Scholarlink

Background and objective <p>Pneumocystis jirovecii (<i>Pj</i>) pneumonia (PJP) is a life-threatening opportunistic infection primarily affecting immunocompromised individuals. Detecting <i>Pj</i> is challenging, particularly in distinguishing between <i>Pj</i> colonization (PJC) and infection. We aimed to systematically evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of various tests in differentiating Pj colonization from infection.</p> Methods <p>Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Original clinical studies reporting sensitivity and specificity data for diagnostic tests such as quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), nested PCR, (1,3)-Beta-D glucan (BDG), metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS), and digital PCR (ddPCR) to differentiate PJC from PJP were included. Quality assessment was performed using QUADAS-2 tool, and data processing followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using either a random-effects or fixed-effects model.</p> Results <p>Twenty-eight studies (2,550 patients, 1,445 with PJP) were included, with moderate methodological quality. The pooled sensitivity of these diagnostic tests was 0.80 (95% CI 0.77–0.82) and specificity was 0.83 (95% CI 0.81–0.85), with a diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 23.12. Among the individual tests, BDG (5 studies) showed high pooled sensitivity (0.83, 95% CI 0.77–0.88) but lower specificity (0.78, 95% CI 0.69–0.85). mNGS (3 studies) had the highest performance, with pooled sensitivity and specificity both at 0.87 (95% CI 0.80–0.92 and 95% CI 0.77–0.94, respectively), and the highest DOR of 41.57. qPCR (19 studies) demonstrated adequate pooled sensitivity (0.78, 95% CI 0.76–0.81) and high specificity (0.83, 95% CI 0.81–0.86), with a DOR of 20.44.</p> Conclusion <p>While BDG has low specificity and mNGS is costly with no standardized interpretation, along with the limited number of relevant studies in BDG and mNGS, this meta-analysis concluded that qPCR remains valuable for distinguishing P. jirovecii infection from colonization. A well-designed randomized clinical trial that standardizes the technical aspects of the qPCR protocol is needed to assess its effectiveness and provide a solid basis for clinical diagnosis.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Diagnostic tests performance in detecting Pneumocystis jirovecii: A systematic review and meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年2月3日

查看全文
  • Ling Zhang,
  • Caopei Zheng,
  • Yuqing Sun,
  • Xue Chen,
  • Yu Wang,
  • Hanxue Xiang,
  • Ying Liang,
  • Feili Wei,
  • Yulin Zhang

摘要

Background and objective

Pneumocystis jirovecii (Pj) pneumonia (PJP) is a life-threatening opportunistic infection primarily affecting immunocompromised individuals. Detecting Pj is challenging, particularly in distinguishing between Pj colonization (PJC) and infection. We aimed to systematically evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of various tests in differentiating Pj colonization from infection.

Methods

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses were performed. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. Original clinical studies reporting sensitivity and specificity data for diagnostic tests such as quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR), nested PCR, (1,3)-Beta-D glucan (BDG), metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS), and digital PCR (ddPCR) to differentiate PJC from PJP were included. Quality assessment was performed using QUADAS-2 tool, and data processing followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Diagnostic performance was evaluated using either a random-effects or fixed-effects model.

Results

Twenty-eight studies (2,550 patients, 1,445 with PJP) were included, with moderate methodological quality. The pooled sensitivity of these diagnostic tests was 0.80 (95% CI 0.77–0.82) and specificity was 0.83 (95% CI 0.81–0.85), with a diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of 23.12. Among the individual tests, BDG (5 studies) showed high pooled sensitivity (0.83, 95% CI 0.77–0.88) but lower specificity (0.78, 95% CI 0.69–0.85). mNGS (3 studies) had the highest performance, with pooled sensitivity and specificity both at 0.87 (95% CI 0.80–0.92 and 95% CI 0.77–0.94, respectively), and the highest DOR of 41.57. qPCR (19 studies) demonstrated adequate pooled sensitivity (0.78, 95% CI 0.76–0.81) and high specificity (0.83, 95% CI 0.81–0.86), with a DOR of 20.44.

Conclusion

While BDG has low specificity and mNGS is costly with no standardized interpretation, along with the limited number of relevant studies in BDG and mNGS, this meta-analysis concluded that qPCR remains valuable for distinguishing P. jirovecii infection from colonization. A well-designed randomized clinical trial that standardizes the technical aspects of the qPCR protocol is needed to assess its effectiveness and provide a solid basis for clinical diagnosis.