ArticleAPMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica2025
Next Generation Sequencing Improves Diagnostic 16S rRNA Amplicon-Based Microbiota Analyses of Clinical Samples Compared to Sanger Sequencing.
Article in APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica, 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.
- Microbiological Profiling of Menstrual Blood Aspirated from the Uterus in Patients Undergoing Frozen Embryo Transfer.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Mesoporous and magnetic nanoparticle-based delivery of 1-hydroxyphenazine extracted from Pseudomonas aeruginosa enhances antimicrobial activity against different bacterial pathogens.Folia microbiologica · 2026Article
- Next Generation Sequencing Improves Diagnostic 16S rRNA Amplicon-Based Microbiota Analyses of Clinical Samples Compared to Sanger Sequencing.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sequencing of the 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene is an important tool in addition to conventional methods for the identification of bacterial pathogens in human infections. In polymicrobial samples, Sanger sequencing can produce uninterpretable chromatograms. This limitation can be overcome by Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) of the 16S rRNA gene. We investigated the applicability of Oxford Nanopore Technologies (ONT) sequencing of the partial 16S rRNA gene as a diagnostic routine method for pathogen detection in clinical samples. From June 2021 to August 2022, 101 clinical samples positive in PCR for partial 16S rRNA gene analysis were subjected to both Sanger and ONT sequencing. Sanger sequences were edited and compared with deposited sequences in the NCBI database using BLAST, while ONT data were processed using EPI2ME Fastq 16S. The positivity rate (clinically relevant pathogen) was higher for ONT vs. Sanger sequencing: 72% and 59%, respectively. Concordance between Sanger and ONT sequencing was 80%. Furthermore, ONT detected more samples with polymicrobial presence compared to Sanger (13 vs. 5) sequencing. Interestingly, in one joint fluid sample, Borrelia bissettiiae was identified by ONT but not by Sanger. The results show that the detection of both monobacterial and multiple bacterial species is improved using ONT.
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.