Suppr超能文献

靶向测序和宏基因组测序在呼吸道感染中的诊断价值

Diagnosis value of targeted and metagenomic sequencing in respiratory tract infection.

作者信息

Kuang Yukun, Tan Weiping, Hu Chaohui, Dai Zehan, Bai Lihong, Wang Jiyu, Liao Huai, Chen Haihong, He Rongling, Zhu Pengyuan, Liu Jun, Xie Canmao, Ke Zunfu, Tang Ke-Jing

机构信息

Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.

Institute of Respiratory Diseases of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.

出版信息

Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2024 Dec 12;14:1498512. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2024.1498512. eCollection 2024.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Targeted next-generation sequencing (tNGS) has become a trending tool in the field of infection diagnosis, but concerns are also raising about its performance compared with metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS). This study aims to explore the clinical feasibility of a tNGS panel for respiratory tract infection diagnosis and compare it with mNGS in the same cohort of inpatients.

METHODS

180 bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples were collected and sent to two centers for mNGS and tNGS blinded tests, respectively. The concordance between pathogen reports of both methods and the clinical significance among samples with/without known etiology was further evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, both methods displayed high agreement on pathogen reports, as the average percent agreement reached 95.29%. But tNGS presented a slightly higher detection rate per species than mNGS (P=1.212e-05; standard mean difference = 0.2887091), as detection rates for 32 out of 48 species were higher than those of mNGS. Due to limitations of panel coverage, tNGS identified 28 fewer species than mNGS, among which only 3 were considered clinically relevant. In reference to composite reference standard, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity combining both tNGS and mNGS reached 95.61%, 96.71%, and 95.68%, respectively, while positive prediction value (PPV) was low at 48.13%, which was caused by low agreement regarding opportunistic pathogens. tNGS and mNGS improved the etiology identification in 30.6% (55/180) and 33.9% (61/180) cases, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Collectively, tNGS presented a similar overall performance in pathogen identification compared to mNGS, but outperformed in some pathogens. This study also demonstrated that deployment of tNGS significantly improves etiology identification in routine practice and provides hints for clinical decisions. The low agreement between clinical diagnosis and NGS reports towards opportunistic pathogens implies that adjudication is essential for report interpretation. Finally, We proposed tNGS as a diagnosis option in clinical practice due to its cost-efficiency.

摘要

背景

靶向二代测序(tNGS)已成为感染诊断领域的一种热门工具,但与宏基因组二代测序(mNGS)相比,其性能也引发了一些担忧。本研究旨在探讨tNGS检测 panel 用于呼吸道感染诊断的临床可行性,并在同一住院患者队列中将其与mNGS进行比较。

方法

收集180份支气管肺泡灌洗液样本,分别送至两个中心进行mNGS和tNGS盲法检测。进一步评估两种方法病原体报告之间的一致性,以及已知病因和未知病因样本的临床意义。

结果

总体而言,两种方法在病原体报告上显示出高度一致性,平均一致率达到95.29%。但tNGS的单物种检测率略高于mNGS(P = 1.212e - 05;标准平均差异 = 0.2887091),48种中的32种检测率高于mNGS。由于检测 panel 覆盖范围的限制,tNGS鉴定出的物种比mNGS少28种,其中只有3种被认为具有临床相关性。参照复合参考标准,结合tNGS和mNGS的准确性、敏感性和特异性分别达到95.61%、96.71%和95.68%,而阳性预测值(PPV)较低,为48.13%,这是由机会性病原体的一致性较低所致。tNGS和mNGS分别在30.6%(55/180)和33.9%(61/180)的病例中改善了病因鉴定。

结论

总体而言,tNGS在病原体鉴定方面的整体表现与mNGS相似,但在某些病原体上表现更优。本研究还表明,tNGS的应用显著改善了常规实践中的病因鉴定,并为临床决策提供了参考。临床诊断与NGS报告对机会性病原体的一致性较低,这意味着对报告解读进行判定至关重要。最后,鉴于其成本效益,我们建议将tNGS作为临床实践中的诊断选择。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/3b42/11669359/793245667bd4/fcimb-14-1498512-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验