Project description:Here we developed a new approach to sepsis diagnosis that integrates host transcriptional profiling with metagenomic broad-range pathogen detection from cell-free plasma RNA and DNA.
Project description:Background: Systemic inflammation is a whole body reaction that can have an infection-positive (i.e. sepsis) or infection-negative origin. It is important to distinguish between septic and non-septic presentations early and reliably, because this has significant therapeutic implications for critically ill patients. We hypothesized that a molecular classifier based on a small number of RNAs expressed in peripheral blood could be discovered that would: 1) determine which patients with systemic inflammation had sepsis; 2) be robust across independent patient cohorts; 3) be insensitive to disease severity; and 4) provide diagnostic utility. The overall goal of this study was to identify and validate such a molecular classifier. Methods and Findings: We conducted an observational, non-interventional study of adult patients recruited from tertiary intensive care units (ICU). Biomarker discovery was conducted with an Australian cohort (n = 105) consisting of sepsis patients and post -surgical patients with infection-negative systemic inflammation. Using this cohort, a four-gene classifier consisting of a combination of CEACAM4, LAMP1, PLA2G7 and PLAC8 RNA biomarkers was identified. This classifier, designated SeptiCyte® Lab, was externally validated using RT-qPCR and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis in five cohorts (n = 345) from the Netherlands. Cohort 1 (n=59) consisted of unambiguous septic cases and infection-negative systemic inflammation controls; SeptiCyte® Lab gave an area under curve (AUC) of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-1.00). ROC analysis of a more heterogeneous group of patients (Cohorts 2-5; 249 patients after excluding 37 patients with infection likelihood possible) gave an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93). Disease severity, as measured by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score or the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score, was not a significant confounding variable. The diagnostic utility o f SeptiCyte® Lab was evaluated by comparison to various clinical and laboratory parameters that would be available to a clinician within 24 hours of ICU admission. SeptiCyte® Lab was significantly better at differentiating sepsis from infection-negative systemic inflammation than all tested parameters, both singly and in various logistic combinations. SeptiCyte® Lab more than halved the diagnostic error rate compared to PCT in all tested cohorts or cohort combinations. Conclusions: SeptiCyte® Lab is a rapid molecular assay that may be clinically useful in the management of ICU patients with systemic inflammation. SIRS and Sepsis ICU patients, admission samples Retrospective, mutli-site sutdy using retrospective physician adjudication as a comparator
Project description:Background: Systemic inflammation is a whole body reaction that can have an infection-positive (i.e. sepsis) or infection-negative origin. It is important to distinguish between septic and non-septic presentations early and reliably, because this has significant therapeutic implications for critically ill patients. We hypothesized that a molecular classifier based on a small number of RNAs expressed in peripheral blood could be discovered that would: 1) determine which patients with systemic inflammation had sepsis; 2) be robust across independent patient cohorts; 3) be insensitive to disease severity; and 4) provide diagnostic utility. The overall goal of this study was to identify and validate such a molecular classifier. Methods and Findings: We conducted an observational, non-interventional study of adult patients recruited from tertiary intensive care units (ICU). Biomarker discovery was conducted with an Australian cohort (n = 105) consisting of sepsis patients and post -surgical patients with infection-negative systemic inflammation. Using this cohort, a four-gene classifier consisting of a combination of CEACAM4, LAMP1, PLA2G7 and PLAC8 RNA biomarkers was identified. This classifier, designated SeptiCyte® Lab, was externally validated using RT-qPCR and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis in five cohorts (n = 345) from the Netherlands. Cohort 1 (n=59) consisted of unambiguous septic cases and infection-negative systemic inflammation controls; SeptiCyte® Lab gave an area under curve (AUC) of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.91-1.00). ROC analysis of a more heterogeneous group of patients (Cohorts 2-5; 249 patients after excluding 37 patients with infection likelihood possible) gave an AUC of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.85-0.93). Disease severity, as measured by Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score or the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) IV score, was not a significant confounding variable. The diagnostic utility o f SeptiCyte® Lab was evaluated by comparison to various clinical and laboratory parameters that would be available to a clinician within 24 hours of ICU admission. SeptiCyte® Lab was significantly better at differentiating sepsis from infection-negative systemic inflammation than all tested parameters, both singly and in various logistic combinations. SeptiCyte® Lab more than halved the diagnostic error rate compared to PCT in all tested cohorts or cohort combinations. Conclusions: SeptiCyte® Lab is a rapid molecular assay that may be clinically useful in the management of ICU patients with systemic inflammation. SIRS and Sepsis ICU patients, admission samples
Project description:Here we developed a new approach to sepsis diagnosis that integrates host transcriptional profiling with metagenomic broad-range pathogen detection from cell-free plasma RNA and DNA.
Project description:INTRODUCTION: Risk stratification of severely ill patients remains problematic, resulting in increased interest in potential circulating markers, such as cytokines, procalcitonin and brain natriuretic peptide. Recent reports have indicated the usefulness of plasma DNA as a prognostic marker in various disease states such as trauma, myocardial infarction and stroke. The present study assesses the significance of raised levels of plasma DNA on admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) in terms of its ability to predict disease severity or prognosis. METHODS: Fifty-two consecutive patients were studied in a general ICU. Blood samples were taken on admission and were stored for further analysis. Plasma DNA levels were estimated by a PCR method using primers for the human beta-haemoglobin gene. RESULTS: Sixteen of the 52 patients investigated died within 3 months of sampling. Nineteen of the 52 patients developed either severe sepsis or septic shock. Plasma DNA was higher in ICU patients than in healthy controls and was also higher in patients who developed sepsis (192 (65-362) ng/ml versus 74 (46-156) ng/ml, P = 0.03) or who subsequently died either in the ICU (321 (185-430) ng/ml versus 71 (46-113) ng/ml, P < 0.001) or in hospital (260 (151-380) ng/ml versus 68 (47-103) ng/ml, P < 0.001). Plasma DNA concentrations were found to be significantly higher in patients who died in the ICU. Multiple logistic regression analysis determined plasma DNA to be an independent predictor of mortality (odds ratio, 1.002 (95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.004), P = 0.05). Plasma DNA had a sensitivity of 92% and a specificity of 80% when a concentration higher than 127 ng/ml was taken as a predictor for death on the ICU. CONCLUSION: Plasma DNA may be a useful prognostic marker of mortality and sepsis in intensive care patients.
Project description:BackgroundDespite the high morbidity and mortality associated with sepsis, the relationship between the plasma proteome and clinical outcome is poorly understood. In this study, we used targeted plasma proteomics to identify novel biomarkers of sepsis in critically ill patients.MethodsBlood was obtained from 15 critically ill patients with suspected/confirmed sepsis (Sepsis-3.0 criteria) on intensive care unit (ICU) Day-1 and Day-3, as well as age- and sex-matched 15 healthy control subjects. A total of 1161 plasma proteins were measured with proximal extension assays. Promising sepsis biomarkers were narrowed with machine learning and then correlated with relevant clinical and laboratory variables.ResultsThe median age for critically ill sepsis patients was 56 (IQR 51-61) years. The median MODS and SOFA values were 7 (IQR 5.0-8.0) and 7 (IQR 5.0-9.0) on ICU Day-1, and 4 (IQR 3.5-7.0) and 6 (IQR 3.5-7.0) on ICU Day-3, respectively. Targeted proteomics, together with feature selection, identified the leading proteins that distinguished sepsis patients from healthy control subjects with ≥ 90% classification accuracy; 25 proteins on ICU Day-1 and 26 proteins on ICU Day-3 (6 proteins overlapped both ICU days; PRTN3, UPAR, GDF8, NTRK3, WFDC2 and CXCL13). Only 7 of the leading proteins changed significantly between ICU Day-1 and Day-3 (IL10, CCL23, TGFα1, ST2, VSIG4, CNTN5, and ITGAV; P < 0.01). Significant correlations were observed between a variety of patient clinical/laboratory variables and the expression of 15 proteins on ICU Day-1 and 14 proteins on ICU Day-3 (P < 0.05).ConclusionsTargeted proteomics with feature selection identified proteins altered in critically ill sepsis patients relative to healthy control subjects. Correlations between protein expression and clinical/laboratory variables were identified, each providing pathophysiological insight. Our exploratory data provide a rationale for further hypothesis-driven sepsis research.
