Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is increasingly being applied in clinical laboratories for unbiased culture-independent diagnosis. Whether it can be a next routine pathogen identification tool has become a topic of concern. We review the current implementation of this new technology for infectious disease diagnostics and discuss the feasibility of transforming mNGS into a routine diagnostic test. Since 2008, numerous studies from over 20 countries have revealed the practicality of mNGS in the work-up of undiagnosed infectious diseases. mNGS performs well in identifying rare, novel, difficult-to-detect and coinfected pathogens directly from clinical samples and presents great potential in resistance prediction by sequencing the antibiotic resistance genes, providing new diagnostic evidence that can be used to guide treatment options and improve antibiotic stewardship. Many physicians recognized mNGS as a last resort method to address clinical infection problems. Although several hurdles, such as workflow validation, quality control, method standardisation, and data interpretation, remain before mNGS can be implemented routinely in clinical laboratories, they are temporary and can be overcome by rapidly evolving technologies. With more validated workflows, lower cost and turnaround time, and simplified interpretation criteria, mNGS will be widely accepted in clinical practice. Overall, mNGS is transforming the landscape of clinical microbiology laboratories, and to ensure that it is properly utilised in clinical diagnosis, both physicians and microbiologists should have a thorough understanding of the power and limitations of this method.

mNGS in clinical microbiology laboratories: on the road to maturity.

Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is emerging as a promising technique for pathogens detection. However, reports on the application of mNGS in mixed pulmonary infection remain scarce. From July 2018 to March 2019, 55 cases were enrolled in this retrospective analysis. Cases were classified into mixed pulmonary infection (36 [65.5%]) and non-mixed pulmonary infection (19 [34.5%]) according to primary diagnoses. The performances of mNGS and conventional test on mixed pulmonary infection diagnosis and pathogen identification were compared. The sensitivity of mNGS in mixed pulmonary infection diagnosis was much higher than that of conventional test (97.2% vs 13.9%; P < 0.01), but the specificity was the opposite (63.2% vs 94.7%; P = 0.07). The positive predictive value of mNGS was 83.3% (95% CI, 68.0–92.5%), and the negative predictive value was 92.3% (95% CI, 62.1–99.6%). A total of 5 (9.1%) cases were identified as mixed pulmonary infection by both conventional tests and mNGS, however, the pathogens identification results were consistent between these two methods in only 1 (1.8%) case. In summary, the pathogens detected by mNGS in 3 (5.5%) cases were consistent with those by conventional test, and only 1 (1.8%) case was mixed pulmonary infection. According to our data, mNGS had a broader spectrum for pathogen detection than conventional tests. In particular, application of mNGS improved the diagnosis of pulmonary fungal infections. Within the 55 cases, mNGS detected and identified fungi in 31 (56.4%) cases, of which only 10 (18.2%) cases were positive for the same fungi by conventional test. The most common pathogen detected by mNGS was Human cytomegalovirus in our study, which was identified in 19 (34.5%) cases of mixed pulmonary infection. Human cytomegalovirus and Pneumocystis jirovecii, which were detected in 7 (12.7%) cases, were the most common co-pathogens in the group of mixed pulmonary infection. mNGS is a promising technique to detect co-pathogens in mixed pulmonary infection, with potential benefits in speed and sensitivity. (retrospectively registered): ChiCTR1900023727. Registrated 9 JUNE 2019.

/pdf/metagenomic-next-generation-sequencing-for-mixed-pulmonary-23dtk3vz74.pdf

Metagenomic next-generation sequencing for mixed pulmonary infection diagnosis.

Although traditional diagnostic techniques of infection are mature and price favorable at present, most of them are time-consuming and with a low positivity. Metagenomic next⁃generation sequencing (mNGS) was studied widely because of identification and typing of all pathogens not rely on culture and retrieving all DNA without bias. Based on this background, we aim to detect the difference between mNGS and traditional culture method, and to explore the relationship between mNGS results and the severity, prognosis of infectious patients. 109 adult patients were enrolled in our study in Shanghai Tenth People’s Hospital from October 2018 to December 2019. The diagnostic results, negative predictive values, positive predictive values, false positive rate, false negative rate, pathogen and sample types were analyzed by using both traditional culture and mNGS methods. Then, the samples and clinical information of 93 patients in the infected group (ID) were collected. According to whether mNGS detected pathogens, the patients in ID group were divided into the positive group of 67 cases and the negative group of 26 cases. Peripheral blood leukocytes, C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin (PCT) and neutrophil counts were measured, and the concentrations of IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, TNF-α, IL-17A, IL-10 and INF-γ in the serum were determined by ELISA. The correlation between the positive detection of pathogens by mNGS and the severity of illness, hospitalization days, and mortality were analyzed. 109 samples were assigned into infected group (ID, 92/109, 84.4%), non-infected group (NID, 16/109, 14.7%), and unknown group (1/109, 0.9%). Blood was the most abundant type of samples with 37 cases, followed by bronchoalveolar lavage fluid in 36 cases, tissue, sputum, pleural effusion, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), pus, bone marrow and nasal swab. In the ID group, the majority of patients were diagnosed with lower respiratory system infections (73/109, 67%), followed by bloodstream infections, pleural effusion and central nervous system infections. The sensitivity of mNGS was significantly higher than that of culture method (67.4% vs 23.6%; P < 0.001), especially in sample types of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (P = 0.002), blood (P < 0.001) and sputum (P = 0.037), while the specificity of mNGS was not significantly different from culture method (68.8% vs 81.3%; P = 0.41). The number of hospitals stays and 28-day-motality in the positive mNGS group were significantly higher than those in the negative group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Age was significant in multivariate logistic analyses of positive results of mNGS. The study found that mNGS had a higher sensitivity than the traditional method, especially in blood, bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and sputum samples. And positive mNGS group had a higher hospital stay, 28-day-mortality, which means the positive of pathogen nucleic acid sequences detection may be a potential high-risk factor for poor prognosis of adult patients and has significant clinical value. MNGS should be used more in early pathogen diagnosis in the future.

/pdf/the-diagnostic-value-of-metagenomic-next-generation-4y1z2t0oqm.pdf

The diagnostic value of metagenomic next⁃generation sequencing in infectious diseases.

Pediatric patients frequently present with illnesses strongly suggesting infection, but without a clearly identified etiology. Our center has recently added a commercially available plasma metagenomic sequencing assay to its available diagnostic testing. Our experience with the first 100 tests suggests that this technology has good clinical performance with >90% sensitivity.

Noninvasive Diagnosis of Infection Using Plasma Next-Generation Sequencing: A Single-Center Experience

Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate the value of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) in peripheral pulmonary infection management by comparing the diagnostic yield of mNGS and traditional pathogen detection methods on interventional specimens obtained by bronchoscopy. Patients and methods This study enrolled patients suspected with pulmonary infection who were admitted to Tianjin Medical University General Hospital from June 2018 to August 2019. Specimens were obtained from bronchoscopy for mNGS analysis and traditional pathogen detection (including bronchoalveolar lavage fluid microbial culture, smear microscopy, and lung biopsy histopathology), and the diagnostic yields were compared between mNGS and traditional methods to evaluate the diagnostic value of mNGS in peripheral pulmonary infection diagnosis. Results In this study, by comparing mNGS with traditional pathogen detection, the results indicated that, first, mNGS identified at least one microbial species in almost 89% of the patients with pulmonary infection; second, mNGS detected microbes related to human diseases in 94.49% of samples from pulmonary infection patients who had received negative results from traditional pathogen detection; third, the accuracy and sensitivity of mNGS are higher than those of traditional pathogen detection; and, finally, mNGS could simultaneously detect and identify a large variety of pathogens. Conclusion Metagenomic NGS analysis provided fast and precise pathogen detection and identification, contributing to prompt and accurate treatment of peripheral pulmonary infection.

/pdf/metagenomic-next-generation-sequencing-versus-traditional-1lu328ijkt.pdf

Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing versus Traditional Pathogen Detection in the Diagnosis of Peripheral Pulmonary Infectious Lesions.

Background Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) was suggested to potentially replace traditional microbiological methodology because of its comprehensiveness. However, clinical experience with application of the test is relatively limited. Methods From April 2017 to December 2017, 511 specimens were collected, and their retrospective diagnoses were classified into infectious disease (347 [67.9%]), noninfectious disease (119 [23.3%]), and unknown cases (45 [8.8%]). The diagnostic performance of pathogens was compared between mNGS and culture. The effect of antibiotic exposure on detection rate was also assessed. Results The sensitivity and specificity of mNGS for diagnosing infectious disease were 50.7% and 85.7%, respectively, and these values outperformed those of culture, especially for Mycobacterium tuberculosis (odds ratio [OR], 4 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.7-10.8]; P < .01), viruses (mNGS only; P < .01), anaerobes (OR, ∞ [95% CI, 1.71-∞]; P < .01) and fungi (OR, 4.0 [95% CI, 1.6-10.3]; P < .01). Importantly, for mNGS-positive cases where the conventional method was inconclusive, 43 (61%) cases led to diagnosis modification, and 41 (58%) cases were not covered by empirical antibiotics. For cases where viruses were identified, broad-spectrum antibiotics were commonly administered (14/27), and 10 of 27 of these cases were suspected to be inappropriate. Interestingly, the sensitivity of mNGS was superior to that of culture (52.5% vs 34.2%; P < .01) in cases with, but not without, antibiotic exposure. Conclusions mNGS could yield a higher sensitivity for pathogen identification and is less affected by prior antibiotic exposure, thereby emerging as a promising technology for detecting infectious diseases.

Yongjun Li

Papers

Microbiological Diagnostic Performance of Metagenomic Next-generation Sequencing When Applied to Clinical Practice.