Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36830277›Full record

ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Metagenomic Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing from Simulated Native Patient Samples.

Lukas Lüftinger, Peter Májek, Thomas Rattei, Stephan Beisken

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

4 authors.

Lukas LüftingerCentre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, University of Vienna, 1030 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-5997-8236
Peter MájekAres Genetics GmbH, 1030 Vienna, Austria.
Thomas RatteiCentre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, University of Vienna, 1030 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-0592-7791
Stephan BeiskenAres Genetics GmbH, 1030 Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) has been shown to be accurate for many pathogens and antimicrobials. However, these methods have not been systematically evaluated for clinical metagenomic data. We investigate the performance of in-silico AST from clinical metagenomes (MG-AST). Using isolate sequencing data from a multi-center study on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) as well as shotgun-sequenced septic urine samples, we simulate over 2000 complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) metagenomes with known resistance phenotype to 5 antimicrobials. Applying rule-based and machine learning-based genomic AST classifiers, we explore the impact of sequencing depth and technology, metagenome complexity, and bioinformatics processing approaches on AST accuracy. By using an optimized metagenomics assembly and binning workflow, MG-AST achieved balanced accuracy within 5.1% of isolate-derived genomic AST. For poly-microbial infections, taxonomic sample complexity and relatedness of taxa in the sample is a key factor influencing metagenomic binning and downstream MG-AST accuracy. We show that the reassignment of putative plasmid contigs by their predicted host range and investigation of whole resistome capabilities improved MG-AST performance on poly-microbial samples. We further demonstrate that machine learning-based methods enable MG-AST with superior accuracy compared to rule-based approaches on simulated native patient samples.

Indexed as

antimicrobial resistanceantimicrobial susceptibility testingbioinformaticsclinical metagenomicsmachine learningNGS

Identifiers

PMID36830277
PMCPMC9952719

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.