Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28429164›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2017

Detection of gastrointestinal pathogens in oncology patients by highly multiplexed molecular panels.

C C Otto, L H Chen, T He, Y-W Tang, N E Babady

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Prevalence of astrovirus and sapovirus among adult oncology patients with acute gastroenteritis using a multiplexed gastrointestinal pathogen PCR panel.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

C C OttoClinical Microbiology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
L H ChenClinical Microbiology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
T HeClinical Microbiology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Y-W TangClinical Microbiology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
N E BabadyClinical Microbiology Service, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. BabadyN@mskcc.org.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
National Cancer Institute P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolFecesFemaleGastroenteritisHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansMaleMetagenomeMetagenomicsMiddle AgedHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant RecipientMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterOncology PatientPediatric Oncology Patient

Identifiers

PMID28429164
PMCPMC5650546

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.