ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2025
Diagnostic value of metagenomic next generation sequencing of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid in immunocompromised patients with pneumonia.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Diagnostic value of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for bacterial and fungal detection and its role in antimicrobial therapy adjustment in critically ill patients with non-resolving pneumonia.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Harnessing next-generation microbial diagnostics to optimize infection management in immunocompromised hosts.Current opinion in infectious diseases · 2026Review
- Drug-resistant tuberculosis and pulmonary co-infections in immunocompromised patients: from multi-omics to precision therapy.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Performance of Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid Metagenomic Next‑generation Sequencing versus Conventional Microbiological Tests in Immunocompromised and Immunocompetent Patients with Pulmonary Infection.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Article
- Metagenomic next-generation sequencing for diagnosis of immune checkpoint inhibitor-associated pneumonitis: a retrospective comparative clinical performance study.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio as prognostic indicators inFrontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Diagnostic performance and clinical utility of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in suspected pulmonary infections: a comparative study stratified by immune status.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
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
Background: Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) enables simultaneous sequencing of DNA fragments for comprehensive pathogen identification. Pneumonia in immunocompromised patients-characterized by atypical clinical manifestations and rapid progression-poses diagnostic challenges. Conventional microbiological testing (CMT), which relies on pathogen culture and serological assays, is limited by prolonged turnaround times and suboptimal detection rates. This study was performed to evaluate the clinical utility of mNGS through comparative analysis with CMT in detecting pathogens among immunocompromised patients with pneumonia. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 146 immunocompromised patients with suspected pneumonia. The mNGS and CMT results were systematically analyzed. Pathogen detection rates and microbial spectrum concordance were visualized using pie and bar charts. Diagnostic performance was compared using McNemar's test and Kappa (κ) statistics for inter-method agreement. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the curve were calculated for pathogen-specific evaluations. Results: mNGS demonstrated superior detection efficacy, identifying pathogens in 98 cases versus 50 by CMT, with 48 overlapping positives. The microbial spectrum showed substantial differences: mNGS detected 73 bacterial, 46 fungal, and 45 viral pathogens, whereas CMT identified 38 bacterial, 27 fungal, and 21 viral agents. mNGS outperformed CMT across all infection types, including single-pathogen infections (bacterial, fungal, or viral only) and mixed infections (bacterial + fungal, bacterial + viral, fungal + viral, or bacterial + fungal + viral). Bacterial and fungal detections showed low inter-method concordance, while viral detection exhibited moderate agreement (κ = 0.510, Conclusions: mNGS and CMT demonstrate complementary strengths in bacterial and fungal detection in immunocompromised patients with pneumonia. mNGS provides enhanced diagnostic accuracy for key pathogens such as
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.