ArticleScientific reports2025
Metagenomic next-generation sequencing for concurrent diagnosis of infections and malignancies in patients with lung lesions: a single-center prospective study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Performance of metagenomic next-generation sequencing, Xpert MTB/RIF and acid-fast staining for diagnosing tuberculous pleurisy and empyema.Journal of thoracic disease · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) offers sensitive and rapid pathogen detection and has the added advantage of analyzing chromosomal copy number variations (CNVs) of the host in the same test. This study aimed to evaluate the dual diagnostic performance of mNGS in clinical cases where pulmonary infections and malignancies are difficult to be distinguished. A single-center prospective study was conducted at the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine. The study recruited patients with lung lesions from October 2021 to October 2022 that required differential diagnosis of infection, malignancy, or other pulmonary diseases. The mNGS was used to detect both pathogens and potential CNVs of the host chromosomes to inform presence of neoplasm, and the results were compared to conventional microbiological tests (CMTs), bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) cytology, histology, and clinical composite diagnoses. The mNGS demonstrated a significantly higher sensitivity of infection diagnosis (56.5% vs.39.1% for CMTs, P < 0.05). The CNVs analysis showed moderate sensitivity (38.9%) and high specificity (100%) for diagnosing malignancy, which helped determine lung cancer in 4 cases who were initially considered as pneumonia. Combining CNVs analysis with BALF cytology has increased the sensitivity for detecting malignancy from 38.9% to 55.6%. Furthermore, the sensitivity of CNVs analysis was higher (50%) when bronchoscopy directly found positive signs, such as neoplasm or bronchial mucosal infiltration. This study highlights the dual capacity of mNGS to simultaneously detect infections and malignancies. The integration of both pathogen and tumor detection could significantly enhance clinical decision-making, particularly for patients with overlapping symptoms of infection and 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.