MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285676647 · doi:10.1101/2022.07.16.22277700

Integrated host-microbe metagenomics for sepsis diagnosis in critically ill adults

2022· preprint· en· W4285676647 on OpenAlexaff
Katrina Kalantar, Lucile Neyton, Mazin Abdelghany, Eran Mick, Alejandra Jáuregui, Saharai Caldera, Paula Hayakawa Serpa, Rajani Ghale, Jack Albright, Aartik Sarma, Alexandra Tsitsiklis, Aleksandra Leligdowicz, S. Christenson, Kathleen D. Liu, Kirsten N. Kangelaris, Carolyn M. Hendrickson, Pratik Sinha, Antonio Gomez, Norma Neff, Angela Oliveira Pisco, Sarah B. Doernberg, Joseph L. DeRisi, Michael A. Matthay, Carolyn S. Calfee, Charles Langelier

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility Testing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSepsisMedicineCohortMetagenomicsProcalcitoninInternal medicineReceiver operating characteristicArea under the curveImmunologyGeneIntensive care medicineBioinformaticsBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Sepsis is a leading cause of death, and improved approaches for disease diagnosis and detection of etiologic pathogens are urgently needed. Here, we carried out integrated host and pathogen metagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS) of whole blood (n=221) and plasma RNA and DNA (n=138) from critically ill patients following hospital admission. We assigned patients into sepsis groups based on clinical and microbiological criteria: 1) sepsis with bloodstream infection (Sepsis BSI ), 2) sepsis with peripheral site infection but not bloodstream infection (Sepsis non-BSI ), 3) suspected sepsis with negative clinical microbiological testing; 4) no evidence of infection (No-Sepsis), and 5) indeterminant sepsis status. From whole blood gene expression data, we first trained a bagged support vector machine (bSVM) classifier to distinguish Sepsis BSI and Sepsis non-BSI patients from No-Sepsis patients, using 75% of the cohort. This classifier performed with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.81 in the training set (75% of cohort) and an AUC of 0.82 in a held-out validation set (25% of cohort). Surprisingly, we found that plasma RNA also yielded a biologically relevant transcriptional signature of sepsis which included several genes previously reported as sepsis biomarkers (e.g., HLA-DRA, CD-177 ). A bSVM classifier for sepsis diagnosis trained on RNA gene expression data performed with an AUC of 0.97 in the training set and an AUC of 0.77 in a held-out validation set. We subsequently assessed the pathogen-detection performance of DNA and RNA mNGS by comparing against a practical reference standard of clinical bacterial culture and respiratory viral PCR. We found that sensitivity varied based on site of infection and pathogen, with an overall sensitivity of 83%, and a per-pathogen sensitivity of 100% for several key sepsis pathogens including S. aureus, E. coli, K. pneumoniae and P. aeruginosa . Pathogenic bacteria were also identified in 10/37 (27%) of patients in the No-Sepsis group. To improve detection of sepsis due to viral infections, we developed a secondary RNA host transcriptomic classifier which performed with an AUC of 0.94 in the training set and an AUC of 0.96 in the validation set. Finally, we combined host and microbial features to develop a proof-of-concept integrated sepsis diagnostic model that identified 72/73 (99%) of microbiologically confirmed sepsis cases, and predicted sepsis in 14/19 (74%) of suspected, and 8/9 (89%) of indeterminate sepsis cases. In summary, our findings suggest that integrating host transcriptional profiling and broad-range metagenomic pathogen detection from nucleic acid may hold promise as a tool for sepsis diagnosis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicBacterial Identification and Susceptibility TestingFrench-language works237,207