Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34988184›Full record

ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2021

Applying the pathogen-targeted next-generation sequencing method to pathogen identification in cerebrospinal fluid.

Daiquan Gao, Yongqiang Hu, Xuebin Jiang, Hao Pu, Zhendong Guo, Yunzhou Zhang

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Daiquan GaoDepartment of Neurology, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Yongqiang HuDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Beijing Fengtai You'anmen Hospital, Beijing, China.
Xuebin JiangIntensive Care Unit, Renhe Hospital, Beijing, China.
Hao PuDepartment of Science and Technology, Shanghai Pathogeno Medical Technology Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Zhendong GuoDepartment of Science and Technology, Shanghai Pathogeno Medical Technology Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China.
Yunzhou ZhangDepartment of Neurology, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China.
Capital Medical University · CNBeijing Fengtai Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) culture is a widely used method for the diagnosis of meningitis, but its detection sensitivity is low. Several new methods have been developed for pathogen detection, including metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and pathogen-targeted NGS (ptNGS). In this study, we aimed to evaluate the performance of ptNGS in pathogen detection in CSF.

methodsCSF specimens were acquired from 38 patients with meningitis who were diagnosed at Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University between October 2020 and February 2021. DNA was extracted from the CSF samples, and pathogens were identified using both ptNGS and mNGS. SPSS 22.0 software was used to compare the pathogen detection performance of ptNGS and mNGS in CSF.

resultsAmong the 38 patients with meningitis, 14 had a non-infectious disease (NID) and 24 had an infectious disease (ID). Of the 38 samples, both ptNGS and mNGS detected 9 (23.7%) positive samples, and 12 (31.6%) negative samples. Thirteen (34.2%) samples were detected to be positive by ptNGS only, and 4 (10.5%) were detected to be positive by mNGS only. The positivity rate detected by ptNGS for the ID group was higher than that detected by mNGS (P=0.080), and the positivity rates detected by ptNGS and mNGS for the NID group were comparable. The positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of diagnosing an ID by ptNGS were 77.3% and 56.3%, respectively. While, the PPV and NPV of diagnosing an ID by mNGS were 76.9% and 44.0%, respectively. ptNGS increased the sensitivity rate by approximately 70%. The sensitivity rate of ptNGS was higher than that of mNGS (70.8%

conclusionsptNGS has a number of advantages over mNGS, including its sensitivity, timeliness, and economy, all factors that are important considerations in clinical use.

Indexed as

cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)Meningitisnext-generation sequencing (NGS)pathogen

Identifiers

PMID34988184
PMCPMC8667110
OpenAlexW3215520776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.