ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Diagnostic performance of the Sepsis qPCR MX-30
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFebrile neutropenia (FN) is a frequent and potentially life-threatening complication in patients with hematologic malignancies. Prompt and accurate identification of bloodstream pathogens is essential to optimize antimicrobial therapy and improve outcomes. Although conventional blood culture (BC) remains the diagnostic gold standard, its limitations have led to increased interest in rapid molecular diagnostics such as real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR).
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the Sepsis qPCR MX-30
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on 251 febrile neutropenia episodes in 80 children with hematologic disorders between February 2023 and November 2024. Blood samples for both BC and the Sepsis qPCR MX-30
resultsOf the 251 episodes, the qPCR panel detected pathogens in 54 episodes (21.5%), while BC confirmed infection in 45 episodes (17.9%). Overall accuracy was 68.5% (172/251 episodes with agreement on presence or absence of infection). Among the 10 episodes positive by both methods, pathogen-level concordance (same organism detected) was observed in 7 episodes (70%). The calculated sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of the qPCR panel were 22.2%, 78.6%, 18.5%, and 82.2%, respectively. Discordant results were frequent: 44 qPCR-positive cases were BC-negative, and 35 BC-positive cases were not detected by qPCR.Notably, the panel enabled early detection of several antimicrobial resistance genes and fungal pathogens not identified by culture.
conclusionThe Sepsis qPCR MX-30 CLINICAL TRIAL: Not applicable.
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.