ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2024
The diagnostic value of metagenomics next-generation sequencing in HIV-infected patients with suspected pulmonary infections.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid Cytomegalovirus DNA Load as a Predictor of Mortality in AIDS Patients with Pulmonary Infections: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Metagenomic and Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing in Infectious Disease Diagnostics: Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Metagenomic next-generation sequencing for pathogen detection of pulmonary infections in persons living with HIV.AIDS research and therapy · 2025Article
- Application of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in the diagnosis of infectious diseases.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Traditional microbiological detection methods used to detect pulmonary infections in people living with HIV (PLHIV) are usually time-consuming and have low sensitivity, leading to delayed treatment. We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of metagenomics next-generation sequencing (mNGS) for microbial diagnosis of suspected pulmonary infections in PLHIV. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed PLHIV who were hospitalized due to suspected pulmonary infections at the sixth people hospital of Zhengzhou from November 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) samples of PLHIV were collected and subjected to routine microbiological examination and mNGS detection. The diagnostic performance of the two methods was compared to evaluate the diagnostic value of mNGS for unknown pathogens. Results: This study included a total of 36 PLHIV with suspected pulmonary infections, of which 31 were male. The reporting period of mNGS is significantly shorter than that of CMTs. The mNGS positive rate of BALF samples in PLHIV was 83.33%, which was significantly higher than that of smear and culture (44.4%, P<0.001). In addition, 11 patients showed consistent results between the two methods. Futhermore, mNGS showed excellent performance in identifying multi-infections in PLHIV, and 27 pathogens were detected in the BALF of 30 PLHIV by mNGS, among which 15 PLHIV were found to have multiple microbial infections (at least 3 pathogens). Pneumocystis jirovecii, human herpesvirus type 5, and human herpesvirus type 4 were the most common pathogen types. Conclusions: For PLHIV with suspected pulmonary infections, mNGS is capable of rapidly and accurately identifying the pathogen causing the pulmonary infection, which contributes to implement timely and accurate anti-infective treatment.
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.