{"title":"元基因组新一代测序用于鉴定革兰氏阴性病原体引起的感染并预测抗菌药耐药性。","authors":"Yang-Hua Xiao, Zhao-Xia Luo, Hong-Wen Wu, De-Rong Xu, Rui Zhao","doi":"10.1093/labmed/lmad039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) for the identification of Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) infections and the prediction of antimicrobial resistance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on 182 patients with diagnosis of GNB infections who underwent mNGS and conventional microbiological tests (CMTs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The detection rate of mNGS was 96.15%, higher than CMTs (45.05%) with a significant difference (χ 2 = 114.46, P < .01). The pathogen spectrum identified by mNGS was significantly wider than CMTs. Interestingly, the detection rate of mNGS was substantially higher than that of CMTs (70.33% vs 23.08%, P < .01) in patients with but not without antibiotic exposure. There was a significant positive correlation between mapped reads and pro-inflammatory cytokines (interleukin-6 and interleukin-8). However, mNGS failed to predict antimicrobial resistance in 5 of 12 patients compared to phenotype antimicrobial susceptibility testing results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Metagenomic next-generation sequencing has a higher detection rate, a wider pathogen spectrum, and is less affected by prior antibiotic exposure than CMTs in identifying Gram-negative pathogens. The mapped reads may reflect a pro-inflammatory state in GNB-infected patients. Inferring actual resistance phenotypes from metagenomic data remains a great challenge.</p>","PeriodicalId":17951,"journal":{"name":"Laboratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":"71-79"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Metagenomic next-generation sequencing for the identification of infections caused by Gram-negative pathogens and the prediction of antimicrobial resistance.\",\"authors\":\"Yang-Hua Xiao, Zhao-Xia Luo, Hong-Wen Wu, De-Rong Xu, Rui Zhao\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/labmed/lmad039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) for the identification of Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) infections and the prediction of antimicrobial resistance.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on 182 patients with diagnosis of GNB infections who underwent mNGS and conventional microbiological tests (CMTs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The detection rate of mNGS was 96.15%, higher than CMTs (45.05%) with a significant difference (χ 2 = 114.46, P < .01). The pathogen spectrum identified by mNGS was significantly wider than CMTs. Interestingly, the detection rate of mNGS was substantially higher than that of CMTs (70.33% vs 23.08%, P < .01) in patients with but not without antibiotic exposure. There was a significant positive correlation between mapped reads and pro-inflammatory cytokines (interleukin-6 and interleukin-8). However, mNGS failed to predict antimicrobial resistance in 5 of 12 patients compared to phenotype antimicrobial susceptibility testing results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Metagenomic next-generation sequencing has a higher detection rate, a wider pathogen spectrum, and is less affected by prior antibiotic exposure than CMTs in identifying Gram-negative pathogens. The mapped reads may reflect a pro-inflammatory state in GNB-infected patients. Inferring actual resistance phenotypes from metagenomic data remains a great challenge.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Laboratory medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"71-79\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Laboratory medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmad039\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laboratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/labmed/lmad039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Metagenomic next-generation sequencing for the identification of infections caused by Gram-negative pathogens and the prediction of antimicrobial resistance.
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) for the identification of Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) infections and the prediction of antimicrobial resistance.
Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 182 patients with diagnosis of GNB infections who underwent mNGS and conventional microbiological tests (CMTs).
Results: The detection rate of mNGS was 96.15%, higher than CMTs (45.05%) with a significant difference (χ 2 = 114.46, P < .01). The pathogen spectrum identified by mNGS was significantly wider than CMTs. Interestingly, the detection rate of mNGS was substantially higher than that of CMTs (70.33% vs 23.08%, P < .01) in patients with but not without antibiotic exposure. There was a significant positive correlation between mapped reads and pro-inflammatory cytokines (interleukin-6 and interleukin-8). However, mNGS failed to predict antimicrobial resistance in 5 of 12 patients compared to phenotype antimicrobial susceptibility testing results.
Conclusions: Metagenomic next-generation sequencing has a higher detection rate, a wider pathogen spectrum, and is less affected by prior antibiotic exposure than CMTs in identifying Gram-negative pathogens. The mapped reads may reflect a pro-inflammatory state in GNB-infected patients. Inferring actual resistance phenotypes from metagenomic data remains a great challenge.