ArticleRespiratory research2026
Blood-based targeted sequencing of microbial cell-free DNA in severe pneumonia-associated sepsis.
Article in Respiratory research, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) improves pathogen detection in severe pneumonia-related sepsis, but sampling is invasive and prone to false-positive results. Blood is easier to obtain, and broad-spectrum targeted NGS (tNGS) of microbial cell-free DNA may offer a practical alternative to BALF-based testing. We evaluated the diagnostic and prognostic value of blood-based bstNGS.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort, 122 adults with suspected severe pneumonia-related sepsis and paired BALF and blood samples underwent BALF-mNGS, blood-bstNGS and blood-mNGS. Pathogens were adjudicated using a composite clinical reference. We assessed blood-BALF concordance, compared diagnostic performance across methods, and examined whether blood-bstNGS could down-weight likely false-positive BALF-only detections and stratify prognosis.
resultsBALF-mNGS identified 414 microorganisms; 51% were adjudicated as causative or possibly causative, corresponding to 85.24% of patients. Among these pathogenic microorganisms, blood-bstNGS detected 45.02%, significantly more than blood-mNGS (22.27%), and nearly all pathogens detected by blood-mNGS were also detected by blood-bstNGS. Against the clinical reference, blood-bstNGS showed higher sensitivity (63.46%) than blood-mNGS (35.58%), conventional microbiological tests (CMTs) (49.04%), and blood culture (9.62%). Organisms detected only in BALF but not in blood were less likely to be classified as causative. Patients with concordant blood-bstNGS and BALF-mNGS profiles had significantly lower 30-day and 90-day mortality.
conclusionsIn severe pneumonia-related sepsis, blood-bstNGS provides sensitive, non-invasive pathogen detection. It acts as a complementary tool rather than a replacement for BALF-mNGS, offering an important diagnostic alternative when BALF is unavailable and improving specificity and prognostic utility when used in combination.
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.