| Literature DB >> 31775777 |
Libing Yang1,2, Ghady Haidar3, Haris Zia4, Rachel Nettles1, Shulin Qin1,2, Xiaohong Wang1,2, Faraaz Shah2,5, Sarah F Rapport2, Themoula Charalampous6, Barbara Methé1,2, Adam Fitch1, Alison Morris1,2,7, Bryan J McVerry1,2, Justin O'Grady6,8, Georgios D Kitsios9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Metagenomic sequencing of respiratory microbial communities for pathogen identification in pneumonia may help overcome the limitations of culture-based methods. We examined the feasibility and clinical validity of rapid-turnaround metagenomics with Nanopore™ sequencing of clinical respiratory specimens.Entities:
Keywords: Mechanical ventilation; Metagenomics sequencing; Nanopore; Pathogen detection; Pneumonia
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31775777 PMCID: PMC6882222 DOI: 10.1186/s12931-019-1218-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Respir Res ISSN: 1465-9921
Characteristics of enrolled patients. Continuous variables are presented as medians (with interquartile ranges), and categorical variables are presented as N (%)
| Culture-Positive | Culture-Negative | Controls | |
|---|---|---|---|
| N | 9 | 5 | 8 |
| Age, median [IQR], yrs | 58.3 [55.2, 62.6] | 55.8 [45.7, 62.8] | 61.2 [51.9, 67.4] |
| Male, N (%) | 5 (55.6) | 2 (40.0) | 6 (75.0) |
| BMI, median [IQR] | 24.0 [21.5, 34.6] | 31.2 [25.6, 32.9] | 28.1 [25.1, 36.1] |
| SOFA Score, median [IQR]a | 6.0 [4.0, 6.0] | 7.0 [6.0, 7.0] | 5.0 [4.0, 8.0] |
| PaO2:FIO2 ratio, median [IQR], mmHg | 158.0 [137.0, 275.0] | 150.0 [121.0, 208.0] | 221.5 [205.0, 319.5] |
| Heart rate (median [IQR]), beats per minute | 107.0 [92.0, 117.0] | 83.0 [82.0, 88.0] | 81.5 [73.8, 85.5] |
| SBP (median [IQR]) mmHg | 125.0 [102.0, 141.0] | 118.0 [117.0, 127.0] | 105.0 [97.8, 117.5] |
| WBC, median [IQR], × 109 per liter (L) | 10.0 [7.4, 16.8] | 4.6 [3.5, 8.3] | 5.4 [4.5, 11.6] |
| Platelets, median [IQR], × 109 per liter (L) | 190.0 [169.0, 281.0] | 155.0 [136.0, 210.0] | 141.0 [72.2, 171.0] |
| Creatinine, median [IQR], mg/dL | 1.3 [1.1, 1.5] | 1.5 [1.5, 2.0] | 1.0 [0.8, 1.4] |
| Respiratory Rate, median [IQR], 1/min | 22.0 [21.0, 24.0] | 21.0 [20.0, 24.0] | 17.0 [15.5, 17.2] |
| PEEP, median [IQR], cm | 8.0 [5.0, 8.0] | 5.0 [5.0, 8.0] | 5.0 [5.0, 5.8] |
| Tidal Volume (per kg of PBW), (median [IQR]), ml/kg | 6.8 [6.2, 8.4] | 6.2 [6.1, 6.6] | 6.3 [6.0, 7.1] |
| Plateau Pressure, median [IQR], cm | 20.0 [13.0, 23.5] | 25.0 [21.0, 29.0] | 16.0 [13.0, 21.5] |
| Type of mechanical breaths, n (%)b | |||
| Volume control | 7 (77.8) | 4 (80.0) | 8 (100) |
| Pressure control | 2 (22.2) | 1 (20.0) | 0 (0) |
| Ventilator free days, median [IQR], days | 12.0 [0.0, 23.0] | 17.0 [6.0, 23.0] | 24.5 [24.0, 26.0] |
| ICU Length of Stay, median [IQR], days | 8.0 [5.0, 18.0] | 11.0 [6.0, 12.0] | 4.5 [3.8, 5.0] |
| Acute Kidney Injury, N (%) | 8 (88.9) | 4 (80.0) | 2 (25.0) |
| 30 Day Mortality, N (%) | 3 (33.3) | 1 (20.0) | 1 (12.5) |
| On antibiotic therapy, N (%) | 9 (100) | 5 (100) | 5 (62.5) |
| Antibiotic days, median [IQR], days | 12.0 [10.0, 24.0] | 21.0 [20.0, 24.0] | 3.5 [0.0, 7.5] |
| CPIS, median [IQR], | 8.0 [7.0, 9.0] | 6.0 [5.0, 7.0] | 5.0 [4.0, 5.2] |
| Procalcitonin, median [IQR], pg/μl | 2783.0 [1049.5, 4330.1] | 4866.0 [94.4, 4965.1] | 353.5 [250.4, 1531.6] |
Abbreviations: IQR Interquartile range, BMI Body mass index, SOFA Sequential organ failure assessment, PaO Partial pressure of arterial oxygen, FiO Fractional inhaled concentration of oxygen, SBP Systolic blood pressure, WBC White blood cell count, PEEP Positive end-expiratory pressure, PBW Predicted body weight, ICU Intensive care unit, CPIS Clinical pulmonary infection score
a SOFA score calculation does not include the neurologic component of SOFA score because all patients were intubated and receiving sedative medications, impairing our ability to perform assessment of the Glasgow Coma Scale in a consistent and reproducible fashion
b All patients were on assist controls mode of ventilation at time of sample acquisition
Fig. 1Saponin-based human DNA depletion effectively removed human DNA without changing bacterial community structure. a Before human DNA depletion, 1% of Nanopore reads were of microbial origin; following human DNA depletion, 48% of Nanopore reads were of Microbial origin. b There was no significant difference in alpha diversity of bacterial communities between depleted and undepleted samples assessed by 16S rRNA gene sequencing. c Non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) plot of the Bray-Curtis dissimilarity index between depleted and undepleted samples based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Depleted samples were compositionally similar to undepleted samples (PERMANOVA, p-value = 0.17)
Fig. 2Comparisons of lung microbiome between culture-positive pneumonia, culture-negative pneumonia and controls based on Nanopore sequencing. a Compared to samples from patients with culture-negative pneumonia, culture-positive samples had a trend for lower alpha diversity of lung microbial communities by Shannon index. b By non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) plot of the Bray-Curtis dissimilarity index, there were significant differences in overall microbial community compositions between three groups (PERMANOVA for Bray-Curtis dissimilarity index, p value= 0.038, R2 = 0.120)
Fig. 3Comparisons of microbes detected by Nanopore metagenomic sequencing and clinical culture. Each small plot represents an endotracheal aspirate; each bar represents a microbe; the X-axis represents the relative abundance of microbes by Nanopore. Petri dish represents pathogen isolated by clinical culture. The three most abundant taxa detected by Nanopore sequencing were included. a In 8 samples with culture-positive bacterial pneumonia, Nanopore signals were dominated by pathogens isolated by culture. b In 8 samples with culture-positive bacterial pneumonia, the relative abundance of culture-positive pathogens was 90-times higher than that of the second-ranked taxa detected by Nanopore. c In 1 sample with probable invasive fungal infection, chest radiograph supported a clinical diagnosis of pneumonia, Aspergillus fumigatus was isolated by culture, and Nanopore revealed the same fungal pathogen by sequencing. d In 5 culture-negative pneumonia samples, potential pathogens were found in one sample, and fungi were found in 3 samples with Nanopore. e Only typical oral bacteria were identified in 5/8 of control samples, but potential pathogens were detected in 3/8 of them. * compared to culture of pleural fluid; ** case of culture-positive tracheobronchitis and acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (no infiltrate on chest radiograph)
Comparison of antibiotic resistance phenotype and clinically relevant resistance genes in cases of bacterial pneumonia. The antibiotic resistance phenotype was detected by clinical culture and clinically relevant resistance genes were detected by Nanopore. Genes conferring resistance phenotype are highlighted in bold
| Case | Pathogen by culture & Nanopore | Resistance phenotype by culture | Clinically relevant resistance genes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Resistance identified | |||
| Case 1 | R: ticarcillin/clavulanic acid R: ceftazidime | blaTEM-4 [4] blaTEM-112 [1] blaTEM-157 [1] blaACT-5 [1] | |
| I: levofloxacin | oqxB [1] | ||
| Tetracycline not tested | |||
| Case 2 | R: methicillin | mecA [4] | |
| R: erythromycin, clindamycin | ermA [10] erm (33) [1] | ||
| Case 3 | I: tetracycline | tetK [1] tet38 [1] tetQ [1] | |
| Case 4 | R: tetracycline | tetX [1] | |
R: Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole R: ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin | sul1 [363] dfrA [127] | ||
acrF [315]a parE [304]a mfd [277]a | |||
| No resistance identified | |||
| Case 5 | S: all tested agents | none | |
| Case 6 | S: all tested agents | ||
| Case 7 | S: all tested agents | none | |
| Resistance not tested | |||
| Case 8 | Not tested | ||
Abbreviations: R Resistant, I Intermediate, S Susceptible
a Genes conferring antibiotic resistance phenotype but not classified as clinical relevant genes by EPI2ME antimicrobial resistance gene analyses [ARMA workflow]
Tested agents for case 5: Ampicillin/Sulbactum, Oxacillin, Imipenem, Gentamicin, Erthromycin, Tetracycline, Vancomycin, Clindamycin, Linezolid, Rifampin, Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, Synercid
Tested agents for case 6: Ampicillin/Sulbactum, Oxacillin, Imipenem, Gentamicin, Erthromycin, Tetracycline
Tested agents for case 7: Piperacillin/Tazobactum, Ticarcillin/Clavulanic acid, Cefepime, Ceftazidime, Imipenem, Meropenem, Aztreonam, Gentamicin, Tobramycin, Amikacin, Ciprofloxacin, Levofloxacin