Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35509078›Full record

ArticleJournal of translational medicine2022

Enhanced DNA and RNA pathogen detection via metagenomic sequencing in patients with pneumonia.

Yukun He, Kechi Fang, Xing Shi, Donghong Yang, Lili Zhao, Wenyi Yu, Yali Zheng, Yu Xu, Xinqian Ma, Li Chen and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Metagenomic next-generation sequencing: new horizons in microbiology.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yukun He *Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Kechi Fang *CAS Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 16 Lincui Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100101, China.
Xing Shi *Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Donghong YangDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Lili ZhaoDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Wenyi YuDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Yali ZhengDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Yu XuDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Xinqian MaDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Li ChenDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Yu XieDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Yan YuDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Jing WangCAS Key Laboratory of Mental Health, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 16 Lincui Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100101, China. wangjing@psych.ac.cn.
Zhancheng GaoDepartment of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China. zcgao@bjmu.edu.cn.
Peking University · CNPeking University People's Hospital · CNInstitute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMetagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is an important supplement to conventional tests for pathogen detections of pneumonia. However, mNGS pipelines were limited by irregularities, high proportion of host nucleic acids, and lack of RNA virus detection. Thus, a regulated pipeline based on mNGS for DNA and RNA pathogen detection of pneumonia is essential.

methodsWe performed a retrospective study of 151 patients with pneumonia. Three conventional tests, culture, loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) and viral quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) were conducted according to clinical needs, and all samples were detected using our optimized pipeline based on the mNGS (DNA and RNA) method. The performances of mNGS and three other tests were compared. Human DNA depletion was achieved respectively by MolYsis kit and pre-treatment using saponin and Turbo DNase. Three RNA library preparation methods were used to compare the detection performance of RNA viruses.

resultsAn optimized mNGS workflow was built, which had only 1-working-day turnaround time. The proportion of host DNA in the pre-treated samples decreased from 99 to 90% and microbiome reads achieved an approximately 20-fold enrichment compared with those without host removal. Meanwhile, saponin and Turbo DNase pre-treatment exhibited an advantage for DNA virus detection compared with MolYsis. Besides, our in-house RNA library preparation procedure showed a more robust RNA virus detection ability. Combining three conventional methods, 76 (76/151, 50.3%) cases had no clear causative pathogen, but 24 probable pathogens were successfully detected in 31 (31/76 = 40.8%) unclear cases using mNGS. The agreement of the mNGS with the culture, LAMP, and viral qPCR was 60%, 82%, and 80%, respectively. Compared with all conventional tests, mNGS had a sensitivity of 70.4%, a specificity of 72.7%, and an overall agreement of 71.5%.

conclusionsA complete and effective mNGS workflow was built to provide timely DNA and RNA pathogen detection for pneumonia, which could effectively remove the host sequence, had a higher microbial detection rate and a broader spectrum of pathogens (especially for viruses and some pathogens that are difficult to culture). Despite the advantages, there are many challenges in the clinical application of mNGS, and the mNGS report should be interpreted with caution.

Indexed as

PneumoniaRNA VirusesSaponinsDeoxyribonucleasesDNAHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansRetrospective StudiesRNASensitivity and SpecificityDeoxyribonucleasesDNARNASaponinsEarly pathogen detectionMetagenomic next-generation sequencingPneumonia

Identifiers

PMID35509078
PMCPMC9066823
OpenAlexW4225395610

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.