671. Initial Impression of Explify Respiratory Testing: Is It an Effective Diagnostic Tool?

Abstract

Abstract Background Respiratory infections are a common cause of hospital admissions resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Isolating specific pathogens from the respiratory tract is a diagnostic challenge. Traditional testing modalities are prone to contamination, time consuming, and have low sensitivity. Next generation genetic sequencing technology has made possible the development of a number of hypothesis free, fast, and highly accurate genome-based identification tests. In this study, we aim at assessing the initial use and performance of one of these tests, the Explify Respiratory panel, at a large quaternary hospital in west Michigan. Methods We performed retrospective analysis on 16 patients with suspected lower respiratory infections. Subjects were chosen for inclusion in the analysis based on the suspicion of pulmonary infection without an identified pathogen. The patient population included 5 immunocompromised patients, 3 with hematologic malignancy, 4 with solid tumor malignancy, and 2 transplant recipients. Results The test resulted in: lack of identified organism (5 patients), identification of non-pathogenic organisms (6 patients), and identification of organisms that were either identified by other traditional testing or did not impact provider’s therapeutic plan (5 patients). The results of Explify testing in all 16 patients did not have a clinical impact on patient care or treatment plan. Conclusion Explify testing seemed to be an appealing cost-effective tool that could replace other available testing modalities such as culture, other sequencing tests, and serological testing with faster turn-around time and less cost. However, it failed to demonstrate any benefit to clinicians in identifying respiratory pathogens while resulting in added cost burden to the patient. Moreover, it resulted in clinical delays of further investigation while awaiting the results. It remains unclear if the lack of clinical impact results from the extensive interventions and treatments that patients receive prior to Explify testing or from the poor sensitivity and performance of the test.This study emphasizes the importance of continuous evaluation of new diagnostic testing before widespread implementation to improve patient care and minimize cost burden. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures