ArticleScientific reports2024
Metagenomic next-generation sequencing and galactomannan testing for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Clinical classification of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with invasive pulmonary aspergillosis: a retrospective study.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Article
- First Case of Concurrent Cytomegalovirus andInfection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Identification of Clinical Characteristics and Risk Factors of Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis in Patients with Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome: A Retrospective Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Concurrent pretreatment serum and BALF galactomannan positivity as a prognostic indicator in non-neutropenic invasive pulmonary aspergillosis without malignancy or solid organ transplantation: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Metagenomic sequencing for identification of nontuberculous mycobacteria and other pathogens in patients with mixed infection of the lung.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate the diagnostic value of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and galactomannan (GM) testing in invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) and to compare mNGS with other diagnostic approaches (serum/bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF)-GM and conventional microbiological tests (CMTs) including sputum smears and culture, BALF fungal culture, and bronchial brushing). In all, 237 patients were enrolled in this retrospective study, including 120 patients with IPA and 117 with non-IPA pulmonary infections treated at Henan Provincial People's Hospital between June 2021 and February 2024. The diagnostic performance of mNGS was compared to conventional diagnostic methods including serum GM, BALF-GM, sputum smear microscopy, sputum culture, bronchial brushings, and BALF culture. The proportion of patients with underlying diseases was significantly higher in the IPA group than in the non-IPA group (P < 0.05). Compared to conventional diagnostic methods for IPA, mNGS showed higher diagnostic efficacy, with a sensitivity of 92.5% and a specificity of 94.02%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for BALF-GM for diagnosing IPA was 0.8, with an optimal cutoff value of 0.546, sensitivity of 66.7%, and specificity of 82.1%. The combination of mNGS and BALF-GM testing further improved diagnostic performance (sensitivity of 96.67% and specificity of 78.63%). mNGS testing has excellent diagnostic efficacy for IPA, which is further enhanced by combining it with BALF-GM testing. This approach has considerable potential for the early diagnosis and targeted treatment of IPA.
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.