Key result
VIDISCA-NGS demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 52% (95% CI 31%-73%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI 91%-100%) for detecting viral CNS infections compared to quantitative PCR.
Why the study?
Confirming the diagnosis in viral central nervous system infections can be difficult with currently available diagnostic tools.
Does VIDISCA-NGS improve diagnostic accuracy compared to quantitative PCR in adult patients with suspected viral CNS infections?
Observational (n=73)
Does VIDISCA-NGS improve diagnostic accuracy compared to quantitative PCR in adult patients with suspected viral CNS infections?
Effect estimate: Sensitivity 52%, Specificity 100% (95% CI 31%-73% for sensitivity, 91%-100% for specificity)
VIDISCA-NGS provides 100% specificity but only 52% sensitivity for viral CNS infections, suggesting it can supplement but not replace quantitative PCR.
May supplement but not replace quantitative PCR in suspected viral CNS infections; leaves open adjunctive utility pending prospective validation.
OBJECTIVES: Confirming the diagnosis in viral central nervous system (CNS) infections can be difficult with the currently available diagnostic tools. Virus discovery cDNA-amplified fragment length polymorphism next-generation sequencing (VIDISCA-NGS) is a promising viral metagenomic technique that enables the detection of all viruses in a single assay. We performed a retrospective study on the diagnostic accuracy of VIDISCA-NGS in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of individuals with suspected CNS infections. METHODS: Consecutive adult patients presenting to the Emergency Department or inpatients, who underwent a lumbar puncture for the suspicion of a CNS infection, were included if they were diagnosed with a viral CNS infection, or if a viral CNS infection was initially suspected but eventually a different diagnosis was made. A quantitative PCR panel of the most common causative viruses was performed on CSF of these patients as reference standard and compared with the results of VIDISCA-NGS, the index test. RESULTS: We included 38 individuals with viral CNS infections and 35 presenting with suspected CNS infection for whom an alternative aetiology was finally established. Overall sensitivity and specificity were 52% (95% CI 31%-73%) and 100% (95% CI 91%-100%), respectively. One enterovirus, detected by VIDISCA-NGS, was only identified by quantitative PCR upon retesting. Additional viruses identified by VIDISCA-NGS consisted of GB virus C, human papillomavirus, human mastadenovirus C, Merkel cell polyoma virus and anelloviruses. CONCLUSION: In patients for whom routine diagnostics do not yield a causative pathogen, VIDISCA-NGS can be of additional value as it can detect a broader range of viruses, but it does not perform well enough to replace quantitativePCR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zeggeren et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Suspected central nervous system infections (n=73). VIDISCA-NGS vs. Quantitative PCR panel was evaluated on Diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) (Sensitivity 52%, Specificity 100%, 95% CI 31%-73% for sensitivity, 91%-100% for specificity). VIDISCA-NGS demonstrated an overall sensitivity of 52% (95% CI 31%-73%) and specificity of 100% (95% CI 91%-100%) for detecting viral CNS infections compared to quantitative PCR.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: