A new method using rapid Nanopore metagenomic cell-free DNA sequencing to diagnose 1 bloodstream infections: a prospective observational study 2

Bloodstream infections (BSIs) remain a major cause of mortality, in part due to many patients 15 developing sepsis or septic shock. To survive sepsis, it is paramount that effective antimicrobial


Background
Bloodstream infections (BSIs) remain a major cause of mortality, in part due to many patients developing sepsis or septic shock.To survive sepsis, it is paramount that effective antimicrobial therapy is initiated rapidly to avoid excess mortality, but the current gold-standard to identify the pathogen in BSIs, blood culturing, has great limitations with a long turnaround time and a poor sensitivity.This delay to correct empiric broad-spectrum antimicrobial treatments leads to excess mortality and antimicrobial resistance development.

Methods
In this study we developed a metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) assay utilizing the Oxford Nanopore Technologies platform to sequence microbial cell-free DNA from blood plasma.The method was evaluated in a prospective observational clinical study (n=40) in an emergency ward setting, where a study sample was taken from the same venipuncture as a blood culture sample from patients with a suspected BSI.Findings Nanopore mNGS confirmed all findings in patients with a positive blood culture (n=11), and identified pathogens relevant to the acute infection in an additional 11 patients with a negative blood culture.In an analysis of potential impact on the antibiotic treatment, we found that 59% (n=13) of mNGS positive answers could have impacted the treatment, with five cases of a change from ineffective to effective therapy.Interpretation This study demonstrates that culture-independent Nanopore mNGS directly on blood plasma could be a feasible alternative to blood culturing for infection diagnostics for patients admitted with a severe infection or sepsis.The method identified a relevant pathogen in patients with a broad range of etiologies including urinary tract infections and lower respiratory tract infections.With a turnaround time of 6 hours the method could provide unprecedented speed and sensitivity in BSI diagnostics.

Introduction
Bloodstream infections (BSIs) are frequent and associated with a high mortality due to the development of sepsis. 1 The Global Burden of Disease study, 2 found that there were 50 million sepsis cases and 11 million sepsis related deaths in 2017, constituting nearly 20% of all global deaths.To treat sepsis, the current international guideline recommends that broad-spectrum empiric antibiotic treatment should be administered ideally within 1 hour from its recognition. 3However, the empiric antibiotic treatment does not cover the causative pathogen in 20% of cases, and these patients have increased mortality (data from US and Canada). 4,5To facilitate a targeted and effective antibiotic treatment to improve sepsis survival, an accurate and rapid identification of the causative pathogen and its antimicrobial susceptibility is crucial.However, gold-standard blood culturing fails to diagnose >50% of patients with clinical sepsis, possibly due to prior antibiotic treatment or a microbial load below the limit of detection. 6Further, blood culturing has a turnaround time of 24-72 hours, which contrasts the urgency to provide effective antibiotic treatment. 7In addition to the urgency on a patient level, there is an increased focus on improving diagnostics to facilitate effective antimicrobial stewardship programs. 8,91][12][13] Particularly mNGS has gained attention due to its high sensitivity and hypothesis-free approach.While cfDNA mNGS has an increased number of relevant detections of pathogens compared to the standard blood culturing, the method has generally been applied on DNA sequencing platforms with long turnaround times that compromise the urgency of diagnosing BSIs.We leveraged the real-time Nanopore sequencing platform to develop a plasma mNGS assay with a short turnaround time and evaluated it in a prospective observational study in an emergency ward setting against gold-standard blood culturing.

Study design
We performed a cross-sectional study in the emergency ward at Aalborg University Hospital, which is the largest hospital in the North Denmark Region with highly specialized functions and a total of 558 beds (catchment population approximately 600,000 inhabitants).Patients were prospectively included upon suspicion of a BSI.All included patients provided written informed consent (see ethics section) and were included in the period from 1 June to 31 December 2022.For included patients, a blood sample (9mL K2EDTA) for mNGS was drawn from the same venipuncture as a blood culture for routine diagnostics.Following inclusion, patient metadata was collected from their electronic medical record, which included medical history and diagnosis, clinical microbiology results, biochemical blood parameters, and antimicrobial therapy.As a negative reference group, blood donor samples were collected from the blood bank at Aalborg University Hospital from 12 donors and handled in parallel with the clinical samples.

