The diagnosis of mucormycosis by PCR in patients at risk a systematic review and meta-analysis

Open Access
Authors
  • Lottie Brown
  • Lena Tschiderer
  • Alexandre Alanio
  • Rosemary A. Barnes
  • Sharon C.A. Chen
  • Massimo Cogliati
  • Mario Cruciani
  • J. Peter Donnelly
  • Ferry Hagen
  • Catriona Halliday
  • Lena Klingspor
  • Katrien Lagrou
  • Willem Melchers
  • Laurence Millon
  • Florent Morio
  • Elena Salvador
  • Giacomo Stroffolini
  • Markus Ruhnke
  • Stephanie Toepfer
  • Karin van Dijk
  • Andrew M. Borman
  • María José Buitrago
  • Rebecca Gorton
  • Jürgen Löffller
  • Riina Rautemaa-Richardson
  • Boualem Sendid
  • Peter Willeit
  • P. Lewis White
  • Michaela Lackner
Publication date 03-2025
Journal EClinicalMedicine
Article number 103115
Volume | Issue number 81
Number of pages 12
Organisations
  • Faculty of Science (FNWI) - Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics (IBED)
  • Faculty of Science (FNWI) - Swammerdam Institute for Life Sciences (SILS)
Abstract

Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the performance of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays for diagnosing mucormycosis. Methods: A standardised search was conducted from conception to December 3rd 2024 using PubMed, Embase, Global Health, and Cochrane library. Original studies that used PCR-based methods on any human specimen to diagnose mucormycosis were analysed for eligibility. Using a bivariate meta-analysis, the diagnostic performance of PCR was examined against the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer–Mycoses Study Group Education and Research Consortium 2020 (EORTC-MSGERC) definitions of proven and probable invasive mould disease, which was modified to include all patients at risk of mucormycosis. The study protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42023478667). Findings: Of 4855 articles, a total of 30 met inclusion criteria, including 5920 PCR reactions on 5147 non-duplicate specimens from 819 cases of proven/probable mucormycosis and 4266 patients who did not meet the EORTC-MSGERC 2020 criteria. According to specimen type, sensitivity of PCR varied (p < 0.001) whereas specificity was similar (p = 0.662). Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid offered the highest sensitivity of 97.5% (95% CI 83.7–99.7%), specificity of 95.8% (95% CI 89.6–98.4%), positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 23.5, and negative likelihood ratio (LR−) of 0.03. Tissue provided sensitivity of 86.4% (95% CI 78.9–91.5%), specificity of 90.6% (95% CI 78.1–96.3%), LR+ of 9.2, and LR− of 0.15. Blood provided reduced sensitivity of 81.6% (95% CI 70.1–89.4%), specificity of 95.5% (95% CI 87.4–98.5%), DOR of 95, LR+ of 18.3, and LR− of 0.19. Formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded specimens yielded the lowest sensitivity of 73.0% (95% CI 61.0–82.3%), highest specificity of 96.4% (CI 95% 87.5–99.0%), LR+ of 20.2, and LR− of 0.28. The covariates best explaining heterogeneity of the overall analysis were specimen type, study design (cohort versus case-control) and disease prevalence while patient population (COVID-19 versus other) and PCR (conventional versus quantitative) had less impact on heterogeneity. Interpretation: This meta-analysis confirms the high performance of PCR for diagnosing mucormycosis and supports the instatement of PCR detection of free-DNA in blood, BALF and tissue into future updated definitions and diagnostic guidelines for mucormycosis. Funding: None.

Document type Article
Note With supplementary material.
Language English
Published at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2025.103115
Other links https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85218231964
Downloads
1-s2.0-S2589537025000471-main (Final published version)
Supplementary materials
Permalink to this page
Back