Evaluating the Diagnostic Performance and Impact on Clinical Outcomes of the NuRapid-CRISPR Pathogen Profile Assay in ICU Patients With Sepsis
- Sponsor
- Shanghai 10th People's Hospital
- Study ID
- NCT07580001
- Status
- Not Yet Recruiting
Notify me when recruiting opens
Save your spot on the interest list for this study. We'll keep your details with this study so our team can follow up when recruiting opens.
Add your contact details and location so we can keep your interest tied to this study.
Conditions
- Sepsis
Eligibility Criteria
- Sex
- ALL
- Age
- N/A - N/A
- Healthy Volunteers
- Not accepted
Interventions
- NuRapid-CRISPR Rapid Pathogen Detection Technology — DIAGNOSTIC_TESTAdjusting early-stage treatment based on NuRapid-CRISPR results.
- Traditional pathogen culture — DIAGNOSTIC_TESTPrimarily based on traditional cultivation methods or empirical treatment.
Study Details
This study is a prospective, multicenter, integrated trial designed to evaluate, from the perspectives of diagnostic performance and clinical utility, whether a diagnostic and treatment strategy based on the NuRapid-CRISPR rapid pathogen detection technology can reduce the 28-day all-cause mortality rate in patients with sepsis or septic shock in the ICU, compared to traditional pathogen culture. The study consists of two parts: 1. Diagnostic Accuracy Study: For all enrolled sepsis patients, microbiological specimens will undergo concurrent blinded testing, with NuRapid-CRISPR serving as the test of interest and traditional pathogen culture as the reference standard. A prospective comparison will evaluate differences between the two methods in key metrics such as pathogen detection rate, sensitivity, specificity, and turnaround time. 2. Clinical Utility Cohort Study: All patients will undergo NuRapid-CRISPR testing as part of routine clinical care. Based on whether the rapid results are adopted clinically to guide early antimicrobial therapy decisions, the cohort will naturally form an exposure group (early treatment adjustments based on NuRapid-CRISPR results) and a control group (treatment primarily based on traditional culture results or empirical therapy). The study will prospectively compare the two groups in terms of the time to optimize antimicrobial therapy, coverage of the initial treatment spectrum, and infection-related clinical outcomes.
Key Dates
- First listed
- May 12, 2026
- Start date
- Jul 31, 2026
- Status verified
- May 2026
- Primary completion
- Dec 31, 2028
- Completion
- Dec 31, 2028
Study Design
- Enrollment
- 396 participants (estimated)
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Intervention model
- PARALLEL
- Primary purpose
- DIAGNOSTIC
Arms
- Experimental: NuRapid-CRISPREligible specimens from enrolled patients undergo NuRapid-CRISPR testing concurrently with submission for conventional culture. Test results (including pathogen species and resistance gene information) are delivered to the attending physician via the hospital information system and/or telephone notification within 2-4 hours of validation. The test report is accompanied by an abstract of the \*Expert Consensus on Clinical Interpretation of Rapid Molecular Test Results and Treatment Recommendations\*, developed by experts in infectious diseases and clinical microbiology. Clinicians are encouraged and authorized to adjust antimicrobial treatment regimens as appropriate based on these rapid results and the patient's specific clinical condition, even before receiving conventional antimicrobial susceptibility test results. The timing of decisions to adjust antimicrobial therapy based on rapid results, the specific regimens, and the rationale for such adjustments must be documented in detail.
- Active Comparator: Pathogen culturePatient specimens were submitted for conventional pathogen culture and antimicrobial susceptibility testing in accordance with standard clinical procedures. The NuRapid-CRISPR assay was performed concurrently; however, its results were blinded to clinicians until the conventional culture report was issued and were not used as a basis for clinical decision-making. The initial selection and adjustment of antimicrobial agents were based entirely on clinical experience, routine inflammatory markers such as procalcitonin, and subsequent conventional culture and susceptibility test results. All treatment decisions and their rationale were routinely documented.
Primary Outcome Measure
28-day all-cause mortality rate [ Time Frame: From the date of randomization through Day 28 (±2 days) ]
Central Contacts
- Du Yingying, Doctor+862166111524
Related Studies
- Alveolar Dead Space as Predictor of Organ Failure in Severe SepsisNot Yet Recruiting · The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston · Houston, Texas
- Clinical Microbial Species & Antibiotic Resistance ID in ED Patients Presenting With Infection - is Rapid ID Possible & Accurate?Recruiting · Michigan State University · Lansing, Michigan
- Biomarkers in InfectionRecruiting · Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · Boston, Massachusetts
- STUDY00015328: Sepsis EndotypesEnrolling By Invitation · Milton S. Hershey Medical Center · Hershey, Pennsylvania