评估元基因组下一代测序检测对感染宿主病原体鉴定的诊断效用:一项回顾性队列研究。

IF 3.8 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease Pub Date : 2024-02-23 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20499361241232854
Austin Williams, William Zach Webster, Chao Cai, Alexander Milgrom, Majdi Al-Hasan, P Brandon Bookstaver
{"title":"评估元基因组下一代测序检测对感染宿主病原体鉴定的诊断效用:一项回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Austin Williams, William Zach Webster, Chao Cai, Alexander Milgrom, Majdi Al-Hasan, P Brandon Bookstaver","doi":"10.1177/20499361241232854","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) testing identifies thousands of potential pathogens in a single blood test, though data on its real-world diagnostic utility are lacking.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Determine the diagnostic utility of mNGS testing in practice and factors associated with high clinical utility.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study of mNGS tests ordered from June 2018 through May 2020 at a community teaching hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Tests were included if ordered for diagnostic purposes in patients with probable or high clinical suspicion of infection. Exclusions included patient expiration, hospice care, or transfer outside of the institution. Utility criteria were established a priori by the research team. Two investigators independently reviewed each test and categorized it to either high or low diagnostic utility. Reviewer discordance was referred to a third investigator. The stepwise multiple regression method was used to identify clinical factors associated with high diagnostic utility.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 96 individual tests from 82 unique patients, 80 tests met the inclusion criteria for analysis. At least one potential pathogen was identified in 58% of tests. Among 112 pathogens identified, there were 74 bacteria, 25 viruses, 12 fungi, and 1 protozoon. In all, 46 tests (57.5%) were determined to be of high diagnostic utility. Positive mNGS tests were identified in 36 (78.3%) and 11 (32.4%) of high and low diagnostic utility tests, respectively (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Antimicrobials were changed after receiving test results in 31 (67.4%) of high utility tests and 4 (11.8%) of low utility tests (<i>p</i> < 0.0001). In the multiple regression model, a positive test [odds ratio (OR) = 10.9; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.2-44.4] and consultation with the company medical director (OR = 3.6; 95% CI, 1.1-13.7) remained significantly associated with high diagnostic utility.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>mNGS testing resulted in high clinical utility in most cases. Positive mNGS tests were associated with high diagnostic utility. Consultation with the Karius<sup>®</sup> medical director is recommended to maximize utility.</p>","PeriodicalId":46154,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease","volume":"11 ","pages":"20499361241232854"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10893884/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the diagnostic utility of metagenomic next-generation sequencing testing for pathogen identification in infected hosts: a retrospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Austin Williams, William Zach Webster, Chao Cai, Alexander Milgrom, Majdi Al-Hasan, P Brandon Bookstaver\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20499361241232854\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) testing identifies thousands of potential pathogens in a single blood test, though data on its real-world diagnostic utility are lacking.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Determine the diagnostic utility of mNGS testing in practice and factors associated with high clinical utility.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study of mNGS tests ordered from June 2018 through May 2020 at a community teaching hospital.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Tests were included if ordered for diagnostic purposes in patients with probable or high clinical suspicion of infection. Exclusions included patient expiration, hospice care, or transfer outside of the institution. Utility criteria were established a priori by the research team. Two investigators independently reviewed each test and categorized it to either high or low diagnostic utility. Reviewer discordance was referred to a third investigator. The stepwise multiple regression method was used to identify clinical factors associated with high diagnostic utility.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 96 individual tests from 82 unique patients, 80 tests met the inclusion criteria for analysis. At least one potential pathogen was identified in 58% of tests. Among 112 pathogens identified, there were 74 bacteria, 25 viruses, 12 fungi, and 1 protozoon. In all, 46 tests (57.5%) were determined to be of high diagnostic utility. Positive mNGS tests were identified in 36 (78.3%) and 11 (32.4%) of high and low diagnostic utility tests, respectively (<i>p</i> < 0.001). Antimicrobials were changed after receiving test results in 31 (67.4%) of high utility tests and 4 (11.8%) of low utility tests (<i>p</i> < 0.0001). In the multiple regression model, a positive test [odds ratio (OR) = 10.9; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.2-44.4] and consultation with the company medical director (OR = 3.6; 95% CI, 1.1-13.7) remained significantly associated with high diagnostic utility.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>mNGS testing resulted in high clinical utility in most cases. Positive mNGS tests were associated with high diagnostic utility. Consultation with the Karius<sup>®</sup> medical director is recommended to maximize utility.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46154,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease\",\"volume\":\"11 \",\"pages\":\"20499361241232854\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10893884/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20499361241232854\",\"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}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Infectious Disease","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20499361241232854","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

摘要

背景:元基因组下一代测序(mNGS)检测可在单次血液检测中识别数千种潜在病原体,但缺乏有关其实际诊断效用的数据:确定 mNGS 检测在实践中的诊断效用以及与高临床效用相关的因素:对一家社区教学医院从 2018 年 6 月至 2020 年 5 月订购的 mNGS 检测进行回顾性队列研究:如果是为诊断目的而对可能感染或临床高度怀疑感染的患者所订购的检验项目,则纳入研究范围。排除项目包括患者过期、临终关怀或转院。实用性标准由研究小组事先制定。两名研究人员独立审查每项检验,并将其分为诊断效用高或诊断效用低两类。审阅者意见不一致时,将交由第三位研究人员处理。采用逐步多元回归法确定与高诊断效用相关的临床因素:在来自 82 名患者的 96 项检验中,有 80 项检验符合纳入分析的标准。58%的检测至少发现了一种潜在病原体。在确定的 112 种病原体中,有 74 种细菌、25 种病毒、12 种真菌和 1 种原生动物。共有 46 项检测(57.5%)被确定为具有高度诊断效用。在诊断效用高和诊断效用低的检测中,分别有 36 项(78.3%)和 11 项(32.4%)发现了 mNGS 检测阳性(p p 结论:在大多数情况下,mNGS 检测都具有很高的临床效用。阳性 mNGS 检测与高诊断效用相关。建议咨询 Karius® 医疗总监,以最大限度地提高效用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of the diagnostic utility of metagenomic next-generation sequencing testing for pathogen identification in infected hosts: a retrospective cohort study.

Background: Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) testing identifies thousands of potential pathogens in a single blood test, though data on its real-world diagnostic utility are lacking.

Objectives: Determine the diagnostic utility of mNGS testing in practice and factors associated with high clinical utility.

Design: Retrospective cohort study of mNGS tests ordered from June 2018 through May 2020 at a community teaching hospital.

Methods: Tests were included if ordered for diagnostic purposes in patients with probable or high clinical suspicion of infection. Exclusions included patient expiration, hospice care, or transfer outside of the institution. Utility criteria were established a priori by the research team. Two investigators independently reviewed each test and categorized it to either high or low diagnostic utility. Reviewer discordance was referred to a third investigator. The stepwise multiple regression method was used to identify clinical factors associated with high diagnostic utility.

Results: Among 96 individual tests from 82 unique patients, 80 tests met the inclusion criteria for analysis. At least one potential pathogen was identified in 58% of tests. Among 112 pathogens identified, there were 74 bacteria, 25 viruses, 12 fungi, and 1 protozoon. In all, 46 tests (57.5%) were determined to be of high diagnostic utility. Positive mNGS tests were identified in 36 (78.3%) and 11 (32.4%) of high and low diagnostic utility tests, respectively (p < 0.001). Antimicrobials were changed after receiving test results in 31 (67.4%) of high utility tests and 4 (11.8%) of low utility tests (p < 0.0001). In the multiple regression model, a positive test [odds ratio (OR) = 10.9; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.2-44.4] and consultation with the company medical director (OR = 3.6; 95% CI, 1.1-13.7) remained significantly associated with high diagnostic utility.

Conclusion: mNGS testing resulted in high clinical utility in most cases. Positive mNGS tests were associated with high diagnostic utility. Consultation with the Karius® medical director is recommended to maximize utility.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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