joints, and immune system.
E. faecalis is notorious for blooming after antibiotics that wipe out its competitors. In a large hospital microbiome study, both meropenem and metronidazole exposure were associated with a higher rate of transitioning into an Enterococcus-dominated stool state. An earlier transplant cohort found metronidazole roughly tripled the odds of enterococcal domination. After stem cell transplantation, the share of enterococci in stool jumped from about 21% in people who stayed well to 74% in those with active gut graft-versus-host disease.
Hospitalization, chemotherapy, and severe illness like sepsis also push the count up. Preliminary work (a preprint, not yet peer-reviewed) has suggested that fecal E. faecalis enrichment may be among the stronger microbiome-based predictors of COVID-19 severity. The mechanism is the same in each case: the rest of the microbial community gets knocked down, and this organism takes advantage of the empty space.
It can feel contradictory that a normal gut bacterium is also associated with cancer, IBD, and worse survival in liver disease. The framework that resolves this: E. faecalis is not a good-or-bad organism, it is a context-dependent one. At low levels it sits quietly in a balanced ecosystem. When something disrupts the surrounding community (antibiotics, inflammation, a tumor microenvironment, hospitalization), it expands, produces reactive oxygen species and virulence factors like cytolysin and gelatinase, and starts contributing to inflammation and tissue damage. The count, not the presence, is what matters.
Stool PCR is sensitive but not always specific to disease. A single reading can mislead in several ways.
A single E. faecalis count is hard to interpret on its own. The number gains meaning when you compare it to your own prior readings and to the rest of your microbiome panel. If you are healthy and curious about your gut, a baseline plus a follow-up in 3 to 6 months gives you something to compare. If you have IBD, recurring digestive symptoms, or a known colorectal cancer risk, annual or twice-yearly tracking alongside calprotectin and other microbiome markers makes the signal usable.
Retest after any major intervention that could shift the microbiome: a course of antibiotics, a new probiotic or prebiotic regimen, a significant diet change, or a hospital stay. Wait at least 4 to 6 weeks after antibiotics before retesting so you are reading your settled state, not the acute aftermath.
An elevated E. faecalis count by itself is not a diagnosis and does not justify treatment with antibiotics. Antibiotics often make enterococcal overgrowth worse, not better. Instead, treat it as a prompt to look at the broader picture.
Evidence-backed interventions that affect your Enterococcus Faecalis level
Enterococcus Faecalis is best interpreted alongside these tests.
Enterococcus Faecalis is included in these pre-built panels.