ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2017
Can a toxin gene NAAT be used to predict toxin EIA and the severity of
Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Clinical significance of toxin EIA positivity in patients with suspectedJournal of clinical microbiology · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical features of NAAT-positive, toxin-negative Clostridioides difficile infections in South Korea.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2026Article
- Cycle thresholds and discordant 2-step testing for Clostridioides Difficile: Comparison of clinical characteristics and outcomes among discordant and true positive results.Antimicrobial stewardship & healthcare epidemiology : ASHE · 2026Article
- Use of PCR cycle threshold values for toxins A and B quantification in Clostridioides difficile infections.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Comparative evaluation of the STANDARD M10 and XpertJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- Novel Biomarkers, IncludingInfection and immunity · 2023Article
- Validation of Clinical Risk Models for Clostridioides difficileAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2022Article
- Article
- Evaluation of Cycle Threshold, Toxin Concentration, and Clinical Characteristics of Clostridioides difficile Infection in Patients with Discordant Diagnostic Test Results.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Prospective Evaluation of the mariPOC Test for Detection of Clostridioides difficile Glutamate Dehydrogenase and Toxins A/B.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- The Role of Diagnostic Stewardship inCurrent infectious disease reports · 2020Article
- Laboratory Tests for the Diagnosis ofClinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2020Review
- Treatment of Severe and Fulminnant Clostridioides difficile Infection.Current treatment options in gastroenterology · 2019Review
- Dual Reporting of Clostridioides difficile PCR and Predicted Toxin Result Based on PCR Cycle Threshold Reduces Treatment of Toxin-Negative Patients without Increases in Adverse Outcomes.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2019Observational
- Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridium difficile Toxins Reveals Suboptimal Accuracy of Toxin Gene Cycle Thresholds for Toxin Predictions.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2019Article
- PCR cycle threshold to assess a diagnostic stewardship intervention for C. difficile testing.The Journal of infection · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Diagnosis of Methods: A three-stage algorithm was employed for CDI testing, comprising a screening test for glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH), followed by a NAAT, then a toxin enzyme immunoassay (EIA). All diarrhoeal samples positive for GDH and NAAT between 2012 and 2016 were analysed. The performance of the NAAT CT value as a classifier of toxin EIA outcome was analysed using a ROC curve; patient mortality was compared to CTs and toxin EIA via linear regression models. Results: A CT value ≤26 was associated with ≥72% toxin EIA positivity; applying a logistic regression model we demonstrated an association between low CT values and toxin EIA positivity. A CT value of ≤26 was significantly associated ( Discussions: Here we demonstrate that a CT ≤26 indicates more severe CDI and is associated with higher mortality. Samples with a low CT value are often toxin EIA positive, questioning the need for this additional EIA test. Conclusions: A CT ≤26 could be used to assess the potential for severity of CDI and guide patient treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.