Study population
Study inclusion criteria comprised that the patient was admitted to the emergency ward at Aalborg University Hospital and admitted upon suspicion of a BSI as adjudicated by a requested blood culture.
Patients were excluded from the study if they were younger than 18 years old or were unable to provide written informed consent.Inclusion was conducted on selected weekdays from 8AM-4PM.

Patient subgrouping
Based on the medical records, patients were subdivided into the following groups as adjudicated by a clinical microbiologist (KKS): patients with a positive blood culture (BSI-confirmed); patients with a negative blood culture but a high suspicion of a true BSI (BSI-suspected); patients with a negative blood culture and no suspicion of an infectious disease (BSI-absent); and patients with a negative blood culture and low to medium suspicion of a true BSI (BSI-unlikely).Patients were assigned based on all available microbiology test results (blood culture results, urine culture, respiratory samples etc.) combined with a clinical evaluation of the patients including vital signs (e.g.temperature, pulse, blood pressure, respiration rate), biochemical parameters (e.g.CRP, white blood cell count) and imaging (e.g.chest x-ray, CT abdomen and chest, endoscopies).Patients in groups BSI-confirmed, BSI-suspected, and BSI-absent were selected for analysis.

Clinical microbiology
All clinical microbiology results were subsequently obtained from patient medical records (wwBakt, Autonik AB, Sweden) and no follow-up analyses were conducted.Clinical microbiology analyses were conducted at the Department of Clinical Microbiology at Aalborg University Hospital.A standard blood culture using two BD BACTEC™ Plus Aerobic medium and one BD BACTEC™ Lytic Anaerobic medium glass culture vials were obtained from a peripheral site upon submission and incubated in the BACTEC FX Top instrument (Becton Dickinson AB, Stockholm, Sweden).The identification of species was conducted with conventional biochemical tests and matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization-time of flight (MALDI Biotyper 3.1, Bruker Daltonics Microflex LT, MBT 6903 MSP Library).

Plasma preparation and DNA extraction
Plasma was prepared from study blood samples by centrifugation at 1,600g at 4°C for 10 minutes within 1hr from blood draw at the Department of Biochemistry at Aalborg University Hospital.The plasma supernatant was subsequently centrifuged again at 16,000g at 4°C for 10 minutes and the new supernatant was obtained and stored at -80°C until analysis.At analysis, plasma samples were thawed, and single-stranded oligonucleotides were added at a known concentration to allow for absolute quantification of microbial DNA (unpublished).DNA was extracted from 2mL plasma using the QIAamp MinElute ccfDNA kit (Qiagen) standard protocol with DNA elution in 30µL.At least one process control was included in each batch, consisting of 2mL nuclease-free water (Qiagen).DNA was quantified with the Qubit dsDNA HS Assay Kit on a Qubit 4 Fluorometer (Thermo Fisher).DNA length was assessed with the D1000 High Sensitivity ScreenTape Assay on a TapeStation 4150 (Agilent).Library preparation and sequencing 10-18µL of extracted DNA was used as input to the SRSLY™ DNA NGS Library Preparation PicoPlus Kit (Claret Biosciences) with custom primers.The library preparation was carried out according to the SRSLY protocol for extreme short fragment retention.At least one process control was included in each batch, consisting of 18µL nuclease-free water (Qiagen).Subsequently, samples were prepared for Oxford Nanopore sequencing with the ligation kit (Oxford Nanopore Technologies, SQK-LSK114).Libraries were sequenced on a PromethION 24 on R10.4.1 flow cells and basecalled with the superaccurate model (Guppy 7.0.9)with a quality cut-off at a phred score of 10 applied.

Data analysis and bioinformatics
Basecalled reads were demultiplexed, trimmed for adapters, checked for any remaining barcodes or adapters with Cutadapt (version 4.4). 14Reads with no alignments to the human genome (BLAST version 2.15.0) were aligned with Bowtie2 to a database consisting of Genome Taxonomy Database (GTDB) representative bacterial and archaeal genomes from release 207 and virus (complete genomes) and fungi (all genomes) from NCBI RefSeq release 215 as well as the reference NCBI Homo sapiens genome (T2T). 15,16All identified microbial taxonomies were re-evaluated with proprietary refinement algorithms.Reads from the single-stranded spike-ins were used to quantify DNA for all identified pathogens in genome equivalents per microliter (GPM).The absolute load of microbial DNA in patient samples was compared to the 12 blood donor samples to establish thresholds for clinical relevance.

Assessment of clinical relevance of mNGS results
To evaluate the relevance of mNGS findings, results were contextualized with the patient's other microbiological results and overall clinical picture.mNGS results were grouped on a patient level based on the clinical relevance of identifications as adjudicated by two clinical microbiologists (KKS and HLN). 12"Confirmed" was assigned only when at least one of the pathogens identified by mNGS was also identified by blood culture."Probable" was assigned when at least one of the pathogens identified by mNGS was also identified in other samples from the suspected infection site or when the mNGS results aligned very well with the clinical picture (e.g.Escherichia coli identified in a patient with suspected urinary tract infection (UTI))."Possible" was assigned when at least one of the pathogens identified by mNGS was consistent with the clinical picture."Unlikely" was assigned when the pathogens identified by mNGS were considered irrelevant in the context of the acute infection.

Potential clinical impact analysis
To evaluate the potential impact on patient antibiotic treatment, the microbial identifications from mNGS were compared to results from routine diagnostics, medical record (suspected site of infection), and the antibiotics administered prior to and during the relevant admission by two clinical microbiologists (KKS and HLN).As the mNGS analysis was conducted in batches following completed patient inclusion, the impact analysis was based on the turnaround time in a potential real-time setup, which was estimated to be around 6 hours (Figure 2b).This aligns with previously reported turnaround times for Nanopore mNGS. 17

Statistical analysis
Confidence intervals for sensitivity and specificity were calculated using the Clopper-Pearson exact method.If not specified otherwise, a two-sided Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test was used to compare distributions.In case of multiple comparisons, the p-values were adjusted with the Holm-Bonferoni method.All statistical analyses were conducted in R (version 4.2.0).

Ethics
The study protocol was reviewed and accepted by The Scientific Ethics Committee for the North Denmark Region (N-20220015).The study was also approved according to GDPR (article 30) regulation for the North Denmark Region (Project-ID: F2023-056).

Role of the funding source
The funders of the study had no role in study design, patient inclusion, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the manuscript.

Clinical microbiology
The 11 positive blood culture identifications from patients in the BSI-confirmed group comprised E. coli (n=7), Staphylococcus epidermidis (n=2), Enterococcus faecalis (n=1), and Staphylococcus aureus (n=1), reflecting that most patients in this group were admitted with a urinary tract focus.Of the 25 patients in BSI-suspected, 14 patients (56%) had positive cultures from urine (n=10), sputum (n=2), bronchoalveolar lavage (n=1), or other sites (n=3), while the remaining patients had no positive microbiological tests to guide the antibiotic treatment.The pathogens identified in other cultures for patients in BSI-suspected were E. coli (n=7), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n=2), and others (n=9) (Table 2).
The patient with a positive mNGS result, that was categorized as 'Unlikely' to be relevant to the acute infection had Clostridioides difficile identified.No pathogens were identified in the BSI-absent group.Evaluated against blood culture, the sensitivity was 100% (confidence interval 71•5-100•0%) and the specificity was 59% (confidence interval 38•9-76•5%) on a patient level (Clopper-Pearson exact method).
In five of the 12 patients with a pathogen identified by mNGS, another microbiological test result supported the finding (Table 2).All patients who received antibiotics prior to admission (n=7) were in the BSI-suspected group, of which three (p072, p105, and p140) were positive with mNGS.With the single-stranded DNA spike-ins the load of pathogen DNA in plasma samples was quantified and pathogens were reported in titers from 0•5-321 genome equivalents per microliter (GPM), which is in accordance with previously reported pathogen DNA titers in BSIs. 20Comparing the GPM of E. coli -the most frequently identified pathogen -across BSI-confirmed (n=7, median: 41.3 GPM) and BSIsuspected (n=6, median: 4.37 GPM), there was no significant difference (p=0•30, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney), which was also the case when comparing the total pathogen load in patients from BSIconfirmed (n=11, median: 41.3 GPM) and BSI-suspected (n=12, median: 4.71 GPM) with a positive mNGS test (p=0•10, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney) (Figure 3b).

