Clinical utility of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in fever of undetermined origin.

IF 3.8 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease Pub Date : 2024-04-18 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20499361241244969
Marilyne Daher, Roumen Iordanov, Mayar Al Mohajer, M Rizwan Sohail, Kristen Andrews Staggers, Ahmed Mufeed Hamdi
{"title":"Clinical utility of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in fever of undetermined origin.","authors":"Marilyne Daher, Roumen Iordanov, Mayar Al Mohajer, M Rizwan Sohail, Kristen Andrews Staggers, Ahmed Mufeed Hamdi","doi":"10.1177/20499361241244969","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is a novel diagnostic tool increasingly used in the field of infectious diseases. Little guidance is available regarding its appropriate use in different patient populations and clinical syndromes. We aimed to review the clinical utility of mNGS in patients with a specific clinical syndrome and identify factors that may increase its utility.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed charts of 72 non-immunocompromised adults hospitalized with the clinical syndrome of 'fever of undetermined origin' and underwent mNGS testing. Standardized criteria from a previously published study were used to determine the clinical impact of mNGS testing. We applied logistic regression to identify factors associated with a positive clinical impact.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 72 patients identified, 62.5% were males with a median age of 56. All patients had a fever at the time of evaluation. At least one organism was identified in 65.3% of cases; most commonly were Epstein-Barr virus (13.9%), cytomegalovirus (12.5%), and <i>Rickettsia typhi</i> (11.1%). Of those determined to have an infectious etiology of their febrile syndrome, 89.5% (<i>n</i> = 34/38) had a positive mNGS. Consistency between the organism(s) on mNGS and the clinically determined infectious etiology was 82.4%. mNGS had a positive clinical impact in 40.3% of cases, a negative impact in 2.8%, and no impact in 56.9% of cases. Besides age, we did not identify other factors associated with a higher likelihood of positive clinical impact.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In our review, mNGS had a positive clinical impact in a large proportion of adults with fever of undetermined origin, with minimal negative impact. However, mNGS results should be interpreted carefully given the high rate of detection of pathogens of unclear clinical significance. Randomized clinical trials are needed to assess the clinical utility of this novel diagnostic tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":46154,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease","volume":"11 ","pages":"20499361241244969"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11027448/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20499361241244969","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is a novel diagnostic tool increasingly used in the field of infectious diseases. Little guidance is available regarding its appropriate use in different patient populations and clinical syndromes. We aimed to review the clinical utility of mNGS in patients with a specific clinical syndrome and identify factors that may increase its utility.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed charts of 72 non-immunocompromised adults hospitalized with the clinical syndrome of 'fever of undetermined origin' and underwent mNGS testing. Standardized criteria from a previously published study were used to determine the clinical impact of mNGS testing. We applied logistic regression to identify factors associated with a positive clinical impact.

Results: Of the 72 patients identified, 62.5% were males with a median age of 56. All patients had a fever at the time of evaluation. At least one organism was identified in 65.3% of cases; most commonly were Epstein-Barr virus (13.9%), cytomegalovirus (12.5%), and Rickettsia typhi (11.1%). Of those determined to have an infectious etiology of their febrile syndrome, 89.5% (n = 34/38) had a positive mNGS. Consistency between the organism(s) on mNGS and the clinically determined infectious etiology was 82.4%. mNGS had a positive clinical impact in 40.3% of cases, a negative impact in 2.8%, and no impact in 56.9% of cases. Besides age, we did not identify other factors associated with a higher likelihood of positive clinical impact.

Conclusion: In our review, mNGS had a positive clinical impact in a large proportion of adults with fever of undetermined origin, with minimal negative impact. However, mNGS results should be interpreted carefully given the high rate of detection of pathogens of unclear clinical significance. Randomized clinical trials are needed to assess the clinical utility of this novel diagnostic tool.

元基因组下一代测序在不明原因发热中的临床应用。
背景:元基因组新一代测序(mNGS)是一种新型诊断工具,在传染病领域的应用日益广泛。关于其在不同患者群体和临床综合征中的适当使用,目前几乎没有任何指导。我们旨在回顾 mNGS 在特定临床综合征患者中的临床实用性,并找出可能提高其实用性的因素:我们回顾性地查看了 72 例因 "不明原因发热 "临床综合征住院并接受 mNGS 检测的非免疫功能低下成人患者的病历。我们使用先前发表的一项研究中的标准化标准来确定 mNGS 检测的临床影响。我们采用逻辑回归来确定与积极临床影响相关的因素:在 72 名被确认的患者中,62.5% 为男性,中位年龄为 56 岁。所有患者在评估时都发烧。65.3%的病例中至少发现了一种病原体;最常见的是爱泼斯坦-巴氏病毒(13.9%)、巨细胞病毒(12.5%)和伤寒立克次体(11.1%)。在确定发热综合征感染病因的患者中,89.5%(34/38)的 mNGS 呈阳性。在 40.3% 的病例中,mNGS 对临床有积极影响;2.8% 的病例中,mNGS 对临床有消极影响;56.9% 的病例中,mNGS 对临床没有影响。除年龄外,我们没有发现其他因素与更有可能产生积极临床影响有关:结论:在我们的研究中,mNGS 对大部分不明原因发热的成人具有积极的临床影响,而负面影响则微乎其微。然而,由于临床意义不明的病原体检出率较高,因此应谨慎解释 mNGS 结果。需要进行随机临床试验来评估这种新型诊断工具的临床实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
8.80%
发文量
64
审稿时长
9 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信