Danielle V Clark1, Patrick Banura2, Karen Bandeen-Roche3, W Conrad Liles4, Kevin C Kain5, W Michael Scheld6, William J Moss3, