Bloodstream InfectionNCT06069206
Effect of Direct-from-blood Bacterial Testing on Antibiotic Administration and Clinical Outcomes
A study testing T2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing) in people with Bloodstream Infection and Sepsis Bacterial, run by Vanderbilt University Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Bacterial blood stream infections are common and life-threatening. Bloodstream infections have historically been identified using blood cultures, which often take 24-72 hours to result and are imperfectly sensitive. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Bloodstream Infection, Sepsis Bacterial, MRSA Bacteremia
- What is being tested?
- T2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing)
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 500 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 13 Dec 2023to 22 Apr 2025
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patient is located in the Emergency Department at Vanderbilt University Hospital
- ≤ 12 hours from patient presentation to the Emergency Department at Vanderbilt University Hospital
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Clinician has ordered blood cultures
- Clinician has ordered intravenous vancomycin
Who cannot join
- Patient is known to be a prisoner
- Patient is known to be pregnant
- Patient is known to have received 2 or more doses of vancomycin since presentation to the Vanderbilt ED
- Patient is known to have a positive bacterial culture in the previous 7 days
- Patient is known to have an infection for which at least 7 days of intravenous vancomycin would routinely be administered regardless of bacterial testing results (e.g., skin and soft tissue infection, etc.)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Nashville, Tennessee, 37203
About this study
Official title: Effect of Direct-from-blood Bacterial Testing on Antibiotic Administration and Clinical Outcomes: A Learning Healthcare Pragmatic Randomized Trial
Bacterial blood stream infections are common and life-threatening. Bloodstream infections have historically been identified using blood cultures, which often take 24-72 hours to result and are imperfectly sensitive. Early administration of antimicrobial therapy is a fundamental component of the management of adults presenting to the hospital with a suspected bloodstream infection and/or sepsis.
But because blood cultures frequently take 24-72 hours to result, patients are typically treated with empiric, broad spectrum antibiotics. In a meta-analysis of sepsis studies, empirical antibiotic therapy was inappropriate for the organism that ultimately grew in culture in almost half of patients. Thus, patients are commonly exposed to unnecessary antibiotics without evidence of infection or with evidence of infection requiring narrow antibiotic selection. For example, current guidelines recommend the use of empiric intravenous vancomycin as coverage for a bloodstream infection caused by the bacterial pathogen methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Vancomycin requires careful monitoring due to its narrow therapeutic range and high risk of toxicity. Administration of vancomycin to patients who do not have MRSA can lead to avoidable adverse drug events and costs, as well as drive antimicrobial resistance.
Read more
There has been increasing interest in using rapid diagnostic tests that identify bacteria directly from whole blood samples without relying on growth in culture, referred to as "direct-from-blood" tests, to guide early therapeutic management of patients with suspected bloodstream infections in addition to standard blood cultures. One such FDA-approved, direct-from-blood test is the T2Bacteria® Panel. This panel's performance as a direct-from blood test for bacterial pathogens has been described in previous studies. A recent meta-analysis of largely observational studies reported a faster transition to targeted microbial therapy and de-escalation of empirical microbial therapy, as well as a shorter duration of intensive care unit stay and hospital stay for patients who received this direct-from-blood test.
We will conduct a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial examining the effect of using the T2Bacteria® Panel direct from-blood testing, compared to using blood cultures alone (standard of care), on antimicrobial receipt and clinical outcomes for adults presenting to the hospital with suspected infection and who have been initiated on empiric therapy with intravenous vancomycin.
- Conditions
- Bloodstream Infection, Sepsis Bacterial, MRSA Bacteremia, Vancomycin
- Being tested
- T2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing), Usual Care
- Medical subject headings
- Sepsis
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
T2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing)Other
Providers will be prompted to order the T2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing) and accompanying communications regarding panel results will be delivered.
Usual CareOther
Standard blood cultures.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Usual Care | Active comparator | Patients will receive blood cultures and will not receive direct-from-blood testing. Receives: Other: Usual Care |
| Direct-from-blood testing | Active comparator | In addition to usual care, patients will receive direct-from-blood testing using the T2Bacteria® Panel. Receives: Other: T2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Time to Last Dose of Intravenous Vancomycin
The time between randomization and the start time for the last dose of intravenous vancomycin received by the patient within 14 days of randomization.
Measured: Baseline to 14 days
Secondary outcomes (1)
Time to Last Dose of Systemic Anti-pseudomonal Beta-lactam Antibiotic
The time between randomization and start time of the last dose of systemic anti-pseudomonal beta-lactam antibiotic received by the patient within 14 days of randomization.
Measured: Baseline to 14 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted5 Oct 2023
- Study start13 Dec 2023
- Primary completion14 Dec 2024
- Study completion22 Apr 2025
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (18)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Bloodstream InfectionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Vanderbilt University Medical CenterThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This study will be performed as a pragmatic, randomized controlled clinical trial with parallel group assignment.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 500 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Vanderbilt University Medical Center
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Matthew Semler, Vanderbilt University Medical Center
- Investigators
- Matthew Semler, MD, MSc, Principal investigator, Vanderbilt University Medical Center
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06069206
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 231229
- Status last verified
- Feb 2026
- First submitted
- 28 Sep 2023
- Last updated
- 27 Feb 2026
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: Individual participant data that underlie the results reported will be made available (including data dictionaries) after de-identification.
Publications
Opota O, Croxatto A, Prod'hom G, Greub G. Blood culture-based diagnosis of bacteraemia: state of the art. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015 Apr;21(4):313-22. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2015.01.003. Epub 2015 Jan 16.
PubMed 25753137Leggieri N, Rida A, Francois P, Schrenzel J. Molecular diagnosis of bloodstream infections: planning to (physically) reach the bedside. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2010 Aug;23(4):311-9. doi: 10.1097/QCO.0b013e32833bfc44.
PubMed 20592531Shah SS, Downes KJ, Elliott MR, Bell LM, McGowan KL, Metlay JP. How long does it take to "rule out" bacteremia in children with central venous catheters? Pediatrics. 2008 Jan;121(1):135-41. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-1387.
PubMed 18166567Peralta G, Rodriguez-Lera MJ, Garrido JC, Ansorena L, Roiz MP. Time to positivity in blood cultures of adults with Streptococcus pneumoniae bacteremia. BMC Infect Dis. 2006 Apr 27;6:79. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-6-79.
PubMed 16643662Tabak YP, Vankeepuram L, Ye G, Jeffers K, Gupta V, Murray PR. Blood Culture Turnaround Time in U.S. Acute Care Hospitals and Implications for Laboratory Process Optimization. J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Nov 27;56(12):e00500-18. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00500-18. Print 2018 Dec.
PubMed 30135230Paul M, Shani V, Muchtar E, Kariv G, Robenshtok E, Leibovici L. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of appropriate empiric antibiotic therapy for sepsis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010 Nov;54(11):4851-63. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00627-10. Epub 2010 Aug 23.
PubMed 20733044Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W, Levy MM, Antonelli M, Ferrer R, Kumar A, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Nunnally ME, Rochwerg B, Rubenfeld GD, Angus DC, Annane D, Beale RJ, Bellinghan GJ, Bernard GR, Chiche JD, Coopersmith C, De Backer DP, French CJ, Fujishima S, Gerlach H, Hidalgo JL, Hollenberg SM, Jones AE, Karnad DR, Kleinpell RM, Koh Y, Lisboa TC, Machado FR, Marini JJ, Marshall JC, Mazuski JE, McIntyre LA, McLean AS, Mehta S, Moreno RP, Myburgh J, Navalesi P, Nishida O, Osborn TM, Perner A, Plunkett CM, Ranieri M, Schorr CA, Seckel MA, Seymour CW, Shieh L, Shukri KA, Simpson SQ, Singer M, Thompson BT, Townsend SR, Van der Poll T, Vincent JL, Wiersinga WJ, Zimmerman JL, Dellinger RP. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med. 2017 Mar;43(3):304-377. doi: 10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6. Epub 2017 Jan 18.
PubMed 28101605Liu C, Bayer A, Cosgrove SE, Daum RS, Fridkin SK, Gorwitz RJ, Kaplan SL, Karchmer AW, Levine DP, Murray BE, J Rybak M, Talan DA, Chambers HF. Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children: executive summary. Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Feb 1;52(3):285-92. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir034.
PubMed 21217178Rybak MJ, Le J, Lodise TP, Levine DP, Bradley JS, Liu C, Mueller BA, Pai MP, Wong-Beringer A, Rotschafer JC, Rodvold KA, Maples HD, Lomaestro BM. Therapeutic monitoring of vancomycin for serious methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: A revised consensus guideline and review by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2020 May 19;77(11):835-864. doi: 10.1093/ajhp/zxaa036. No abstract available.
PubMed 32191793Peri AM, Stewart A, Hume A, Irwin A, Harris PNA. New Microbiological Techniques for the Diagnosis of Bacterial Infections and Sepsis in ICU Including Point of Care. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2021;23(8):12. doi: 10.1007/s11908-021-00755-0. Epub 2021 Jun 16.
PubMed 34149321Timbrook TT, Morton JB, McConeghy KW, Caffrey AR, Mylonakis E, LaPlante KL. The Effect of Molecular Rapid Diagnostic Testing on Clinical Outcomes in Bloodstream Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Jan 1;64(1):15-23. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciw649. Epub 2016 Sep 26.
PubMed 27678085Pliakos EE, Andreatos N, Shehadeh F, Ziakas PD, Mylonakis E. The Cost-Effectiveness of Rapid Diagnostic Testing for the Diagnosis of Bloodstream Infections with or without Antimicrobial Stewardship. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2018 May 30;31(3):e00095-17. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00095-17. Print 2018 Jul.
PubMed 29848775Nguyen MH, Clancy CJ, Pasculle AW, Pappas PG, Alangaden G, Pankey GA, Schmitt BH, Rasool A, Weinstein MP, Widen R, Hernandez DR, Wolk DM, Walsh TJ, Perfect JR, Wilson MN, Mylonakis E. Performance of the T2Bacteria Panel for Diagnosing Bloodstream Infections: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study. Ann Intern Med. 2019 Jun 18;170(12):845-852. doi: 10.7326/M18-2772. Epub 2019 May 14.
PubMed 31083728Voigt C, Silbert S, Widen RH, Marturano JE, Lowery TJ, Ashcraft D, Pankey G. The T2Bacteria Assay Is a Sensitive and Rapid Detector of Bacteremia That Can Be Initiated in the Emergency Department and Has Potential to Favorably Influence Subsequent Therapy. J Emerg Med. 2020 May;58(5):785-796. doi: 10.1016/j.jemermed.2019.11.028. Epub 2020 Jan 23.
PubMed 31982197Drevinek P, Hurych J, Antuskova M, Tkadlec J, Berousek J, Prikrylova Z, Bures J, Vajter J, Soucek M, Masopust J, Martinkova V, Adamkova J, Hysperska V, Bebrova E. Direct detection of ESKAPEc pathogens from whole blood using the T2Bacteria Panel allows early antimicrobial stewardship intervention in patients with sepsis. Microbiologyopen. 2021 Jun;10(3):e1210. doi: 10.1002/mbo3.1210.
PubMed 34180598
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 Feb 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Effect of Direct-from-blood Bacterial Testing on Antibiotic Administration and Clinical Outcomes: A Learning Healthcare Pragmatic Randomized Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06069206
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 231229
- Conditions
- Bloodstream Infection, Sepsis Bacterial, MRSA Bacteremia, Vancomycin
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 500 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Vanderbilt University Medical CenterUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 13 Dec 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 14 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 22 Apr 2025 (actual)
- First posted
- 5 Oct 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 27 Feb 2026
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Bacterial blood stream infections are common and life-threatening. Bloodstream infections have historically been identified using blood cultures, which often take 24-72 hours to result and are imperfectly sensitive. Early administration of antimicrobial therapy is a fundamental component of the management of adults presenting to the hospital with a suspected bloodstream infection and/or sepsis.
But because blood cultures frequently take 24-72 hours to result, patients are typically treated with empiric, broad spectrum antibiotics. In a meta-analysis of sepsis studies, empirical antibiotic therapy was inappropriate for the organism that ultimately grew in culture in almost half of patients. Thus, patients are commonly exposed to unnecessary antibiotics without evidence of infection or with evidence of infection requiring narrow antibiotic selection. For example, current guidelines recommend the use of empiric intravenous vancomycin as coverage for a bloodstream infection caused by the bacterial pathogen methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Vancomycin requires careful monitoring due to its narrow therapeutic range and high risk of toxicity. Administration of vancomycin to patients who do not have MRSA can lead to avoidable adverse drug events and costs, as well as drive antimicrobial resistance.
There has been increasing interest in using rapid diagnostic tests that identify bacteria directly from whole blood samples without relying on growth in culture, referred to as "direct-from-blood" tests, to guide early therapeutic management of patients with suspected bloodstream infections in addition to standard blood cultures. One such FDA-approved, direct-from-blood test is the T2Bacteria® Panel. This panel's performance as a direct-from blood test for bacterial pathogens has been described in previous studies. A recent meta-analysis of largely observational studies reported a faster transition to targeted microbial therapy and de-escalation of empirical microbial therapy, as well as a shorter duration of intensive care unit stay and hospital stay for patients who received this direct-from-blood test.
We will conduct a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial examining the effect of using the T2Bacteria® Panel direct from-blood testing, compared to using blood cultures alone (standard of care), on antimicrobial receipt and clinical outcomes for adults presenting to the hospital with suspected infection and who have been initiated on empiric therapy with intravenous vancomycin.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This study will be performed as a pragmatic, randomized controlled clinical trial with parallel group assignment.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Usual Care | Active comparator | Other: Usual CarePatients will receive blood cultures and will not receive direct-from-blood testing. |
| Direct-from-blood testing | Active comparator | Other: T2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing)In addition to usual care, patients will receive direct-from-blood testing using the T2Bacteria® Panel. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patient is located in the Emergency Department at Vanderbilt University Hospital
- ≤ 12 hours from patient presentation to the Emergency Department at Vanderbilt University Hospital
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Clinician has ordered blood cultures
- Clinician has ordered intravenous vancomycin
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patient is known to be a prisoner
- Patient is known to be pregnant
- Patient is known to have received 2 or more doses of vancomycin since presentation to the Vanderbilt ED
- Patient is known to have a positive bacterial culture in the previous 7 days
- Patient is known to have an infection for which at least 7 days of intravenous vancomycin would routinely be administered regardless of bacterial testing results (e.g., skin and soft tissue infection, etc.)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| T2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing)Providers will be prompted to order the T2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing) and accompanying communications regarding panel results will be delivered. | Other | Direct-from-blood testing |
| Usual CareStandard blood cultures. | Other | Usual Care |
Primary outcome
Time to Last Dose of Intravenous Vancomycin
Time frame: Baseline to 14 days
The time between randomization and the start time for the last dose of intravenous vancomycin received by the patient within 14 days of randomization.
1 secondary outcome
Time to Last Dose of Systemic Anti-pseudomonal Beta-lactam Antibiotic
Time frame: Baseline to 14 days
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 Feb 2026.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 25753137Opota O, Croxatto A, Prod'hom G, Greub G. Blood culture-based diagnosis of bacteraemia: state of the art. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015 Apr;21(4):313-22. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2015.01.003. Epub 2015 Jan 16.
- Background: PubMed 20592531Leggieri N, Rida A, Francois P, Schrenzel J. Molecular diagnosis of bloodstream infections: planning to (physically) reach the bedside. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2010 Aug;23(4):311-9. doi: 10.1097/QCO.0b013e32833bfc44.
- Background: PubMed 18166567Shah SS, Downes KJ, Elliott MR, Bell LM, McGowan KL, Metlay JP. How long does it take to "rule out" bacteremia in children with central venous catheters? Pediatrics. 2008 Jan;121(1):135-41. doi: 10.1542/peds.2007-1387.
- Background: PubMed 16643662Peralta G, Rodriguez-Lera MJ, Garrido JC, Ansorena L, Roiz MP. Time to positivity in blood cultures of adults with Streptococcus pneumoniae bacteremia. BMC Infect Dis. 2006 Apr 27;6:79. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-6-79.
- Background: PubMed 30135230Tabak YP, Vankeepuram L, Ye G, Jeffers K, Gupta V, Murray PR. Blood Culture Turnaround Time in U.S. Acute Care Hospitals and Implications for Laboratory Process Optimization. J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Nov 27;56(12):e00500-18. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00500-18. Print 2018 Dec.
- Background: PubMed 20733044Paul M, Shani V, Muchtar E, Kariv G, Robenshtok E, Leibovici L. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of appropriate empiric antibiotic therapy for sepsis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010 Nov;54(11):4851-63. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00627-10. Epub 2010 Aug 23.
- Background: PubMed 28101605Rhodes A, Evans LE, Alhazzani W, Levy MM, Antonelli M, Ferrer R, Kumar A, Sevransky JE, Sprung CL, Nunnally ME, Rochwerg B, Rubenfeld GD, Angus DC, Annane D, Beale RJ, Bellinghan GJ, Bernard GR, Chiche JD, Coopersmith C, De Backer DP, French CJ, Fujishima S, Gerlach H, Hidalgo JL, Hollenberg SM, Jones AE, Karnad DR, Kleinpell RM, Koh Y, Lisboa TC, Machado FR, Marini JJ, Marshall JC, Mazuski JE, McIntyre LA, McLean AS, Mehta S, Moreno RP, Myburgh J, Navalesi P, Nishida O, Osborn TM, Perner A, Plunkett CM, Ranieri M, Schorr CA, Seckel MA, Seymour CW, Shieh L, Shukri KA, Simpson SQ, Singer M, Thompson BT, Townsend SR, Van der Poll T, Vincent JL, Wiersinga WJ, Zimmerman JL, Dellinger RP. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016. Intensive Care Med. 2017 Mar;43(3):304-377. doi: 10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6. Epub 2017 Jan 18.
- Background: PubMed 21217178Liu C, Bayer A, Cosgrove SE, Daum RS, Fridkin SK, Gorwitz RJ, Kaplan SL, Karchmer AW, Levine DP, Murray BE, J Rybak M, Talan DA, Chambers HF. Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children: executive summary. Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Feb 1;52(3):285-92. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir034.
- Background: PubMed 32191793Rybak MJ, Le J, Lodise TP, Levine DP, Bradley JS, Liu C, Mueller BA, Pai MP, Wong-Beringer A, Rotschafer JC, Rodvold KA, Maples HD, Lomaestro BM. Therapeutic monitoring of vancomycin for serious methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: A revised consensus guideline and review by the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2020 May 19;77(11):835-864. doi: 10.1093/ajhp/zxaa036. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 34149321Peri AM, Stewart A, Hume A, Irwin A, Harris PNA. New Microbiological Techniques for the Diagnosis of Bacterial Infections and Sepsis in ICU Including Point of Care. Curr Infect Dis Rep. 2021;23(8):12. doi: 10.1007/s11908-021-00755-0. Epub 2021 Jun 16.
- Background: PubMed 27678085Timbrook TT, Morton JB, McConeghy KW, Caffrey AR, Mylonakis E, LaPlante KL. The Effect of Molecular Rapid Diagnostic Testing on Clinical Outcomes in Bloodstream Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2017 Jan 1;64(1):15-23. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciw649. Epub 2016 Sep 26.
- Background: PubMed 29848775Pliakos EE, Andreatos N, Shehadeh F, Ziakas PD, Mylonakis E. The Cost-Effectiveness of Rapid Diagnostic Testing for the Diagnosis of Bloodstream Infections with or without Antimicrobial Stewardship. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2018 May 30;31(3):e00095-17. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00095-17. Print 2018 Jul.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. Individual participant data that underlie the results reported will be made available (including data dictionaries) after de-identification.
Related trials for Bloodstream Infection
Not yet recruitingPhase 2/3
A Pivotal Safety and Immunogenicity GBS-NN/NN2 Vaccine Maternal Immunisation Trial
Streptococcus Agalactiae Infection, Neonatal Sepsis
Active, not recruiting
CT for Personalized Mechanical Ventilation
Ventilator-Induced Lung Injury, Sepsis Syndrome
RecruitingPhase 4
A Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Extended and Intermittent Infusion of Beta-lactams in Critically Ill Paediatric Patients
Infection, Sepsis
Not yet recruiting
Double Plasma Separation and Adsorption in Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (DPMAS-ACLF Trial)
Acute-on-Chronic Liver Failure (ACLF)
Active, not recruitingPhase 4
Thymosin Alpha 1 and IgM Levels in Sepsis
Sepsis, Septic Shock
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Matthew Semler, MD, MSc principal investigator
Vanderbilt University Medical Center
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing T2Bacteria® Panel (direct-from-blood testing) in people with Bloodstream Infection and Sepsis Bacterial, run by Vanderbilt University Medical Center at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Feb 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 27 Feb 2026). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Time to Last Dose of Intravenous Vancomycin (time frame: Baseline to 14 days). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06069206, which also lists 18 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Feb 2026.