ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024
Potential of nanopore sequencing for tuberculosis diagnosis and drug resistance detection.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanopore Sequencing in Mycobacterial Diagnostics: Clinical and Laboratory Roles of mNGS and tNGS.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The diagnostic value of Xpert detection combined with nanopore sequencing for tuberculosis in HIV/AIDS patients.Infectious medicine · 2026Article
- The transformative impact of ultra-rapid nanopore sequencing in precision medicine.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Drug resistance mechanisms inFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Utility of Nanopore Sequencing for Tuberculous Serous Effusions.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study evaluates the effectiveness of nanopore sequencing for accurate detection of Mycobacterium tuberculosis pathogens and drug resistance mutations in clinical specimens.
methodsA retrospective analysis of 2,421 specimens from suspected tuberculosis patients admitted to Xi'an Chest Hospital from 2022 to 2023 was conducted, with 131 specimens undergoing via real-time, fluorescence-based quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (qPCR), simultaneous amplification and testing RNA (RNA), Mycobacterium culture, Mycobacterium smear, and nanopore sequencing. Employing clinical tuberculosis diagnoses as the gold standard, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, concordance rate, and Kappa coefficient were measured for the five detection techniques. We compared nanopore sequencing with the Melting Curve method to detect drug-resistant gene mutations.
resultsNanopore sequencing has a significantly higher sensitivity (0.786) for tuberculosis diagnosis compared to qPCR (0.411), RNA (0.411), Mycobacterium culture (0.402), and Mycobacterium smear (0.241), against the gold-standard clinical diagnosis. It also exhibited a greater concordance rate (0.809) and Kappa coefficient (0.488), and outperformed the other methods in terms of the area under the ROC curve. Nanopore sequencing surpassed the Melting Curve method in identifying drug-resistant mutations.
conclusionNanopore sequencing significantly enhances the detection of tuberculosis pathogens and drug-resistant genes.
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.