Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29458686›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical microbiology2018

DNA extraction from primary liquid blood cultures for bloodstream infection diagnosis using whole genome sequencing.

Luke W Anson, Kevin Chau, Nicholas Sanderson, Sarah Hoosdally, Phelim Bradley, Zamin Iqbal, Hang Phan, Dona Foster, Sarah Oakley, Marcus Morgan and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Rescue ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

14 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Luke W AnsonNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Kevin ChauNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Nicholas SandersonNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Sarah HoosdallyNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Phelim BradleyWellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7BN, UK.
Zamin IqbalWellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7BN, UK.
Hang PhanNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Dona FosterNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Sarah OakleyMicrobiology Laboratory, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Marcus MorganMicrobiology Laboratory, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Tim E A PetoNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Modernizing Medical Microbiology Informatics Group MmmigNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Derrick W CrookNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
Louise J PankhurstNuffield Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, OX3 9DU, UK.
University of Oxford · GBJohn Radcliffe Hospital · GBOxford University Hospitals NHS Trust · GBPublic Health England · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeSpeed of bloodstream infection diagnosis is vital to reduce morbidity and mortality. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) performed directly from liquid blood culture could provide single-assay species and antibiotic susceptibility prediction; however, high inhibitor and human cell/DNA concentrations limit pathogen recovery. We develop a method for the preparation of bacterial DNA for WGS-based diagnostics direct from liquid blood culture. METHODOLOGY: We evaluate three commercial DNA extraction kits: BiOstic Bacteraemia, Amplex Hyplex and MolYsis Plus. Differential centrifugation, filtration, selective lysis and solid-phase reversible immobilization bead clean-up are tested to improve human cells/DNA and inhibitor removal. Using WGS (Illumina/MinION), we assess human DNA removal, pathogen recovery, and predict species and antibiotic susceptibility inpositive blood cultures of 44 Gram-negative and 54 Staphylococcus species.Results/Key findings. BiOstic kit extractions yield the greatest mean DNA concentration, 94-301 ng µl

conclusionOur method for DNA preparation allows WGS-based diagnosis direct from blood culture bottles, providing species and antibiotic susceptibility prediction in a single assay.

Indexed as

Blood CultureGenome, BacterialWhole Genome SequencingBacteremiaCatheter-Related InfectionsDNA, BacterialEscherichia coliHumansMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMolecular Diagnostic TechniquesReagent Kits, DiagnosticSequence Analysis, DNAStaphylococcus aureusDNA, BacterialReagent Kits, Diagnosticbacteraemiabloodstream infectionsepsiswhole genome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID29458686
PMCPMC5882078
OpenAlexW2782986315

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.