Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2026 review

Diagnostic performance of panfungal PCR on tissue specimens for the diagnosis of invasive fungal diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Fungal PCR Initiative (FPCRI)

0Citations signalées — pas une note de qualité
34Institutions déclarées
12Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Résumé fourni par la source

ABSTRACT Invasive fungal diseases are difficult to diagnose because of the limited sensitivity of culture. Panfungal PCR amplicon sequencing assays (targeting ribosomal RNA, such as 18S, 28S, ITS) are recommended for fungal identification in histopathology samples showing fungal elements. However, data describing its overall performance and consistency are lacking. This systematic literature review and meta-analysis assessed the performance of panfungal PCR on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) and non-fixed (fresh or frozen) tissue samples. A systematic literature search was performed to include studies reporting the use of panfungal PCR for fungal identification in FFPE or non-fixed tissue samples. PCR sensitivity and specificity were assessed using the reference standard of histopathology showing fungal elements. Quality assessment was performed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Pooled estimates were obtained using random-effects meta-analysis. Twenty-eight studies were included. In FFPE samples (18 studies, 852 samples), sensitivity and specificity were 75.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 59.2–86.6) and 93.5% (70.2–98.9), respectively. Sensitivity in non-fixed samples (13 studies, 207 samples) was 86.5% (74.7–93.3), while specificity could not be assessed (insufficient data). Comparative analyses showed a significantly higher sensitivity of panfungal PCR over culture (88.2%; 76–94.7 vs 52.2%; 39–65, P = 0.001). Sub-analyses could not demonstrate the superiority of one PCR target over another due to limited data. Panfungal PCR exhibited adequate sensitivity and good specificity in FFPE samples. Sensitivity was even higher in non-fixed samples and largely superior to culture. Nevertheless, large interstudy variability was observed, warranting interlaboratory studies to define the optimal PCR target and standardized protocols. IMPORTANCE Invasive fungal diseases are difficult to diagnose because of the low sensitivity of culture. Panfungal PCRs are widely used for fungal identification in tissue specimens but suffer from heterogeneous procedures and performance. This meta-analysis shows an acceptable sensitivity (75.4% and 86.5% in fixed and non-fixed samples, respectively) and good specificity (93.5%) of panfungal PCR, supporting its use, not only on histopathology-positive fixed samples but also in non-fixed samples concomitantly with other diagnostic tools (cultures and fungal-specific PCRs if available). These results provide a strong basis for further standardization of panfungal PCR techniques via interlaboratory assays to assess reproducibility and optimize analytical protocols. CLINICAL TRIALS This study is registered with PROSPERO as CRD42023461148 .

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Diagnostic performance of panfungal PCR on tissue specimens for the diagnosis of invasive fungal diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Fungal PCR Initiative (FPCRI)
Date Crossref
09/09/2026
Éditeur
American Society for Microbiology
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Sujets associés

Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityMolecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsFungal Infections and Studies

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Recherche à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé ; OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant requis, aucune donnée externe enregistrée en base. Sources et limites.