Utility of Respiratory Pathogen Panels in the Outpatient Oncology Setting

Oncology patients presenting for outpatient evaluation of a respiratory tract infection (RTI) are often tested for a variety of viruses with a respiratory pathogen panel (RPP) in addition to influenza and SARS-CoV-2. This triad of testing is expensive and uncomfortable because it requires 2 nasal swabs. Little evidence supports the use of an RPP in outpatient settings, but it is routinely ordered. This retrospective chart review analyzed 183 RPPs performed at Jefferson between April 2020 and November 2021 in outpatient oncology patients presenting with RTI. Data collected included patient demographics, symptoms, and exam findings at time of RPP, additional testing completed, results of RPP, antibiotic and antiviral use before and after RPP results, and patient outcomes 30 days after RPP. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Of the 183 RPPs analyzed, 16.9% (31) were positive for at least 1 respiratory virus. Fifty-two patients (28.4%) started antibiotics before results of the RPP. Of those, 2 patients (3.8%) had a change in antibiotic plan after RPP results returned. Zero patients were started on antiviral medication before results of the RPP. One patient started antiviral treatment after RPP results returned. In total, only 3 patients (1.6%) had an RPP-driven change in medication management. This study suggests limited utility in use of RPPs for oncology patients presenting to the office with RTI symptoms. Targeted testing with a single nasal swab for influenza, RSV, and SARS-CoV-2 may be more clinically relevant. The authors hope to use these data to implement a quality improvement initiative to reduce RPP utilization in this population.

Automated summary

This retrospective chart review analyzed the utility of respiratory pathogen panel (RPP) testing in outpatient oncology patients presenting with respiratory tract infection (RTI) symptoms. The study found limited usefulness of RPP testing and suggests that targeted testing for influenza, RSV, and SARS-CoV-2 with a single nasal swab may be more clinically relevant.