Next Article in Journal
Pandemic Disruptions to Private Pathology Testing Uptake in Australia, 2019–2024
Previous Article in Journal
Comprehensive Laboratory Analysis of a Scrub Typhus and H1N1 Influenza Co-Infection: A Case Report from Hainan, China
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Communication

A Cell-Free DNA Plasma Next-Generation Sequencing Test—Is It Worth the Cost?

by
Sean Jung
1,2,*,
Francesca Torriani
1,2,
Shira Abeles
1,2 and
Ahnika Kline
1,3,*
1
Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases and Global Public Health, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA
2
Infection Prevention and Clinical Epidemiology and Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs, University of California San Diego Health, San Diego, CA 92103, USA
3
Department of Pathology, Center for Advanced Laboratory Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Pathogens 2025, 14(8), 811; https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens14080811
Submission received: 15 July 2025 / Revised: 12 August 2025 / Accepted: 13 August 2025 / Published: 15 August 2025

Abstract

Background: The Karius Test (KT), a microbial cell-free DNA next-generation sequencing assay, is increasingly utilized in challenging infectious syndromes. However, its real-world clinical utility and cost-effectiveness remain uncertain. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 88 KT results from adult patients at UC San Diego Health between July 2017 and April 2024. Each case was evaluated for clinical impact using standardized criteria. We analyzed diagnostic yield, turnaround time, number needed to test (NNT), and institutional billing data for reimbursement and cost implications. Results: Of 88 unique tests, forty-nine (55.7%) identified at least one pathogen. Eleven (12.5%) had a positive clinical impact—eight provided the only microbiologic diagnosis, and three were faster than conventional methods. Vascular/graft infections showed the highest yield. Twenty-one tests had a neutral impact; fifty-six showed no clinical benefit. The Median turnaround time was 3 days. The NNT was 6.1 or 2.75 including neutral cases. Cost analysis revealed a substantial financial burden without transparent reimbursement mechanisms in inpatient settings. Conclusion: The KT demonstrates modest clinical utility with noteworthy benefits in select scenarios. Given its high cost and variable impact, we advocate for diagnostic stewardship led by infectious disease specialists to optimize test use and minimize unnecessary expense.
Keywords: cell-free DNA; Karius Test; next-generation sequencing; infectious disease diagnostics; cost-effectiveness; clinical utility; stewardship cell-free DNA; Karius Test; next-generation sequencing; infectious disease diagnostics; cost-effectiveness; clinical utility; stewardship

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jung, S.; Torriani, F.; Abeles, S.; Kline, A. A Cell-Free DNA Plasma Next-Generation Sequencing Test—Is It Worth the Cost? Pathogens 2025, 14, 811. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens14080811

AMA Style

Jung S, Torriani F, Abeles S, Kline A. A Cell-Free DNA Plasma Next-Generation Sequencing Test—Is It Worth the Cost? Pathogens. 2025; 14(8):811. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens14080811

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jung, Sean, Francesca Torriani, Shira Abeles, and Ahnika Kline. 2025. "A Cell-Free DNA Plasma Next-Generation Sequencing Test—Is It Worth the Cost?" Pathogens 14, no. 8: 811. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens14080811

APA Style

Jung, S., Torriani, F., Abeles, S., & Kline, A. (2025). A Cell-Free DNA Plasma Next-Generation Sequencing Test—Is It Worth the Cost? Pathogens, 14(8), 811. https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens14080811

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop