Utilizing Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing for Rapid, Accurate, and Cost-Effective Pathogen Detection in Lower Respiratory Tract Infections.

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Infection and Drug Resistance Pub Date : 2025-01-17 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/IDR.S494558
Lisha Qin, Mengyuan Liang, Jianping Song, Ping Chen, Shujing Zhang, Yaya Zhou, Hui Li, Jian Tang, Yanling Ma, Bohan Yang, Juanjuan Xu, Jianchu Zhang
{"title":"Utilizing Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing for Rapid, Accurate, and Cost-Effective Pathogen Detection in Lower Respiratory Tract Infections.","authors":"Lisha Qin, Mengyuan Liang, Jianping Song, Ping Chen, Shujing Zhang, Yaya Zhou, Hui Li, Jian Tang, Yanling Ma, Bohan Yang, Juanjuan Xu, Jianchu Zhang","doi":"10.2147/IDR.S494558","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the diagnostic performance and clinical impact of targeted next-generation sequencing (tNGS) in patients with suspected lower respiratory tract infections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following propensity score matching, we compared the diagnostic performances of tNGS and metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS). Furthermore, the diagnostic performance of tNGS was compared with that of culture, and its clinical impact was assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After propensity score matching, the coincidence rate of tNGS was comparable to that of mNGS (82.9% vs 73.9%, P=0.079). The detection rates for bacterial, viral, fungal, and mixed infections were not significantly different (P>0.05). Bacterial-viral co-infection (16.7%) was the most common mixed infection detected by tNGS. tNGS showed a higher detection rate than culture (75.2% vs 19.0%, P<0.01). The positive detection rate by tNGS was not significantly different between immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients (88.6% vs 80.5%, P=0.202), but was significantly higher than that by culture (P<0.001). Moreover, 65 patients (44.5%) had their medications modified based on the tNGS results, and the majority exhibited notable improvement regardless of treatment adjustment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>tNGS performs comparably to mNGS and surpasses culture in detecting lower respiratory tract infections. Nevertheless, tNGS is faster and more cost-effective than mNGS, making it highly significant for guiding rational treatment.</p>","PeriodicalId":13577,"journal":{"name":"Infection and Drug Resistance","volume":"18 ","pages":"329-340"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11748758/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection and Drug Resistance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S494558","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic performance and clinical impact of targeted next-generation sequencing (tNGS) in patients with suspected lower respiratory tract infections.

Methods: Following propensity score matching, we compared the diagnostic performances of tNGS and metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS). Furthermore, the diagnostic performance of tNGS was compared with that of culture, and its clinical impact was assessed.

Results: After propensity score matching, the coincidence rate of tNGS was comparable to that of mNGS (82.9% vs 73.9%, P=0.079). The detection rates for bacterial, viral, fungal, and mixed infections were not significantly different (P>0.05). Bacterial-viral co-infection (16.7%) was the most common mixed infection detected by tNGS. tNGS showed a higher detection rate than culture (75.2% vs 19.0%, P<0.01). The positive detection rate by tNGS was not significantly different between immunocompromised and immunocompetent patients (88.6% vs 80.5%, P=0.202), but was significantly higher than that by culture (P<0.001). Moreover, 65 patients (44.5%) had their medications modified based on the tNGS results, and the majority exhibited notable improvement regardless of treatment adjustment.

Conclusion: tNGS performs comparably to mNGS and surpasses culture in detecting lower respiratory tract infections. Nevertheless, tNGS is faster and more cost-effective than mNGS, making it highly significant for guiding rational treatment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Infection and Drug Resistance
Infection and Drug Resistance Medicine-Pharmacology (medical)
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
826
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: About Journal Editors Peer Reviewers Articles Article Publishing Charges Aims and Scope Call For Papers ISSN: 1178-6973 Editor-in-Chief: Professor Suresh Antony An international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that focuses on the optimal treatment of infection (bacterial, fungal and viral) and the development and institution of preventative strategies to minimize the development and spread of resistance.
期刊最新文献
Coagulation Parameters in Elderly Patients with Severe Pneumonia: Correlation with Disease Severity and Prognosis. Utilizing Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing for Rapid, Accurate, and Cost-Effective Pathogen Detection in Lower Respiratory Tract Infections. Efficacy of Contezolid in the Treatment of Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infections Caused by Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a Patient with Hepatorenal Syndrome and Acute Kidney Injury: A Case Report. Nanobubble Ozone Stored in Hyaluronic Acid-Decorated Liposome Solutions: Inactivating Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria and Genotoxicity, Sub-Acute and Sub-Chronic Toxicity Tests. Risk Factor Analysis and Molecular Epidemiological Investigation of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) Infection in Patients with Acute Pancreatitis.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1