ArticleAnnals of medicine2026
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.
Article in Annals of medicine, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionEarly targeted antibiotic therapy is critical for improving outcomes in ICU patients with pneumonia unresponsive to initial treatment. Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is a unique diagnostic tool; however, its effectiveness for high-risk populations remains unclear.
methodsThis retrospective study included 642 ICU patients with pneumonia unresponsive to initial treatment, categorized into single- or repeat-test groups based on mNGS testing frequency. We analyzed the results of mNGS and conventional microbiological tests (CMTs), compared microbial detection characteristics between patients with different immune statuses, assessed the impact of repeat testing on microbial detection and treatment adjustments and evaluated its association with patient prognosis using multivariable logistic regression and propensity score matching.
resultsAmong 642 patients, patient-level agreement between mNGS and CMTs was low (κ = 0.180,
conclusionmNGS is a valuable microbial detection tool for ICU patients with pneumonia unresponsive to initial treatment and can support early antimicrobial adjustment. Repeat testing can provide information on dynamic changes in the microbial spectrum during disease but was not associated with improved patient outcomes, suggesting that repeat testing frequency should be carefully considered to avoid unnecessary testing. mNGS results should be interpreted in conjunction with CMTs, host immune status and inflammatory biomarkers to optimise its clinical value in ICU pneumonia.
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.