Dataset Information

Could Neutrophil CD64 Expression Be Used as a Diagnostic Parameter of Bacteremia in Patients with Febrile Neutropenia?

ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to investigate if neutrophil CD64 expression in febrile neutropenia patients could be used as an early indicator of bacteremia.All consecutive patients older than 18 years of age who had developed febrile neutropenia episodes due to hematological malignancies were included in the study. Those patients who had significant growth in their blood cultures constituted the case group, while those who had febrile neutropenia without any growth in their cultures and who did not have any documented infections formed the control group. Blood culture bottles were incubated in the Bact ALERT 3D system (bioMerieux, France), identification and susceptibility testing were performed using an automated broth microdilution method (VITEK 2, bioMerieux), and CD64 expression analysis was performed by the flow cytometry method. C-reactive protein (CRP) was measured by turbidimetric methods (Biosystems, Spain) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) was measured by the Wintrobe method.In total, we prospectively evaluated 31 febrile episodes. The case group consisted of 17 patients while the control group included 14 patients. CD64 was found on neutrophils of the case group patients with a mean count of 8006 molecules/cell and of control group with a mean count of 2786 molecules/cell. CD64 levels of the case group were significantly higher than those of the control group (p=0.005). In the differentiation of the case group from the control group, a 2500 cut-off value for CD64 had significant [AUC=0.792 (0.619-0.965)] predictive value (p=0.001). In the prediction of patients with a 2500 cut-off value for CD64, sensitivity was 94.1%, positive predictive value was 76.2%, specificity was 64.3%, and negative predictive value was 90.0%. CRP levels and ESR values did not differ significantly between the groups (p=0.005).Neutrophil CD64 expression could be a good predictor as an immune parameter with high sensitivity and a negative predictive value for bacteremia in febrile neutropenic patients.

SUBMITTER: Efe Iris N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5440869 | biostudies-other | 2017 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Serum procalcitonin (PCT) and C-reactive protein (CRP) are biomarkers of infection. In patients with hematologic disorders with or without hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), it is difficult to distinguish bloodstream infections from aseptic causes of febrile episodes. The objective of this study was to investigate diagnostic values of PCT and CRP in predicting systemic bacterial infection in patients with hematologic malignancies. METHODS:Clinical and laboratory data of 614 febrile episode cases from 511 patients were analyzed. Febrile episodes were classified into four groups: (1) culture-positive bacterial infection by Gram-positive cocci (GPC), (2) culture-positive bacterial infection by Gram-negative bacilli (GNB), (3) fungal infection, and (4) viral infection or a noninfectious etiology. RESULTS:Of 614 febrile cases, systemic bacterial infections were confirmed in 99 (16.1%) febrile episodes, including 38 (6.2%) GPC and 61 (9.9%) GNB infections. PCT levels were significantly higher in GNB infectious episodes than those in febrile episodes caused by fungal infection (0.58 ng/mL (95% CI: 0.26-1.61) vs. 0.22 ng/mL (0.16-0.38), P = 0.047). Bacterial infectious episodes showed higher PCT and CRP levels than non-bacterial events (PCT: 0.49 (0.26-0.93) ng/mL vs. 0.20 (0.18-0.22) ng/mL, P < 0.001; CRP: 76.6 (50.5-92.8) mg/L vs. 58.0 (51.1-66.5) mg/L, P = 0.036). For non-neutropenic febrile episodes, both PCT and CRP discriminated bacteremia from non-bacteremia. However, in neutropenic febrile episodes, PCT only distinguished bacteremia from non-bacteremia. In non-neutropenic episode, both PCT and CRP showed good diagnostic accuracy (AUC: 0.757 vs. 0.763). In febrile neutropenia, only PCT discriminated bacteremia from non-bacterial infection (AUC: 0.624) whereas CRP could not detect bacteremia (AUC: 0.500, 95% CI: 0.439-0.561, P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS:In this single-center observational study, PCT was more valuable than CRP for discriminating between bacteremia and non-bacteremia independent of neutropenia or HSCT.

