Syndromic Panel-Based Testing in Clinical Microbiology.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ramanan P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5740973 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Syndromic Panel-Based Testing in Clinical Microbiology.
Ramanan Poornima P Bryson Alexandra L AL Binnicker Matthew J MJ Pritt Bobbi S BS Patel Robin R
Clinical microbiology reviews 20171115 1
The recent development of commercial panel-based molecular diagnostics for the rapid detection of pathogens in positive blood culture bottles, respiratory specimens, stool, and cerebrospinal fluid has resulted in a paradigm shift in clinical microbiology and clinical practice. This review focuses on U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved/cleared multiplex molecular panels with more than five targets designed to assist in the diagnosis of bloodstream, respiratory tract, gastrointestinal ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Thirty percent of all inherited retinal disease (IRD) is accounted for by conditions with extra-ocular features. This study aimed to establish the genetic diagnostic pick-up rate for IRD patients with one or more extra-ocular features undergoing panel-based screening in a clinical setting. One hundred and six participants, tested on a gene panel which contained both isolated and syndromic IRD genes, were retrospectively ascertained from the Manchester Genomic Diagnostics Laboratory database spanning 6 years (2012-2017). Phenotypic features were extracted from the clinical notes and classified according to Human Phenotype Ontology; all identified genetic variants were interpreted in accordance to the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics guidelines. Overall, 49% (n?=?52) of patients received a probable genetic diagnosis. A further 6% (n?=?6) had a single disease-associated variant in an autosomal recessive disease-relevant gene. Fifty-two percent (n?=?55) of patients had a clinical diagnosis at the time of testing. Of these, 71% (n?=?39) received a probable genetic diagnosis. By contrast, for those without a provisional clinical diagnosis (n?=?51), only 25% (n?=?13) received a probable genetic diagnosis. The clinical diagnosis of Usher (n?=?33) and Bardet-Biedl syndrome (n?=?10) was confirmed in 67% (n?=?22) and 80% (n?=?8), respectively. The testing diagnostic rate in patients with clinically diagnosed multisystemic IRD conditions was significantly higher than those without one (71% versus 25%; p value?<?0.001). The lower pick-up rate in patients without a clinical diagnosis suggests that panel-based approaches are unlikely to be the most effective means of achieving a molecular diagnosis for this group. Here, we suggest that genome-wide approaches (whole exome or genome) are more appropriate.
| S-EPMC7171123 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Real-time PCR has revolutionized the way clinical microbiology laboratories diagnose many human microbial infections. This testing method combines PCR chemistry with fluorescent probe detection of amplified product in the same reaction vessel. In general, both PCR and amplified product detection are completed in an hour or less, which is considerably faster than conventional PCR detection methods. Real-time PCR assays provide sensitivity and specificity equivalent to that of conventional PCR combined with Southern blot analysis, and since amplification and detection steps are performed in the same closed vessel, the risk of releasing amplified nucleic acids into the environment is negligible. The combination of excellent sensitivity and specificity, low contamination risk, and speed has made real-time PCR technology an appealing alternative to culture- or immunoassay-based testing methods for diagnosing many infectious diseases. This review focuses on the application of real-time PCR in the clinical microbiology laboratory.
| S-EPMC1360278 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinical sequencing using a panel of genes has recently been applied worldwide for patients with refractory solid tumors, but the significance of clinical sequencing using gene panel testing remains uncertain. Here we sought to clarify the feasibility and utility of clinical sequencing in the treatment of refractory tumors at our hospital.MethodsA total of 39 patients with advanced solid tumors treated at our hospital between 2018 and 2020 were enrolled in the clinical sequencing. Among them, we identified 36 patients whose tissue samples were of suitable quality for clinical sequencing, and we analyzed the genomic profiles of these tumors.ResultsPathogenic alterations were detected in 28 (78%) of the 36 patients. The most common mutation was TP53 (55%), followed by KRAS (22%), and the highest frequency of gene amplification was ERBB2 (17%). Nine of the 36 patients were identified as candidates for novel molecular-targeted therapy based on their actionable gene alterations, but only one case ended up receiving novel targeted therapy following the genetic tests.ConclusionsOur current results suggested that clinical sequencing might be useful for the detection of pathogenic alterations and the management of additional cancer treatment. However, molecular target based on actionable genomic alteration does not always bridge to subsequent therapy due to clinical deterioration, refusal for unapproved drug, and complexity of clinical trial access. Both improved optimal timing of clinical sequencing and a consensus about its off-label use might help patients receive greater benefit from clinical sequencing.
