| Title |
Development and evaluation of a culture-free microbiota profiling platform (MYcrobiota) for clinical diagnostics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10096-018-3220-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefan A. Boers, Saskia D. Hiltemann, Andrew P. Stubbs, Ruud Jansen, John P. Hays |
| Abstract |
Microbiota profiling has the potential to greatly impact on routine clinical diagnostics by detecting DNA derived from live, fastidious, and dead bacterial cells present within clinical samples. Such results could potentially be used to benefit patients by influencing antibiotic prescribing practices or to generate new classical-based diagnostic methods, e.g., culture or PCR. However, technical flaws in 16S rRNA gene next-generation sequencing (NGS) protocols, together with the requirement for access to bioinformatics, currently hinder the introduction of microbiota analysis into clinical diagnostics. Here, we report on the development and evaluation of an "end-to-end" microbiota profiling platform (MYcrobiota), which combines our previously validated micelle PCR/NGS (micPCR/NGS) methodology with an easy-to-use, dedicated bioinformatics pipeline. The newly designed bioinformatics pipeline processes micPCR/NGS data automatically and summarizes the results in interactive, but simple web reports. In order to explore the utility of MYcrobiota in clinical diagnostics, 47 clinical samples (40 "damaged skin" samples and 7 synovial fluids) were investigated using routine bacterial culture as comparator. MYcrobiota confirmed the presence of bacterial DNA in 37/37 culture-positive samples and detected bacterial taxa in 2/10 culture-negative samples. Moreover, 36/38 potentially relevant aerobic bacterial taxa and 3/3 mixtures of anaerobic bacteria were identified using culture and MYcrobiota, with the sensitivity and specificity being 95%. Interestingly, the majority of the 448 bacterial taxa identified using MYcrobiota were not identified using culture, which could potentially have an impact on clinical decision-making. Taken together, the development of MYcrobiota is a promising step towards the introduction of microbiota analysis into clinical diagnostic laboratories. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 35% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 7 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 11% |
| Engineering | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Unknown | 7 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 March 2018.
All research outputs
#5,810,623
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#587
of 2,793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,347
of 333,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases
#7
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,793 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,153 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.