ArticleRespiratory research2025
One-step diagnosis of infection and lung cancer using metagenomic sequencing.
Article in Respiratory research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical research advances in pulmonary infections in 2025: a narrative review of multipathogen assessment, precision diagnosis, and integrated management.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- MARM: a framework for malignancy risk prediction from host-derived CNV in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid mNGS data with microbial admixture.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Pathogen spectrum and management strategies for opportunistic infections in lung cancer in the immunotherapy era: recent advances from fungi to mycobacteria.American journal of cancer research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTraditional detection methods face challenges in meeting the diverse clinical needs for diagnosing both lung cancer and infections within a single test. Onco-mNGS has emerged as a promising solution capable of accurately identifying infectious pathogens and tumors simultaneously. However, critical evidence is still lacking regarding its diagnostic performance in distinguishing between pulmonary infections, tumors, and non-infectious, non-tumor conditions in real clinical settings.
methodsIn this study, data were gathered from 223 participants presenting symptoms of lung infection or tumor who underwent Onco-mNGS testing. Patients were categorized into four groups based on clinical diagnoses: infection, tumor, tumor with infection, and non-infection-non-tumor. Comparisons were made across different groups, subtypes, and stages of lung cancer regarding copy number variation (CNV) patterns, microbiome compositions, and clinical detection indices.
resultsCompared to conventional infection testing methods, Onco-mNGS demonstrates superior infection detection performance, boasting a sensitivity of 81.82%, specificity of 72.55%, and an overall accuracy of 77.58%. In lung cancer diagnosis, Onco-mNGS showcases excellent diagnostic capabilities with sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value reaching 88.46%, 100%, 91.41%, 100%, and 90.98%, respectively. In bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) samples, these values stand at 87.5%, 100%, 94.74%, 100%, and 91.67%, respectively. Notably, more abundant CNV mutation types and higher mutation rates were observed in adenocarcinoma (ADC) compared to squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Concurrently, onco-mNGS data revealed specific enrichment of Capnocytophaga sputigeria in the ADC group and Candida parapsilosis in the SCC group. These species exhibited significant correlations with C reaction protein (CRP) and CA153 values. Furthermore, Haemophilus influenzae was enriched in the early-stage SCC group and significantly associated with CRP values.
conclusionsOnco-mNGS has exhibited exceptional efficiencies in the detection and differentiation of infection and lung cancer. This study provides a novel technological option for achieving single-step precise and swift detection of lung cancer.
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.