Project description:Objective: It is unclear whether the host response of gram-positive sepsis differs from gram-negative sepsis at a transcriptome level. Using microarray technology, we compared the gene-expression profiles of gram-positive sepsis and gram-negative sepsis in critically ill patients. Design: A prospective cross-sectional study. Setting: A 20-bed general intensive care unit of a tertiary referral hospital. Patients: Seventy-two patients admitted to the intensive care unit. Interventions: Intravenous blood was collected for leukocyte separation and RNA extraction. Microarray experiements were then performed examing the expression level of 19,232 genes in each sample. Measurements and Main Results: There was no difference in the expression profile between gram-positive and gram-negative sepsis. The finding remained unchanged even when genes with lower expression level were included or after statistical stringency was lowered. There were, however, ninety-four genes differentially expressed between sepsis and control patients. These genes included those involved in immune regulation, inflammation and mitochondrial function. Hierarchical cluster analysis confirmed that the difference in gene expression profile existed between sepsis and control patients, but not between gram-positive and gram-negative patients. Conclusion: Gram-positive and gram-negative sepsis share a common host response at a transcriptome level. These findings support the hypothesis that the septic response is non-specific and is designed to provide a more general response that can be elicited by a wide range of different micro-organisms. The study included seventy-two critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) of Nepean Hospital, Sydney, Australia. Of these, fifty-five patients were diagnosed to have sepsis, as confirmed by microbiological culture. The remaining seventeen patients did not have sepsis and were therefore used as controls. The study was approved by the hospital ethics committee and informed consent was obtained from all patients or their relatives. Patient Samples. Whole blood was taken from each patient on admission to ICU. Neutrophils were separated from whole blood using density-gradient separation with Ficoll-PaqueP P(Amersham). Subsequent neutrophil RNA extraction was performed using guanidinium thiocyanate (Ambion). Microarray Experiment. The neutrophil RNA was converted to cDNA, fluorescently labeled and hybridized to its complimentary sequences on the microarray (Invitrogen). The fluorescent signals on each micrroarray were captured using the GenePix 4000B laser scanner (Axon Instruments). Expression level of each gene was represented by the intensity of its fluorescent signal. Data Extraction. All signal intensity values were processed using background-subtraction method. Prior to analysis, all values were log-transformed and normalized by fitting a print-tip group Lowess curve. Normalization minimizes bias due to dye chemistry, signal intensity or location of a gene on the array. It ensures the detection of genes that are truly differentially expressed, instead of those caused by experimental artifacts or variation in the hybridization process. After normalization, genes that had more than 50% of data missing were removed. We then selected genes that had at least 80% of the data showing two-fold changes from the geneâs median values. After filtering, 1617 genes were available for further analysis.
Project description:Objective: It is unclear whether the host response of gram-positive sepsis differs from gram-negative sepsis at a transcriptome level. Using microarray technology, we compared the gene-expression profiles of gram-positive sepsis and gram-negative sepsis in critically ill patients. Design: A prospective cross-sectional study. Setting: A 20-bed general intensive care unit of a tertiary referral hospital. Patients: Seventy-two patients admitted to the intensive care unit. Interventions: Intravenous blood was collected for leukocyte separation and RNA extraction. Microarray experiements were then performed examing the expression level of 19,232 genes in each sample. Measurements and Main Results: There was no difference in the expression profile between gram-positive and gram-negative sepsis. The finding remained unchanged even when genes with lower expression level were included or after statistical stringency was lowered. There were, however, ninety-four genes differentially expressed between sepsis and control patients. These genes included those involved in immune regulation, inflammation and mitochondrial function. Hierarchical cluster analysis confirmed that the difference in gene expression profile existed between sepsis and control patients, but not between gram-positive and gram-negative patients. Conclusion: Gram-positive and gram-negative sepsis share a common host response at a transcriptome level. These findings support the hypothesis that the septic response is non-specific and is designed to provide a more general response that can be elicited by a wide range of different micro-organisms. Keywords: disease state analysis, gram-positive sepsis, gram-negative sepsis
Project description:BackgroundSepsis is a life-threatening condition with high mortality rates. Early detection and treatment are critical to improving outcomes. Our primary objective was to develop artificial intelligence capable of predicting sepsis earlier using a minimal set of streaming physiological data in real time.Methods and findingsA total of 29,552 adult patients were admitted to the intensive care unit across five regional hospitals in Memphis, Tenn, over 18 months from January 2017 to July 2018. From these, 5,958 patients were selected after filtering for continuous (minute-by-minute) physiological data availability. A total of 617 (10.4%) patients were identified as sepsis cases, using the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3) criteria. Physiomarkers, a set of signal processing features, were derived from five physiological data streams including heart rate, respiratory rate, and blood pressure (systolic, diastolic, and mean), captured every minute from the bedside monitors. A support vector machine classifier was used for classification. The model accurately predicted sepsis up to a mean and 95% confidence interval of 17.4 ± 0.22 h before sepsis onset, with an average test accuracy of 83.0% (average sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.757, 0.902, and 0.781, respectively).ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that salient physiomarkers derived from continuous bedside monitoring are temporally and differentially expressed in septic patients. Using this information, minimalistic artificial intelligence models can be developed to predict sepsis earlier in critically ill patients.