Clinical Microbiology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA.
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2017 Sep;36(9):1665-1672. doi: 10.1007/s10096-017-2981-0. Epub 2017 Apr 20.
We compared the frequency of gastrointestinal (GI) pathogen detection in an oncology patient population by two multiplexed molecular assays, the Luminex xTAG® Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel (GPP, which identifies 14 GI pathogens) and the BioFire Gastrointestinal Panel (BFGP, which identifies 22 GI pathogens). We additionally reviewed the clinical characteristics of patients tested with both panels. A total of 200 prospectively collected and 81 archived stool samples were tested by both panels. In the prospective cohort, the GPP and BFGP identified a pathogen in 33.5% [95% confidence interval (CI): 27.3-40.35%] and 39.6% (95% CI: 33.0%-46.6%) of samples, respectively (p = 0.25). The BFGP detected significantly more pathogens than the GPP (p = 0.038), with 21.3% of samples positive for targets only detected by the BFGP. The concordance between the assays was very good at 91.1% (κ = 0.8, 95% CI: 0.7-0.9) when considering only pathogens detected by both assays. The most frequent pathogens detected were Clostridium difficile, norovirus, Campylobacter, and Salmonella species. On the archived samples, the BFGP was positive in 92.6% of samples but detected more pathogens than the GPP (86 vs. 97, p = 0.033), including both targets unique to the BFGP and targets common to both panels. A pathogen was more frequently detected in patients with hematological malignancies than solid tumors and in ambulatory patients compared to hospitalized patients, but these differences were not statistically significant. Overall, the detection rates were similar for both the GPP and the BFGP, and the latter detected more than one pathogen in additional patients. The impact of increased detection of GI pathogens by multiplexed panels on the clinical care of oncology patients will require further investigation.
我们通过两种多重分子检测方法,即 Luminex xTAG® 胃肠道病原体检测试剂盒(GPP,可鉴定 14 种胃肠道病原体)和 BioFire 胃肠道检测试剂盒(BFGP,可鉴定 22 种胃肠道病原体),比较了肿瘤患者群体中胃肠道(GI)病原体的检测频率。我们还回顾了用两种试剂盒检测的患者的临床特征。总共对 200 份前瞻性采集的和 81 份存档的粪便样本进行了两种试剂盒的检测。在前瞻性队列中,GPP 和 BFGP 分别在 33.5%[95%置信区间(CI):27.3-40.35%]和 39.6%(95%CI:33.0%-46.6%)的样本中鉴定出病原体(p = 0.25)。BFGP 检测到的病原体明显多于 GPP(p = 0.038),有 21.3%的样本仅对 BFGP 检测到的靶标呈阳性。当仅考虑两种检测方法均检测到的病原体时,两种检测方法的一致性非常好,为 91.1%(κ = 0.8,95%CI:0.7-0.9)。检测到的最常见病原体是艰难梭菌、诺如病毒、弯曲杆菌和沙门氏菌。在存档样本中,BFGP 在 92.6%的样本中呈阳性,但比 GPP 检测到更多的病原体(86 对 97,p = 0.033),包括 BFGP 特有的靶标和两种试剂盒共有的靶标。血液系统恶性肿瘤患者比实体瘤患者更常检测到病原体,门诊患者比住院患者更常检测到病原体,但这些差异无统计学意义。总体而言,GPP 和 BFGP 的检测率相似,后者在更多患者中检测到一种以上病原体。多重检测试剂盒对胃肠道病原体的检测增加对肿瘤患者临床治疗的影响,需要进一步研究。