Search

To assess the performance of the rapid syndromic BioFire® Joint Infection Panel (BF-JIP) to detect bacterial and fungal pathogens, as well as antibiotic resistance genes, directly in synovial fluid specimens collected from patients with acute arthritis. The study was conducted in six French bacteriological laboratories. To assess the performances of BF-JIP, results were compared with those of synovial fluid 14-day culture and, in case of discrepancy, with those of complementary molecular methods and intraoperative samples. A total of 308 synovial fluid specimens were tested after collection from 308 adults and children presenting with clinical and biological suspicion of acute arthritis; patients presenting with acute periprosthetic joint infection were included according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society 2021 criteria. Only one specimen failed (no result). On the basis of the consolidated data, the BF-JIP was concordant with the 14-day culture in 280 (91.2%) of the 307 specimens finally included in the study. The positive percentage agreement was 84.9% (95% CI, 78.8–89.8%) and the negative percentage agreement was 100% (95% CI, 97.2–100%). The positive predictive value was extremely high (100%; 95% CI, 97.6–100%), whereas the negative predictive value was lower (82.6%; 95% CI, 75.7–88.2%), partially explained by the missing target species in the panel. The BF-JIP showed high performances to detect pathogens involved in acute arthritis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pancreatic cancer, predominantly characterized by ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) accounts for 90% of cases and is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Its incidence is notably increasing. This poor prognosis is primarily due to late-stage diagnosis (approximately 70% to 80% of patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage), aggressive tumor biology, and low sensitivity to chemotherapy. Consequently, it is crucial to identify and develop a simple, feasible and reproducible blood-based signature (i.e., combination of biomarkers) for early detection of PDAC. Methods: The PANLIPSY study is a multi-center, non-interventional prospective clinical trial designed to achieve early detection of PDAC with high specificity and sensitivity, using a combinatorial approach in blood samples. These samples are collected from patients with resectable, borderline or locally advanced, and metastatic stage PDAC within the framework of the French Biological and Clinical Database for PDAC cohort (BACAP 2). All partners of the BACAP consortium are eligible to participate. The study will include 215 PDAC patients, plus 25 patients with benign pancreatic conditions from the PAncreatic Disease Cohort of TOuLouse (PACTOL) cohort, and 115 healthy controls, totaling 355 individuals. Circulating biomarkers will be collected in a total volume of 50 mL of blood, divided into one CellSave tube (10 mL), two CELL-FREE DNA BCT® preservative tubes (18 mL), and five EDTA tubes (22 mL in total). Samples preparation will adhere to the guidelines of the European Liquid Biopsy Society (ELBS). A unique feature of the study is the AI-based comparison of these complementary liquid biopsy biomarkers. Main end-points: i) to define a liquid biopsy signature that includes the most relevant circulating biomarkers, ii) to validate the multi-marker panel in an independent cohort of healthy controls and patients, with resectable PDAC, and iii) to establish a unique liquid biopsy biobank for PDAC study. Discussion: The PANLIPSY study is a unique prospective non-interventional clinical trial that brings together liquid biopsy experts. The aim is to develop a biological signature for the early detection of PDAC based on AI-assisted detection of circulating biomarkers in blood samples (CTCs, ctDNA, EVs, circulating immune system, circulating cell-free nucleosomes, proteins, and microbiota). Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06128343 / NCT05824403. Registration dates: June 8,2023 and April 21, 2023. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In forensic sciences, body fluids, or biological traces, are a major source of information, and their identification can play a decisive role in criminal investigations. Currently, the nature of biological fluids is assessed using immunological, physico-chemical, mRNA and epigenetic methods, but these have limits in terms of sensitivity and specificity. The emergence of next-generation sequencing technologies offers new opportunities to identify the nature of body fluids by determining bacterial communities. The aim of this pilot study was to assess whether analysis of the bacterial communities in isolated and mixed biological fluids could reflect the situation observed in real forensics labs. Several samples commonly encountered in forensic sciences were tested from healthy volunteers: saliva, vaginal fluid, blood, semen and skin swabs. These samples were analyzed alone or in combination in a ratio of 1:1. Sequencing was performed on the Ion Gene StudioTM S5 automated sequencer. Fluids tested alone revealed a typical bacterial signature with specific bacterial orders, enabling formal identification of the fluid of interest, despite inter-individual variations. However, in biological fluid mixtures, the predominance of some bacterial microbiomes inhibited interpretation. Oral and vaginal microbiomes were clearly preponderant, and the relative abundance of their bacterial communities and/or the presence of common species between samples made it impossible to detect bacterial orders or genera from other fluids, although they were distinguishable from one another. However, using the beta diversity, salivary fluids were identified and could be distinguished from fluids in combination. While this method of fluid identification is promising, further analyses are required to consolidate the protocol and ensure reliability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is a correction notice for an article titled "Usefulness of dynamic regression time series models for studying the relationship between antimicrobial consumption and bacterial antimicrobial resistance in hospitals: a systematic review." The original article, published in Antimicrobial Resistance & Infection Control, mistakenly omitted rows below the 8th row of Table 1. The table has now been amended to include the complete information as intended. The correction notice is provided by the authors of the article, and the publisher, Springer Nature, remains neutral in terms of jurisdictional claims and institutional affiliations. [Extracted from the article]