Project description:BackgroundDiagnosis of pneumonia is critical in managing patients with febrile neutropenia (FN), however, chest X-ray (CXR) has limited performance in the detection of pneumonia. We aimed to evaluate the performance of a deep learning-based computer-aided detection (CAD) system in pneumonia detection in the CXRs of consecutive FN patients and investigated whether CAD could improve radiologists' diagnostic performance when used as a second reader.MethodsCXRs of patients with FN (a body temperature ≥ 38.3 °C, or a sustained body temperature ≥ 38.0 °C for an hour; absolute neutrophil count < 500/mm3) obtained between January and December 2017 were consecutively included, from a single tertiary referral hospital. Reference standards for the diagnosis of pneumonia were defined by consensus of two thoracic radiologists after reviewing medical records and CXRs. A commercialized, deep learning-based CAD system was retrospectively applied to detect pulmonary infiltrates on CXRs. For comparing performance, five radiologists independently interpreted CXRs initially without the CAD results (radiologist-alone interpretation), followed by the interpretation with CAD. The sensitivities and specificities for detection of pneumonia were compared between radiologist-alone interpretation and interpretation with CAD. The standalone performance of the CAD was also evaluated, using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity. Moreover, sensitivity and specificity of standalone CAD were compared with those of radiologist-alone interpretation.ResultsAmong 525 CXRs from 413 patients (52.3% men; median age 59 years), pneumonia was diagnosed in 128 (24.4%) CXRs. In the interpretation with CAD, average sensitivity of radiologists was significantly improved (75.4% to 79.4%, P = 0.003) while their specificity remained similar (75.4% to 76.8%, P = 0.101), compared to radiologist-alone interpretation. The CAD exhibited AUC, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.895, 88.3%, and 68.3%, respectively. The standalone CAD exhibited higher sensitivity (86.6% vs. 75.2%, P < 0.001) and lower specificity (64.8% vs. 75.4%, P < 0.001) compared to radiologist-alone interpretation.ConclusionsIn patients with FN, the deep learning-based CAD system exhibited radiologist-level performance in detecting pneumonia on CXRs and enhanced radiologists' performance.

Project description:BackgroundNeonatal septicemia is a critical medical situation; current conventional laboratory methods still have many limitations and diagnostic obstacles. For this purpose, last decades have witnessed a challenge between the battery of sepsis biomarkers including many leukocyte surface antigens, not only for early diagnostic purposes but also for better follow-up and good management of sepsis patients.AimTo evaluate the diagnostic, prognostic, and monitoring performance of both neutrophil CD64 (nCD64) and presepsin as sepsis biomarkers compared to each other and to the conventional laboratory sepsis parameters aiming to decide which is the best fitting for routine daily use in neonatal intensive care units (NICUs).Methods235 neonates were enrolled from three Egyptian neonatal ICUs, during the period from November 2015 till March 2018; they were classified into two main groups: the control group (n = 102) and the sepsis group (n = 133). Laboratory sepsis evaluation included highly sensitive CRP (hs-CRP), CBC, in addition to nCD64 (flow cytometry technique), and presepsin measurement (CLEIA technique combined with Magtration® technology); the diagnosis was confirmed thereafter by positive blood culture results (BacT/Alert system). Sixty-two of the enrolled sepsis neonates were subjected to follow-up assessment; they were reclassified according to their clinical improvement at the second time assessment into (group 1: sepsis group without improvement) (n = 20) and (group 2: improved sepsis group) (n = 42).ResultsSignificant increase in nCD64 and presepsin values was found in sepsis groups compared to the controls. At cutoff 41.6%, nCD64% could discriminate the presence of septicemia with sensitivity 94.7%, specificity 93.6 %, and AUC 0.925, while presepsin at cutoff 686 pg/ml achieves sensitivity 82.7%, specificity 95.5%, and AUC 0.887, respectively. Significant increase in nCD64 (P < 0.001) and hs-CRP (P=0.018) values was observed in severe sepsis/septic shock patients compared to nonsevere sepsis patients. Delta change percentage (dC%) between initial and follow-up evaluations for both improved and nonimproved sepsis patients was dC Z value -5.904 for nCD64% followed by dC Z value -4.494 for presepsin.ConclusionnCD64 and presepsin are valuable early diagnostic and monitoring sepsis biomarkers; the highest sensitivity could be achieved by a univariant sepsis marker in this study was recorded by the nCD64% biomarker, while the highest specificity was documented by presepsin. Combined measurement of both achieves the highest diagnostic performance in sepsis neonates. Either of CD64 or presepsin combined with hs-CRP associated with better performance than any of them alone. nCD64 carries an additional promising role in reflecting sepsis prognosis.

Dataset Information

Could Neutrophil CD64 Expression Be Used as a Diagnostic Parameter of Bacteremia in Patients with Febrile Neutropenia?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure