ArticleCritical care medicine2021
Discriminating Bacterial and Viral Infection Using a Rapid Host Gene Expression Test.
Article in Critical care medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
32 citing papers in PubMed, 50 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of azithromycin versus placebo to treat lower respiratory tract infections associated with low procalcitonin: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.The Lancet. Infectious diseases · 2023Trial
- Fast Microbiology: A Pilot Study Comparing Culture-Independent Digital PCR and Blood Culture for Pathogen Detection in Sepsis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Host gene expression analysis in the detection of bacterial and viral etiology in children hospitalized with a suspected severe infection.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Early diagnosis of serious bacterial infection in febrile infants using type I interferon signature.Pediatric research · 2026Article
- A four-gene signature from blood to exclude bacterial etiology of lower respiratory tract infection in adults.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Molecular dynamics of the host response to Streptococcus pneumoniae pneumonia in baboons.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2025Article
- Fever in Children with Cancer: Pathophysiological Insights Using Blood Transcriptomics.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Hidden in plain sight: the impact of human rhinovirus infection in adults.Respiratory research · 2025Review
- A Four-Gene Signature from Blood to Exclude Bacterial Etiology of Lower Respiratory Tract Infection in Adults.Research square · 2025Article
- A Rapid Host Response Blood Test for Bacterial/Viral Infection Discrimination Using a Portable Molecular Diagnostic Platform.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Host gene expression in the Nasopharynx can discriminate microbiologically confirmed viral and bacterial lower respiratory tract infection.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Harnessing the host response for precision infectious disease diagnosis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2024Review
- Review: Diagnostic Potential for Collaborative Pharyngitis Biomarkers.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2024Review
- Host-response transcriptional biomarkers accurately discriminate bacterial and viral infections of global relevance.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group: Scientific Advancements and Future Directions.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2023Article
- Integrated host/microbe metagenomics enables accurate lower respiratory tract infection diagnosis in critically ill children.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2023Article
- Blood RNA alternative splicing events as diagnostic biomarkers for infectious disease.Cell reports methods · 2023Article
- Article
- The Microbial Etiology of Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Adults: from Classical Bacteriology to Host Transcriptional Signatures.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2022Review
- Performance Evaluation of Host Biomarker Combinations for the Diagnosis of Serious Bacterial Infection in Young Febrile Children: A Double-Blind, Multicentre, Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
24 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesHost gene expression signatures discriminate bacterial and viral infection but have not been translated to a clinical test platform. This study enrolled an independent cohort of patients to describe and validate a first-in-class host response bacterial/viral test.
designSubjects were recruited from 2006 to 2016. Enrollment blood samples were collected in an RNA preservative and banked for later testing. The reference standard was an expert panel clinical adjudication, which was blinded to gene expression and procalcitonin results.
settingFour U.S. emergency departments. PATIENTS: Six-hundred twenty-three subjects with acute respiratory illness or suspected sepsis.
interventionsForty-five-transcript signature measured on the BioFire FilmArray System (BioFire Diagnostics, Salt Lake City, UT) in ~45 minutes. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
resultsHost response bacterial/viral test performance characteristics were evaluated in 623 participants (mean age 46 yr; 45% male) with bacterial infection, viral infection, coinfection, or noninfectious illness. Performance of the host response bacterial/viral test was compared with procalcitonin. The test provided independent probabilities of bacterial and viral infection in ~45 minutes. In the 213-subject training cohort, the host response bacterial/viral test had an area under the curve for bacterial infection of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.84-0.94) and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87-0.95) for viral infection. Independent validation in 209 subjects revealed similar performance with an area under the curve of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.78-0.90) for bacterial infection and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.85-0.94) for viral infection. The test had 80.1% (95% CI, 73.7-85.4%) average weighted accuracy for bacterial infection and 86.8% (95% CI, 81.8-90.8%) for viral infection in this validation cohort. This was significantly better than 68.7% (95% CI, 62.4-75.4%) observed for procalcitonin (p < 0.001). An additional cohort of 201 subjects with indeterminate phenotypes (coinfection or microbiology-negative infections) revealed similar performance.
conclusionsThe host response bacterial/viral measured using the BioFire System rapidly and accurately discriminated bacterial and viral infection better than procalcitonin, which can help support more appropriate antibiotic use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.