Dataset Information

CD169 and CD64 could help differentiate bacterial from CoVID-19 or other viral infections in the Emergency Department.

ABSTRACT: The identification of a bacterial, viral, or even noninfectious cause is essential in the management of febrile syndrome in the emergency department (ED), especially in epidemic contexts such as flu or CoVID-19. The aim was to assess discriminative performances of two biomarkers, CD64 on neutrophils (nCD64) and CD169 on monocytes (mCD169), using a new flow cytometry procedure, in patients presenting with fever to the ED during epidemics. Eighty five adult patients presenting with potential infection were included during the 2019 flu season in the ED of La Timone Hospital. They were divided into four diagnostic outcomes according to their clinical records: no-infection, bacterial infection, viral infection and co-infection. Seventy six patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were also compared to 48 healthy volunteers. For the first cohort, 38 (45%) patients were diagnosed with bacterial infections, 11 (13%) with viral infections and 29 (34%) with co-infections. mCD169 was elevated in patients with viral infections, with a majority of Flu A virus or Respiratory Syncytial Virus, while nCD64 was elevated in subjects with bacterial infections, with a majority of Streptococcus pneumoniae and Escherichia coli. nCD64 and mCD169 showed 90% and 80% sensitivity, and 78% and 91% specificity, respectively, for identifying patients with bacterial or viral infections. When studied in a second cohort, mCD169 was elevated in 95% of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infections and remained at normal level in 100% of healthy volunteers. nCD64 and mCD169 have potential for accurately distinguishing bacterial and acute viral infections. Combined in an easy and rapid flow cytometry procedure, they constitute a potential improvement for infection management in the ED, and could even help for triage of patients during emerging epidemics.

SUBMITTER: Bourgoin P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8014466 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:There is an urgent need to develop biomarkers that stratify risk of bacterial infection in order to support antimicrobial stewardship in emergency hospital admissions. METHODS:We used computational machine learning to derive a rule-out blood transcriptomic signature of bacterial infection (SeptiCyte™ TRIAGE) from eight published case-control studies. We then validated this signature by itself in independent case-control data from more than 1500 samples in total, and in combination with our previously published signature for viral infections (SeptiCyte™ VIRUS) using pooled data from a further 1088 samples. Finally, we tested the performance of these signatures in a prospective observational cohort of emergency department (ED) patients with fever, and we used the combined SeptiCyte™ signature in a mixture modelling approach to estimate the prevalence of bacterial and viral infections in febrile ED patients without microbiological diagnoses. RESULTS:The combination of SeptiCyte™ TRIAGE with our published signature for viral infections (SeptiCyte™ VIRUS) discriminated bacterial and viral infections in febrile ED patients, with a receiver operating characteristic area under the curve of 0.95 (95% confidence interval 0.90-1), compared to 0.79 (0.68-0.91) for WCC and 0.73 (0.61-0.86) for CRP. At pre-test probabilities 0.35 and 0.72, the combined SeptiCyte™ score achieved a negative predictive value for bacterial infection of 0.97 (0.90-0.99) and 0.86 (0.64-0.96), compared to 0.90 (0.80-0.94) and 0.66 (0.48-0.79) for WCC and 0.88 (0.69-0.95) and 0.60 (0.31-0.72) for CRP. In a mixture modelling approach, the combined SeptiCyte™ score estimated that 24% of febrile ED cases receiving antibacterials without a microbiological diagnosis were due to viral infections. Our analysis also suggested that a proportion of patients with bacterial infection recovered without antibacterials. CONCLUSIONS:Blood transcriptional biomarkers offer exciting opportunities to support precision antibacterial prescribing in ED and improve diagnostic classification of patients without microbiologically confirmed infections.

Project description:BackgroundWhether or not to administer antibiotics is a common and challenging clinical decision in patients with suspected infections presenting to the emergency department (ED). We prospectively validate InSep, a 29-mRNA blood-based host response test for the prediction of bacterial and viral infections.MethodsThe PROMPT trial is a prospective, non-interventional, multi-center clinical study that enrolled 397 adult patients presenting to the ED with signs of acute infection and at least one vital sign change. The infection status was adjudicated using chart review (including a syndromic molecular respiratory panel, procalcitonin and C-reactive protein) by three infectious disease physicians blinded to InSep results. InSep (version BVN-2) was performed using PAXgene Blood RNA processed and quantified on NanoString nCounter SPRINT. InSep results (likelihood of bacterial and viral infection) were compared to the adjudicated infection status.ResultsSubject mean age was 64 years, comorbidities were significant for diabetes (17.1%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (13.6%), and severe neurological disease (6.8%); 16.9% of subjects were immunocompromised. Infections were adjudicated as bacterial (14.1%), viral (11.3%) and noninfected (0.25%): 74.1% of subjects were adjudicated as indeterminate. InSep distinguished bacterial vs. viral/noninfected patients and viral vs. bacterial/noninfected patients using consensus adjudication with AUROCs of 0.94 (95% CI 0.90-0.99) and 0.90 (95% CI 0.83-0.96), respectively. AUROCs for bacterial vs. viral/noninfected patients were 0.88 (95% CI 0.79-0.96) for PCT, 0.80 (95% CI 0.72-89) for CRP and 0.78 (95% CI 0.69-0.87) for white blood cell counts (of note, the latter biomarkers were provided as part of clinical adjudication). To enable clinical actionability, InSep incorporates score cutoffs to allocate patients into interpretation bands. The Very Likely (rule in) InSep bacterial band showed a specificity of 98% compared to 94% for the corresponding PCT band (> 0.5 µg/L); the Very Unlikely (rule-out) band showed a sensitivity of 95% for InSep compared to 86% for PCT. For the detection of viral infections, InSep demonstrated a specificity of 93% for the Very Likely band (rule in) and a sensitivity of 96% for the Very Unlikely band (rule out).ConclusionsInSep demonstrated high accuracy for predicting the presence of both bacterial and viral infections in ED patients with suspected acute infections or suspected sepsis. When translated into a rapid, point-of-care test, InSep will provide ED physicians with actionable results supporting early informed treatment decisions to improve patient outcomes while upholding antimicrobial stewardship. Registration number at Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03295825.

Dataset Information

CD169 and CD64 could help differentiate bacterial from CoVID-19 or other viral infections in the Emergency Department.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets