Dataset Information

Presymptomatic diagnosis of postoperative infection and sepsis using gene expression signatures.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

Early accurate diagnosis of infection ± organ dysfunction (sepsis) remains a major challenge in clinical practice. Utilizing effective biomarkers to identify infection and impending organ dysfunction before the onset of clinical signs and symptoms would enable earlier investigation and intervention. To our knowledge, no prior study has specifically examined the possibility of pre-symptomatic detection of sepsis.

Methods

Blood samples and clinical/laboratory data were collected daily from 4385 patients undergoing elective surgery. An adjudication panel identified 154 patients with definite postoperative infection, of whom 98 developed sepsis. Transcriptomic profiling and subsequent RT-qPCR were undertaken on sequential blood samples taken postoperatively from these patients in the three days prior to the onset of symptoms. Comparison was made against postoperative day-, age-, sex- and procedure- matched patients who had an uncomplicated recovery (n =151) or postoperative inflammation without infection (n =148).

Results

Specific gene signatures optimized to predict infection or sepsis in the three days prior to clinical presentation were identified in initial discovery cohorts. Subsequent classification using machine learning with cross-validation with separate patient cohorts and their matched controls gave high Area Under the Receiver Operator Curve (AUC) values. These allowed discrimination of infection from uncomplicated recovery (AUC 0.871), infectious from non-infectious systemic inflammation (0.897), sepsis from other postoperative presentations (0.843), and sepsis from uncomplicated infection (0.703).

Conclusion

Host biomarker signatures may be able to identify postoperative infection or sepsis up to three days in advance of clinical recognition. If validated in future studies, these signatures offer potential diagnostic utility for postoperative management of deteriorating or high-risk surgical patients and, potentially, other patient populations.

SUBMITTER: Lukaszewski RA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9281215 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Sexually transmitted infection (STI) of the upper reproductive tract can result in inflammation and infertility. A biomarker of STI-induced upper tract inflammation would be significant as many women are asymptomatic and delayed treatment increases risk of sequelae. Blood mRNA from 111 women from three cohorts was profiled using microarray. Unsupervised analysis revealed a transcriptional profile that distinguished 9 cases of STI-induced endometritis from 18 with cervical STI or uninfected controls. Using a hybrid feature selection algorithm we identified 21 genes that yielded maximal classification accuracy within our training dataset. Predictive accuracy was evaluated using an independent testing dataset of 5 cases and 10 controls. Sensitivity was evaluated in a separate test set of 12 women with asymptomatic STI-induced endometritis in whom cervical burden was determined by PCR; and specificity in an additional test set of 15 uninfected women with pelvic pain due to unknown cause. Disease module preservation was assessed in 42 women with a clinical diagnosis of pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). We also tested the ability of the biomarker to discriminate STI-induced endometritis from other diseases. The biomarker was 86.7% (13/15) accurate in correctly distinguishing cases from controls in the testing dataset. Sensitivity was 83.3% (5/6) in women with high cervical Chlamydia trachomatis burden and asymptomatic endometritis, but 0% (0/6) in women with low burden. Specificity in patients with non-STI-induced pelvic pain was 86.7% (13/15). Disease modules were preserved in all 8 biomarker predicted cases. The 21-gene biomarker was highly discriminatory for systemic infections, lupus, and appendicitis, but wrongly predicted tuberculosis as STI-induced endometritis in 52.4%. A 21-gene biomarker can identify asymptomatic women with STI-induced endometritis that places them at risk for chronic disease development and discriminate STI-induced endometritis from non-STI pelvic pain and other diseases.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:In response to a need for better sepsis diagnostics, several new gene expression classifiers have been recently published, including the 11-gene "Sepsis MetaScore," the "FAIM3-to-PLAC8" ratio, and the Septicyte Lab. We performed a systematic search for publicly available gene expression data in sepsis and tested each gene expression classifier in all included datasets. We also created a public repository of sepsis gene expression data to encourage their future reuse. DATA SOURCES:We searched National Institutes of Health Gene Expression Omnibus and EBI ArrayExpress for human gene expression microarray datasets. We also included the Glue Grant trauma gene expression cohorts. STUDY SELECTION:We selected clinical, time-matched, whole blood studies of sepsis and acute infections as compared to healthy and/or noninfectious inflammation patients. We identified 39 datasets composed of 3,241 samples from 2,604 patients. DATA EXTRACTION:All data were renormalized from raw data, when available, using consistent methods. DATA SYNTHESIS:Mean validation areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve for discriminating septic patients from patients with noninfectious inflammation for the Sepsis MetaScore, the FAIM3-to-PLAC8 ratio, and the Septicyte Lab were 0.82 (range, 0.73-0.89), 0.78 (range, 0.49-0.96), and 0.73 (range, 0.44-0.90), respectively. Paired-sample t tests of validation datasets showed no significant differences in area under the receiver operating characteristic curves. Mean validation area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for discriminating infected patients from healthy controls for the Sepsis MetaScore, FAIM3-to-PLAC8 ratio, and Septicyte Lab were 0.97 (range, 0.85-1.0), 0.94 (range, 0.65-1.0), and 0.71 (range, 0.24-1.0), respectively. There were few significant differences in any diagnostics due to pathogen type. CONCLUSIONS:The three diagnostics do not show significant differences in overall ability to distinguish noninfectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome from sepsis, though the performance in some datasets was low (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, < 0.7) for the FAIM3-to-PLAC8 ratio and Septicyte Lab. The Septicyte Lab also demonstrated significantly worse performance in discriminating infections as compared to healthy controls. Overall, public gene expression data are a useful tool for benchmarking gene expression diagnostics.

Project description:Purpose: There is a quest for novel non-invasive diagnostic markers for the detection of breast cancer. The goal of this study is to identify circulating microRNA signatures using a cohort of Asian Chinese breast cancer patients, and to compare microRNA profiles between tumour and serum samples. Experimental design: MicroRNAs from paired breast cancer tumours, normal tissue and serum samples derived from 32 patients were comprehensively profiled using microarrays (1300 microRNAs against tumour and normal tissues) or LNA RT-PCR panels (742 microRNAs against serum samples). Serum samples from healthy individuals (n=22) were also employed as normal controls. Significant serum microRNAs, identified by logistic regression, were validated in an independent set of serum samples from patients (n=82) and healthy controls (n=53). Results: The 20 most significant microRNAs differentially expressed in breast cancer tumours included miR-21, miR-10b, and miR-145, previously shown to be dysregulated in breast cancer. Interestingly, 16 of the 20 most significant microRNAs differentially expressed in serum samples were novel. MiR-1, miR-92a, miR-133a and miR-133b were identified as the most important diagnostic markers, and were successfully validated; receiver operating characteristic curves derived from combinations of these microRNAs exhibited areas under the curves of 0.944-0.946. Only seven microRNAs were overexpressed in both tumours and serum, suggesting that microRNAs may be released into the serum selectively. Conclusion: The clinical employment of microRNA signatures as a non-invasive diagnostic strategy is promising, but should be further validated for different subtypes of breast cancers. "_A" and "_B" are two tissue sections of the same sample; "_1" and "_2" represents 2 runs of the same sample; na = not available All tissue samples were histologically confirmed by a pathologist using hematoxylin and eosin staining of cryosectioned specimens. One tumour sample was rejected due to failure to detect any tumour cells. Except for two samples (with 30% and 40% tumour cells), all tumour tissues employed had a minimum of 60% tumour cells, as estimated microscopically. Overall, the breast cancer tumour samples had an average of 71% tumour cells. The criteria for adjacent normal tissue were absence of tumour cells and presence of epithelial cells. Hence, after histological confirmation, 31 breast cancer tumours and 23 matched normal tissues were employed for microRNA extraction and profiling using microarray.