| S-EPMC7909652 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We aimed to estimate the utility of panel-based pharmacogenetic testing of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Utilization of Clinical Pharmacogenetic Implementation Consortium (CPIC) level A/B drugs after PCI was estimated in a national sample of IBM MarketScan beneficiaries. Genotype data from University of Florida (UF) patients (n = 211) who underwent PCI were used to project genotype-guided opportunities among MarketScan beneficiaries with at least one (N = 105,547) and five (N = 12,462) years of follow-up data. The actual incidence of genotype-guided prescribing opportunities was determined among UF patients. In MarketScan, 50.0% (52,799/105,547) over 1 year and 68.0% (8,473/12,462) over 5 years had ≥ 1 CPIC A/B drug besides antiplatelet therapy prescribed, with a projected incidence of genotype-guided prescribing opportunities of 39% at 1 year and 52% at 5 years. Genotype-guided prescribing opportunities occurred in 32% of UF patients. Projected and actual incidence of genotype-guided opportunities among two cohorts supports the utility of panel-based testing among patients who underwent PCI.
| S-EPMC7214641 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Next-generation sequencing enables testing for multiple genes simultaneously ('panel-based testing') as opposed to sequential testing for one inherited condition at a time ('syndrome-based testing'). This study presents results from patients who underwent hereditary colorectal cancer (CRC) panel-based testing ('ColoNext(™) '). De-identified data from a clinical testing laboratory were used to calculate (1) frequencies for patient demographic, clinical, and family history variables and (2) rates of pathogenic mutations and variants of uncertain significance (VUS). The proportion of individuals with a pathogenic mutation who met national syndrome-based testing criteria was also determined. Of 586 patients, a pathogenic mutation was identified in 10.4%, while 20.1% had at least one VUS. After removing eight patients with CHEK2 mutations and 11 MUTYH heterozygotes, the percentage of patients with 'actionable' mutations that would clearly alter cancer screening recommendations per national guidelines decreased to 7.2%. Of 42 patients with an 'actionable' result, 30 (71%) clearly met established syndrome-based testing guidelines. This descriptive study is among the first to report on a large clinical series of patients undergoing panel-based testing for inherited CRC. Results are discussed in the context of benefits and concerns that have been raised about panel-based testing implementation.
| S-EPMC4127163 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIncluding Clostridioides difficile (CD) in gastrointestinal multiplex molecular panels (GIPCR) presents a diagnostic challenge. Incidental detection by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) without consideration of pretest probability (PTP) may inadvertently delay diagnoses of other treatable causes of diarrhea and lead to prescription of unnecessary antibiotics.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study to determine the frequency at which clinicians characterize PTP and disease severity in adult patients who test positive for CD by GIPCR. We organized subjects into cohorts based on the status of their CD PCR, glutamate dehydrogenase enzyme immunoassay (GDH), and toxin A/B detection, as well as by high, moderate, or low CD PTP. We used multivariable regression models to describe predictors of toxin positivity.ResultsWe identified 483 patients with positive CD PCR targets. Only 22% were positive for both GDH and CD toxin. Among patients with a low PTP for CDI, 11% demonstrated a positive CD toxin result compared to 63% of patients with a high PTP. A low clinician PTP for CD infection (CDI) correlated with a negative CD toxin result compared to cases of moderate-to-high PTP for CDI (odds ratio, 0.19 [95% confidence interval, .10-.36]). Up to 64% of patients with negative GDH and CD toxin received CD treatment. Only receipt of prior antibiotics, fever, and a moderate-to-high clinician PTP were statistically significant predictors of toxin positivity.ConclusionsPatients with a positive CD PCR were likely to receive treatment regardless of PTP or CD toxin results. We recommend that CD positivity on GIPCR be interpreted with caution, particularly in the setting of a low PTP.
| S-EPMC10498342 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesClefts of the lip, alveolus and/or palate (CLA/P) are the most common craniofacial congenital malformations in humans. These oral clefts can be divided into non-syndromic (isolated) and syndromic forms. Many cleft-related syndromes are clinically variable and genetically heterogeneous, making it challenging to distinguish syndromic from non-syndromic cases. Recognition of syndromic/genetic causes is important for personalized tailored care, identification of (unrecognized) comorbidities, and accurate genetic counseling. Therefore, next generation sequencing (NGS)-based targeted gene panel testing is increasingly implemented in diagnostics of CLA/P patients. In this retrospective study, we assess the yield of NGS gene panel testing in a cohort of CLA/P cases.MethodsWhole exome sequencing (WES) followed by variant detection and interpretation in an a priori selected set of genes associated with CLA/P phenotypes was performed in 212 unrelated CLA/P patients after genetic counseling between 2015 and 2020. Medical records including family history and results of additional genetic tests were evaluated.ResultsIn 24 CLA/P cases (11.3%), a pathogenic genetic variant was identified. Twenty out of these 24 had a genetic syndrome requiring specific monitoring and follow-up. Six of these 24 cases (25%) were presumed to be isolated CLA/P cases prior to testing, corresponding to 2.8% of the total cohort. In eight CLA/P cases (3.8%) without a diagnosis after NGS-based gene panel testing, a molecular diagnosis was established by additional genetic analyses (e.g., SNP array, single gene testing, trio WES).ConclusionThis study illustrates NGS-based gene panel testing is a powerful diagnostic tool in the diagnostic workup of CLA/P patients. Also, in apparently isolated cases and non-familial cases, a genetic diagnosis can be identified. Early diagnosis facilitates personalized care for patients and accurate genetic counseling of their families.
| S-EPMC10425715 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The diagnostic workup in patients with a clinical suspicion of lysosomal storage diseases (LSD) is often difficult due to the variability in the clinical phenotype. The gold standard for diagnosis of LSDs consists of enzymatic testing. However, due to the sequential nature of this methodology and inconsistent genotype-phenotype correlations of certain LSDs, finding a diagnosis can be challenging. METHOD:We developed and clinically implemented a gene panel covering 50 genes known to cause LSDs when mutated. Over a period of 18 months, we analyzed 150 patients who were referred for LSD testing and compared these results with the data of patients who were previously enrolled in a scheme of classical biochemical testing. RESULTS:Our panel was able to determine the molecular cause of the disease in 22 cases (15%), representing an increase in diagnostic yield compared to biochemical tests developed for 21 LSDs (4.6%). We were furthermore able to redirect the diagnosis of a mucolipidosis patient who was initially suspected to be affected with galactosialidosis. Several patients were identified as being affected with neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis, which cannot readily be detected by enzyme testing. Finally, several carriers of pathogenic mutations in LSD genes related to the disease phenotype were identified as well, thus potentially increasing the diagnostic yield of the panel as heterozygous deletions cannot be detected. CONCLUSION:We show that the implementation of a gene panel for LSD diagnostics results in an increased yield in comparison to classical biochemical testing. As the panel is able to cover a wider range of diseases, we propose to implement this methodology as a first-tier test in cases of an aspecific LSD presentation, while enzymatic testing remains the first choice in patients with a more distinctive clinical presentation. Positive panel results should however still be enzymatically confirmed whenever possible.
| S-EPMC6393649 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesImplementing new programs to support precision medicine in clinical settings is a complex endeavor. We describe challenges and potential solutions based on the Indiana GENomics Implementation: an Opportunity for the Underserved (INGenious) program at Eskenazi Health-one of six sites supported by the Implementing GeNomics In pracTicE network grant of the National Institutes of Health/National Human Genome Research Institute. INGenious is an implementation of a panel of genomic tests.MethodsWe conducted a descriptive case study of the implementation of this pharmacogenomics program, which has a wide scope (14 genes, 27 medications) and a diverse population (patients who often have multiple chronic illnesses, in a large urban safety-net hospital and its outpatient clinics).ChallengesWe placed the clinical pharmacogenomics implementation challenges into six categories: patient education and engagement in care decision making; clinician education and changes in standards of care; integration of technology into electronic health record systems; translational and implementation sciences in real-world clinical environments; regulatory and reimbursement considerations, and challenges in measuring outcomes. A cross-cutting theme was the need for careful attention to workflow. Our clinical setting, a safety-net health care system, presented some distinctive challenges. Patients often had multiple chronic illnesses and sometimes were taking more than one pharmacogenomics-relevant medication. Reaching patients for recruitment or follow-up was another challenge.ConclusionsNew, large-scale endeavors in health care are challenging. A description of the challenges that we encountered and the approaches that we adopted to address them may provide insights for those who implement and study innovations in other health care systems.
| S-EPMC7543044 | biostudies-literature
Project description:16S ribosomal-ribonucleic acid polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and targeted PCR aid microbiological diagnosis in culture-negative clinical samples. Despite routine clinical use, there remains a paucity of data on their effectiveness across a variety of clinical sample types, and cost-effectiveness. In this 4 year multicentre retrospective observational study, all clinical samples referred for 16S PCR and/or targeted PCR from a laboratory network serving seven London hospitals were identified. Laboratory, clinical, prescribing, and economic variables were analysed. 78/607 samples were 16S PCR positive; pus samples were most frequently positive (29/84; p?<?0.0001), and CSF least (8/149; p?=?0.003). 210/607 samples had targeted PCR (361 targets requested across 23 organisms) with 43/361 positive; respiratory samples (13/37; p?=?0.01) had the highest detection rate. Molecular diagnostics provided a supportive microbiological diagnosis for 21 patients and a new diagnosis for 58. 14/91 patients with prescribing information available and a positive PCR result had antimicrobial de-escalation. For culture-negative samples, mean cost-per-positive 16S PCR result was £568.37 and £292.84 for targeted PCR, equating to £4041.76 and £1506.03 respectively for one prescription change. 16S PCR is more expensive than targeted PCR, with both assisting in microbiological diagnosis but uncommonly enabling antimicrobial change. Rigorous referral pathways for molecular tests may result in significant fiscal savings.
| S-EPMC7224368 | biostudies-literature