Potential clinical impact
The mNGS answers for the 22 patients where the result was either confirmed by blood culture or deemed relevant by a clinical microbiologist, were analyzed for potential clinical impact.In a real-time setting, the mNGS result could have affected the antimicrobial treatment in 13 cases (59%) subgrouping to 5 changes from ineffective to effective treatment, 7 escalations from oral to IV, and 1 addition of an extra antimicrobial (more details in appendix p 8).The 5 cases where a change from ineffective to effective treatment could have been facilitated are particularly interesting, and in patients from BSI-confirmed this was achieved by identifying an unsuspected pathogen more rapidly than the blood culture (n=4), while it in patients from BSI-suspected was achieved by identifying an unsuspected pathogen not detected by blood culture (n=1).

Discussion
In recent years, multiple studies have assessed the use of cfDNA mNGS for BSI diagnostics on patients admitted to e.g. the intensive care unit, 13,21 the emergency ward, 12 hematology, 22 and pediatric departments. 23In this study, we show that rapid Nanopore mNGS could be a feasible alternative to blood culturing, as the test confirmed all positive blood cultures (n=11) and provided a relevant pathogen identification in an additional 11 patients.In general, for patients admitted to the emergency ward, no or few microbiological results (e.g. from primary care or previous admissions) are available to guide the upfront antibiotic therapy, and rapid and sensitive infection diagnostics are most welcomed by treating physicians to provide effective antimicrobial therapy for the benefit of the patient and to use narrow-spectrum antibiotics to combat antimicrobial resistance development. 24,25 mNGS results reported in this study constitute both common and rare pathogens from various suspected body site origins including UTIs, LRIs, and intraabdominal abscesses, demonstrating applicability across a broad range of etiologies.To the best of our knowledge only a single study with four patients has evaluated the use of Nanopore sequencing for mNGS BSI diagnostics. 26Our study establishes the feasibility of using the platform to decrease the turnaround time.We also introduce a quantitative measure of microbial cfDNA in the original sample as a way of standardizing results between patients (and possibly cohorts) and to allow for an improved clinical interpretation of results.
Validation and interpretation of mNGS results in patients with a negative blood culture is difficult and the many additional findings have led to questions on the clinical relevance of these identifications. 27,28 the BSI-suspected group from this study, the high number of microbiological tests from other sites that confirm the mNGS result and the fact that patients were included in this group upon suspicion of a systemic infection, supports the relevance of mNGS pathogen identifications.Further, no microbes were identified with mNGS in patients from the BSI-absent group.In addition to the finding of common pathogens, mNGS also identified microbes that were unlikely to be responsible for the acute infection.This includes H. pylori, CMV, KSHV, and C. difficile, and such findings necessitate that results are interpreted with caution.
We also demonstrate that a fast and sensitive mNGS test has the potential to impact a major fraction of antibiotic treatments.While mNGS tests for clinical microbiology diagnostics are expensive to conduct (the commercially available Karius test is priced at $2000 per sample) the added value of increased sensitivity and fast turnaround time with Nanopore sequencing on antibiotic treatment may impact mortality and length-of-stay to justify this increased cost. 29More studies, and randomized interventional studies, are required to answer these questions.We see this test best applied to vulnerable patient groups where etiology determination is crucial for patient survival.This study has several limitations.Firstly, only patients who could provide informed consent were included and the patients who were in septic shock were thus excluded.Secondly, the study was conducted in a non-real-time setup with batching of samples for analysis after all patients were included in the cohort.Finally, the setup of the study did not allow us to conduct follow-up microbiological tests to investigate mNGS findings.In summary, this study provides a proof-of-concept for the use of Nanopore cfDNA metagenomics as a diagnostic tool for patients with a BSI.We showed that Nanopore mNGS is capable of identifying a pathogen relevant to the acute infection in twice the number of patients as gold-standard blood culturing, and that the method works on patients with a broad range of etiologies.

Declaration of interests
MEN, SMK, HLN, and MA are in the process of filing patents related to algorithms presented in this study.MEN has stocks in Oxford Nanopore Technologies plc.

Table 1 .
18tient characteristics.ᵃImmunosuppresivetherapy covers ATC codes L04 and H02.ᵇOral antibiotics administered at the general practitioner in relation to the relevant infection.ᶜqSOFA,Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment.18