Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Advertisement

Scientific Reports
  • View all journals
  • Search
  • My Account Login
  • Content Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed
  1. nature
  2. scientific reports
  3. articles
  4. article
Nanomotion-enabled ultra-rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing with magnetic bead-based pathogen enrichment for accelerated sepsis diagnostics
Download PDF
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 20 March 2026

Nanomotion-enabled ultra-rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing with magnetic bead-based pathogen enrichment for accelerated sepsis diagnostics

  • Grzegorz Jóźwiak1,
  • Marta Pla Verge1,
  • Amanda Luraschi-Eggemann1,10,
  • Cyrine Mestiri2,
  • Elinor McSorley2,
  • Daisy Wilson-Owen2,
  • Sonia La Fauci2,
  • María García-Castillo3,
  • Eric Delarze1,
  • Katja Fromm1,
  • Laura Munch1,
  • Caspar Vogel1,
  • Dimitrios Balasopoulos1,
  • Gino Cathomen1,
  • Silke Reiter1,
  • Michał Świątkowski1,
  • Roxana Totu1,
  • Susanne Häussler4,
  • Tanel Tenson5,
  • Stefano Pagliara6,12,
  • Rafael Cantón3,7,11,
  • Gilbert Greub8,10,
  • Gorm Lisby9,
  • William Mullen2,
  • Daniel Lockhart2,
  • Danuta Cichocka1 na2 &
  • Alexander Sturm1 na2
  • for the ERADIAMR consortium

Scientific Reports , Article number:  (2026) Cite this article

  • 1047 Accesses

  • Metrics details

We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Subjects

  • Diseases
  • Medical research
  • Microbiology

Abstract

Rapid and accurate antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) is critical for guiding therapy in life-threatening infections such as sepsis, but current diagnostics rely on blood culture, delaying results by 48–72 h. This time lag forces empirical use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, increasing risks of treatment failure and antimicrobial resistance. We developed an approach combining bacterial growth-independent nanomotion detection with magnetic bead–based enrichment directly from blood. Using machine-learning classifiers trained on nanomotion spectra, we established ten antibiotic-specific models across 1,337 blood culture samples containing 390 clinical isolates of Enterobacterales (e.g., Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Enterobacter cloacae) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. These models achieved 94–98% sensitivity and specificity with fixed 2-h readouts. In parallel, SepsiSTAT enrichment enabled rapid recovery of viable bacteria and yeast at clinically relevant concentrations from 10 mL blood, with time-to-positivity averaging 5.5 h, i.e., over 7 h faster and more predictable than conventional blood culturing. The workflow was afterwards adapted to 1 mL input volumes, compatible with blood volume sampling constraints in fragile patient groups such as geriatric or neonatal patients. In spiked E. coli blood samples, ceftriaxone susceptibility was determined within 9–11 h of collection, nearly two days earlier than current standards. By integrating enrichment with nanomotion AST, we introduce a low-volume, label-free, phenotypic diagnostic platform capable of delivering actionable results within clinically meaningful timeframes. This approach holds potential to improve antibiotic stewardship, enable earlier transition from empiric to targeted therapy, and expand diagnostic access for vulnerable populations such as neonates.

Data availability

Link to code: https://github.com/resistell-com/neur-ast-2h.git.

References

  1. Singer, M. et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.0287 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Rudd, K. E. et al. Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990-2017: Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet 395, 200–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32989-7 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cohen, J. The immunopathogenesis of sepsis. Nature 420, 885–891. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01326 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Lancaster, D. P., Friedman, D. F., Chiotos, K., Sullivan, K. V. & Carroll, K. C. Blood volume required for detection of low levels and ultralow levels of organisms responsible for neonatal bacteremia by use of Bactec Peds Plus/F, Plus Aerobic/F Medium, and the BD Bactec FX System: Anin vitro study. J. Clin. Microbiol. 53, 3609–3613. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01706-15 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kellogg, J. A., Manzella, J. P. & Bankert, D. A. Frequency of low-level bacteremia in children from birth to fifteen years of age. J. Clin. Microbiol. 38, 2181–2185. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.38.6.2181-2185.2000 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Stranieri, I. et al. Assessment and comparison of bacterial load levels determined by quantitative amplifications in blood culture-positive and negative neonatal sepsis. Rev. Inst. Med. Trop. Sao Paulo 60, e61. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-9946201860061 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gonzalez, M. D., Chao, T. & Pettengill, M. A. Modern blood culture. Clin. Lab. Med. 40, 379–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cll.2020.07.001 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Opota, O., Croxatto, A., Prod’hom, G. & Greub, G. Blood culture-based diagnosis of bacteraemia: State of the art. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 21, 313–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2015.01.003 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Mettler, J. et al. Empirical use of antibiotics and adjustment of empirical antibiotic therapies in a university hospital: a prospective observational study. BMC Infect. Dis. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-7-21 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Paterson, D. L. & Rice, L. B. Empirical antibiotic choice for the seriously ill patient: Are minimization of selection of resistant organisms and maximization of individual outcome mutually exclusive?. Clin. Infect. Dis. 36, 1006–1012. https://doi.org/10.1086/374243 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Riccobene, T. et al. Outcomes of inadequate empiric therapy and timing of newer antibacterial therapy in hospitalized adults with culture-positive Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa: A multicenter analysis. BMC. Infect. Dis. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09700-7 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kang, C.-I. et al. Bloodstream infections caused by antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacilli: Risk factors for mortality and impact of inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy on outcome. Antimicrob. Agents. Chemother. 49, 760–766. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.49.2.760-766.2005 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Opota, O., Jaton, K. & Greub, G. Microbial diagnosis of bloodstream infection: Towards molecular diagnosis directly from blood. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 21, 323–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2015.02.005 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Malmberg, C. et al. Evaluation of the speed, accuracy and precision of the QuickMIC rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing assay with Gram-negative bacteria in a clinical setting. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2022.758262 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Baltekin, O., Boucharin, A., Tano, E., Andersson, D. I. & Elf, J. Antibiotic susceptibility testing in less than 30 min using direct single-cell imaging. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 114, 9170–9175. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1708558114 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kandavalli, V., Karempudi, P., Larsson, J. & Elf, J. Rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing and species identification for mixed samples. Nat. Commun. 13, 6215. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-33659-1 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fredborg, M. et al. Rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing of clinical isolates by digital time-lapse microscopy. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 34, 2385–2394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-015-2492-9 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Baker, K. R. et al. Multicenter evaluation of the Selux Next-Generation Phenotyping antimicrobial susceptibility testing system. J. Clin. Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00546-23 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Avesar, J. et al. Rapid phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing using nanoliter arrays. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1703736114 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Tibbetts, R. et al. Performance of the reveal rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing system on gram-negative blood cultures at a large urban hospital. J. Clin. Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.00098-22 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Tellapragada, C. et al. Isothermal microcalorimetry minimal inhibitory concentration testing in extensively drug resistant Gram-negative bacilli: A multicentre study. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 26, 1413.e1411-1413.e1417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2020.01.026 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang, M. et al. Rapid determination of antimicrobial susceptibility by stimulated Raman scattering imaging of D2O metabolic incorporation in a single bacterium. Adv. Sci. https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202001452 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Bhattacharyya, R. P. et al. Simultaneous detection of genotype and phenotype enables rapid and accurate antibiotic susceptibility determination. Nat. Med. 25, 1858–1864. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-019-0650-9 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Blanc, D. S. et al. Evaluation of the performance of rapid tests for screening carriers of acquired ESBL-producing Enterobacterales and their impact on turnaround time. J. Hosp. Infect. 108, 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhin.2020.10.013 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Silva-Dias, A. et al. Evaluation of FASTinov ultrarapid flow cytometry antimicrobial susceptibility testing directly from positive blood cultures. J. Clin. Microbiol. 59, e0054421. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00544-21 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Murless-Collins, S. et al. Blood culture versus antibiotic use for neonatal inpatients in 61 hospitals implementing with the NEST360 Alliance in Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania: a cross-sectional study. BMC Pediatr. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12887-023-04343-0 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  27. van Belkum, A. et al. Innovative and rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing systems. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 18, 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41579-020-0327-x (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ho, C. S. et al. Antimicrobial resistance: a concise update. Lancet Microbe https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lanmic.2024.07.010 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kasas, S. et al. Detecting nanoscale vibrations as signature of life. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 112, 378–381. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1415348112 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Longo, G. et al. Rapid detection of bacterial resistance to antibiotics using AFM cantilevers as nanomechanical sensors. Nat. Nanotechnol. 8, 522–526. https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2013.120 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Lissandrello, C. et al. Nanomechanical motion of Escherichia coli adhered to a surface. Appl. Phys. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4895132 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Rosłoń, I. E. et al. Prospects and challenges for graphene drums as sensors of individual bacteria. Appl. Phys. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0186160 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rosłoń, I. E., Japaridze, A., Steeneken, P. G., Dekker, C. & Alijani, F. Probing nanomotion of single bacteria with graphene drums. Nat. Nanotechnol. 17, 637–642. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-022-01111-6 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sturm, A. et al. Accurate and rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing using a machine learning-assisted nanomotion technology platform. Nat. Commun. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-46213-y (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Vocat, A. et al. Nanomotion technology in combination with machine learning: A new approach for a rapid antibiotic susceptibility test for Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Microbes Infect. 25, 105151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micinf.2023.105151 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Villalba, M. I. et al. Nanomotion detection method for testing antibiotic resistance and susceptibility of slow-growing bacteria. Small https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.201702671 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Venturelli, L. et al. A perspective view on the nanomotion detection of living organisms and its features. J. Mol. Recognit. 33, e2849. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmr.2849 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Stupar, P. et al. Nanomechanical sensor applied to blood culture pellets: A fast approach to determine the antibiotic susceptibility against agents of bloodstream infections. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 23, 400–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2016.12.028 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mustazzolu, A. et al. A rapid unraveling of the activity and antibiotic susceptibility of mycobacteria. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.02194-18 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kasas, S. et al. Nanomotion detection-based rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing. Antibiotics https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10030287 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Pelling, A. E., Sehati, S., Gralla, E. B., Valentine, J. S. & Gimzewski, J. K. Local nanomechanical motion of the cell wall of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Science 305, 1147–1150. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1097640 (2004).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kohler, A. C., Venturelli, L., Longo, G., Dietler, G. & Kasas, S. Nanomotion detection based on atomic force microscopy cantilevers. Cell Surf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcsw.2019.100021 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Hinnu, M. et al. Nanomotion technology for testing azithromycin susceptibility of Salmonella enterica. Microbiol. Spectr. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02385-24 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Fromm, K. et al. Nanomotion-based drug sensitivity prediction in ovarian and colon cancer cell lines using machine learning. ACS Pharmacol. Transl. Sci. 8, 3149–3159. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsptsci.5c00312 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Vocat, A. et al. Real-time evaluation of macozinone activity against Mycobacterium tuberculosi through bacterial nanomotion analysis. Antimicrob. Agents Chemotherapy https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.01318-24 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  46. Schwock, F. & Abadi, S. ICASSP 2021 - 2021 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) 5165–5169 (2021).

  47. Moragues-Solanas, L. et al. Development and proof-of-concept demonstration of a clinical metagenomics method for the rapid detection of bloodstream infection. BMC Med. Genomics https://doi.org/10.1186/s12920-024-01835-5 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Pancholi, P. et al. Multicenter evaluation of the accelerate PhenoTest BC Kit for rapid identification and phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing using morphokinetic cellular analysis. J. Clin. Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01329-17 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Wimmer, J. L. et al. Strategy for rapid identification and antibiotic susceptibility testing of gram-negative bacteria directly recovered from positive blood cultures using the Bruker MALDI Biotyper and the BD Phoenix system. J. Clin. Microbiol. 50, 2452–2454. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00409-12 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  50. McGregor, A. et al. The MicroScan WalkAway diagnostic microbiology system--an evaluation. Pathology 27, 172–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313029500169822 (1995).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Kim, T. H. et al. Blood culture-free ultra-rapid antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Nature 632, 893–902. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07725-1 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  52. EUCAST. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters Version 12.0. (2022).

  53. WHO. WHO bacterial priority pathogens list, 2024: Bacterial pathogens of public health importance to guide research, development and strategies to prevent and control antimicrobial resistance. (2024).

  54. Friedman, J. H. Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine. Ann. Stat. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1013203451 (2001).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Pareto, V. Cours d’Economie Politique. II. Lausanne (1897).

  56. Levy, M. M., Evans, L. E. & Rhodes, A. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Bundle: 2018 update. Intensive Care Med. 44, 925–928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-018-5085-0 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Caruana, G. et al. Nanomotion-based technology for rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing among adult patients admitted to a tertiary-care hospital with Gram-negative bacteraemia: a prospective, single arm, comparative diagnostic accuracy study. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2025.10.016 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Wang, M.-C. et al. Early identification of microorganisms in blood culture prior to the detection of a positive signal in the BACTEC FX system using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization–time of flight mass spectrometry. J. Microbiol. Immunol. Infect. 48, 419–424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmii.2013.10.006 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Gosiewski, T. et al. Comparison of nested, multiplex, qPCR; FISH; SeptiFast and blood culture methods in detection and identification of bacteria and fungi in blood of patients with sepsis. BMC Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12866-014-0313-4 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Meini, S., Tascini, C., Cei, M., Sozio, E. & Rossolini, G. M. AmpC β-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales: What a clinician should know. Infection 47, 363–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-019-01291-9 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Clerc, O. et al. Impact of matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry on the clinical management of patients with Gram-negative bacteremia: A prospective observational study. Clin. Infect. Dis. 56, 1101–1107. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/cis1204 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Mancini, S., Poirel, L., Corthesy, M., Greub, G. & Nordmann, P. Klebsiella pneumoniae co-producing KPC and RmtG, finally targeting Switzerland. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 90, 151–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2017.10.019 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Nordmann, P., Assouvie, L., Prod’Hom, G., Poirel, L. & Greub, G. Screening of plasmid-mediated MCR-1 colistin-resistance from bacteremia. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 35, 1891–1892. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10096-016-2739-0 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Pillonel, T. et al. Resistome analysis of a Carbapenemase (OXA-48)-producing and Colistin-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae strain. Antimicrob. Agents Chemotherapy https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.00076-18 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  65. Caméléna, F. et al. Multicenter evaluation of the FilmArray blood culture identification 2 panel for pathogen detection in bloodstream infections. Microbiol. Spect. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02547-22 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  66. Huang, T.-D. et al. Evaluation of the ePlex Blood Culture Identification Panels for detection of pathogens in bloodstream infections. J. Clin. Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01597-18 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  67. GWH Organization. Guidance on Implementing Patient Blood Management to Improve Global Blood Health Status (World Health Organization, 2024).

    Google Scholar 

  68. Organization, G. W. H. The urgent need to implement patient blood management: policy brief. (2021).

  69. Pellegrino, C., Stone, E. F., Valentini, C. G. & Teofili, L. Fetal red blood cells: A comprehensive review of biological properties and implications for neonatal transfusion. Cells https://doi.org/10.3390/cells13221843 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  70. Simons, C. C. & Capraro, G. A. Barriers to implementation of rapid identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing technologies in the clinical microbiology laboratory: An American perspective. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 79, i32–i36. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkae279 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  71. Hattab, S. et al. Rapid phenotypic and genotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing approaches for use in the clinical laboratory. Antibiotics https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13080786 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  72. Rodriguez-Manzano, J. et al. Innovative diagnostic technologies: Navigating regulatory frameworks through advances, challenges, and future prospects. Lancet Digit. Health 6, e934–e943. https://doi.org/10.1016/s2589-7500(24)00242-5 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Matuschek, E., Brown, D. F. J. & Kahlmeter, G. Development of the EUCAST disk diffusion antimicrobial susceptibility testing method and its implementation in routine microbiology laboratories. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 20, O255–O266. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-0691.12373 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  74. EUCAST. Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing - EUCAST disk difffusion method Version 10.0. (2022).

  75. Park, H.-M., Myaeng, S.-H. & Kang, U. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining 1115–1124 (2016).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge all institutions and collaborators who provided bacterial isolates and contributed to this study. These include Dr Stephen Hawser from the International Health Management Associates (IHMA); Shionogi & Co., Ltd.; Pfizer Inc.; Dr. Patrice Nordmann and colleagues at the Swiss Centre for Emerging Antibiotic Resistances (NARA); Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research; Prof. Dirk Bumann and Ms. Beatrice Claudi from the Biozentrum, University of Basel; Hvidovre Hospital, Denmark; Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV), Switzerland; Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Spain; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), USA; Mr. Christian Miscenic from F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.; Dr. Michael Oberle and Ms. Nadine Hunn from the Kantonsspital Aarau, Switzerland; Prof. Cornelia Lass-Floerl and Dr. Ronald Gstir from the University Hospital Innsbruck, Austria; and the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC). We thank them for their generous contributions of clinical and reference strains. We thank Prof. Sandor Kasas for the discussion and all contributors of the JPIAMR ERADIAMR consortiums for their valuable inputs. We also thank Mr. Grzegorz Gonciarz for his support and Mr. Piotr Grzywacz for graphical design support.

Funding

G.G., R.C., S.H., T.T., and S.P. were partially funded by the national funding bodies within JPIAMR-Development of innovative strategies, tools, technologies, and methods for diagnostics and surveillance of antimicrobial resistance.

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Danuta Cichocka and Alexander Sturm.

  2. A list of authors and their affiliations appears at the end of the paper.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Resistell AG, Hofackerstrasse 40, Muttenz, Switzerland

    Grzegorz Jóźwiak, Marta Pla Verge, Amanda Luraschi-Eggemann, Eric Delarze, Katja Fromm, Laura Munch, Caspar Vogel, Dimitrios Balasopoulos, Gino Cathomen, Silke Reiter, Michał Świątkowski, Roxana Totu, Danuta Cichocka & Alexander Sturm

  2. Momentum Bioscience Milton Park, Oxfordshire, UK

    Cyrine Mestiri, Elinor McSorley, Daisy Wilson-Owen, Sonia La Fauci, William Mullen & Daniel Lockhart

  3. Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Instituto Ramón y Cajal de Investigación Sanitaria (IRYCIS), Madrid, Spain

    María García-Castillo & Rafael Cantón

  4. Helmholtz Centre for Infection Research, Braunschweig, Germany

    Susanne Häussler & Nicolas Oswaldo Trinler

  5. Institute of Technology, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia

    Tanel Tenson, Mariliis Hinnu & Niilo Kaldalu

  6. Living Systems Institute and Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK

    Stefano Pagliara

  7. CIBER de Enfermedades Infecciosas (CIBERINFEC), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain

    Rafael Cantón

  8. Institute of Microbiology, Lausanne University Hospital & University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Gilbert Greub

  9. Department of Clinical Microbiology, Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Gorm Lisby

  10. Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Amanda Luraschi-Eggemann, Gilbert Greub, Christèle Aubry & Maria Georgevia

  11. Hospital Ramón y Cajal-IRYCIS and CIBER de Enfermedades Infecciosas (CIBERINFEC), Madrid, Spain

    Rafael Cantón & Maria Garcia-Castillo

  12. Living Systems Institute, Exeter, UK

    Stefano Pagliara, Tailise de Souza Guerreiro Rodrigues, Urszula Łapińska & Maureen Micaletto

Authors
  1. Grzegorz Jóźwiak
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marta Pla Verge
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amanda Luraschi-Eggemann
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Cyrine Mestiri
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Elinor McSorley
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Daisy Wilson-Owen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Sonia La Fauci
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. María García-Castillo
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Eric Delarze
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Katja Fromm
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Laura Munch
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Caspar Vogel
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Dimitrios Balasopoulos
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Gino Cathomen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Silke Reiter
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Michał Świątkowski
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Roxana Totu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Susanne Häussler
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Tanel Tenson
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Stefano Pagliara
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Rafael Cantón
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  22. Gilbert Greub
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Gorm Lisby
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  24. William Mullen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  25. Daniel Lockhart
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  26. Danuta Cichocka
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  27. Alexander Sturm
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Consortia

for the ERADIAMR consortium

  • Christèle Aubry
  • , Maria Georgevia
  • , Maria Garcia-Castillo
  • , Nicolas Oswaldo Trinler
  • , Mariliis Hinnu
  • , Niilo Kaldalu
  • , Tailise de Souza Guerreiro Rodrigues
  • , Urszula Łapińska
  •  & Maureen Micaletto

Contributions

D.C., D.L., and A.S. were responsible for the project’s conception and design. M.P.V., A.L.E., C.M., E.M., D.W.O., S.L.F., M.G.C., E.D., K.F., L.M., C.V., D.B., and S.R. conducted experiments. G.J. and G.C. developed the nanomotion AST classification algorithms. Data analysis was performed by G.J., A.S., D.L., M.P.V., and G.C.; M.S. and R.T. were responsible for the technical development of the Phenotech devices. A.S., D.L., D.C., G.J., M.S., E.S., R.C., G.G., G.L., W.M., T.T., S.H., and S.P. wrote/edited the manuscript and provided resources. Supplementary Information and Supplementary Data 1 and 2 were compiled by A.S. and G.J.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexander Sturm.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

G.L. serves as a scientific advisor to Momentum Bioscience. R.C. and G.G. serve as scientific advisors to Resistell. E.D., A.L.E., M.S., and are inventors on a patent application (PCT/EP2020/08782) filed by Resistell concerning bacterial attachment to a cantilever. G.J., A.S., E.D., and D.C. are inventors on another Resistell patent application (PCT/EP2023/055596) related to machine learning analysis of particle motion on a cantilever. Resistell also holds an exclusive license for the patent EP2766722B1, which protects a nanoscale motion detector.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information 1. (download PDF )

Supplementary Information 2. (download XLSX )

Supplementary Information 3. (download XLSX )

Supplementary Information 4. (download XLSX )

Supplementary Information 5. (download DOCX )

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jóźwiak, G., Pla Verge, M., Luraschi-Eggemann, A. et al. Nanomotion-enabled ultra-rapid antibiotic susceptibility testing with magnetic bead-based pathogen enrichment for accelerated sepsis diagnostics. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-44519-z

Download citation

  • Received: 14 January 2026

  • Accepted: 11 March 2026

  • Published: 20 March 2026

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-44519-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Nanomotions
  • Antibiotic susceptibility test
  • Blood culture
  • Magnetic bead enrichment
  • Infectious disease
  • Sepsis
  • Bloodstream infection
  • Bacteremia
  • Septicemia
  • AMR
Download PDF

Advertisement

Explore content

  • Research articles
  • News & Comment
  • Collections
  • Subjects
  • Follow us on Facebook
  • Follow us on X
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed

About the journal

  • About Scientific Reports
  • Contact
  • Journal policies
  • Guide to referees
  • Calls for Papers
  • Editor's Choice
  • Journal highlights
  • Open Access Fees and Funding

Publish with us

  • For authors
  • Language editing services
  • Open access funding
  • Submit manuscript

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Find a job
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Scientific Reports (Sci Rep)

ISSN 2045-2322 (online)

nature.com footer links

About Nature Portfolio

  • About us
  • Press releases
  • Press office
  • Contact us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Articles by subject
  • protocols.io
  • Nature Index

Publishing policies

  • Nature portfolio policies
  • Open access

Author & Researcher services

  • Reprints & permissions
  • Research data
  • Language editing
  • Scientific editing
  • Nature Masterclasses
  • Research Solutions

Libraries & institutions

  • Librarian service & tools
  • Librarian portal
  • Open research
  • Recommend to library

Advertising & partnerships

  • Advertising
  • Partnerships & Services
  • Media kits
  • Branded content

Professional development

  • Nature Awards
  • Nature Careers
  • Nature Conferences

Regional websites

  • Nature Africa
  • Nature China
  • Nature India
  • Nature Japan
  • Nature Middle East
  • Privacy Policy
  • Use of cookies
  • Legal notice
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Your US state privacy rights
Springer Nature

© 2026 Springer Nature Limited

Nature Briefing Microbiology

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Microbiology newsletter — what matters in microbiology research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Microbiology