ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2024
Application of plasma metagenomic next-generation sequencing improves prognosis in hematology patients with neutropenia or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for infection.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Respiratory and blood samples metagenomic sequencing in diagnosing pulmonary infections in hematologic patients.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- The clinical utility of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in the management of fever in patients with hematological disorders.Nagoya journal of medical science · 2026Article
- The value of second-generation gene sequencing in lung cancer immunotherapy with concurrent infections.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- China Expert consensus on the application of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for the etiological diagnosis of infections in hematological disorders (2024).Blood science (Baltimore, Md.) · 2025Article
- Effect of Interpretation of Positive Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Reports on the Infection Diagnosis in Patients With Hematological Disorders.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Unveils Prognostic Microbial Synergism and Guides Precision Therapy in Candidemia: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- A comprehensive evaluation of plasma metagenomics sequencing for the diagnosis of suspected infection in pediatric patients with hematologic diseases.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Deciphering the pathogen heterogeneity for precise diagnosis and personalized therapeutics of infections after kidney transplantation: insights from metagenomic next-generation sequencing.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is a novel technique for detecting pathogens. This retrospective study evaluated the diagnostic value of mNGS using plasma for infections in hematology patients and its impact on clinical treatment and prognosis in different subgroups of hematology patients. Methods: A total of 153 hematology patients with suspected infection who underwent mNGS using plasma were enrolled in the study. Their clinical histories, conventional microbiological test (CMT) results, mNGS results, treatment and prognosis were retrospectively analyzed. Results: In 153 plasma samples, mNGS yielded a higher positivity rate than CMT (total: 88.24% vs. 40.52%, P<0.001; bacteria: 35.95% vs. 21.57%, P < 0.01; virus: 69.93% vs. 21.57%, P<0.001; fungi: 20.26% vs. 7.84%, P<0.01). mNGS had a higher positivity rate for bacteria and fungi in the neutropenia group than in the non-neutropenia group (bacteria: 48.61% vs. 24.69%, P<0.01; fungi: 27.78% vs. 13.58%, P<0.05). mNGS demonstrated a greater advantage in the group of patients with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Both the 3-day and 7-day efficacy rates in the HSCT group were higher than those in the non-HSCT group (3-day: 82.22% vs. 58.65%, P < 0.01; 7-day: 88.89% vs. 67.31%, P < 0.01), and the 28-day mortality rate was lower in the HSCT group than in the non-HSCT group (6.67% vs. 38.89%, P < 0.000). The neutropenia group achieved similar efficacy and mortality rates to the non-neutropenia group (7-day efficiency rate: 76.39% vs. 71.43%, P > 0.05; mortality rate: 29.17% vs. 29.63%, P > 0.05) with more aggressive antibiotic adjustments (45.83% vs. 22.22%, P < 0.01). Conclusion: mNGS can detect more microorganisms with higher positive rates, especially in patients with neutropenia. mNGS had better clinical value in patients with hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) or neutropenia, which had a positive effect on treatment and prognosis.
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.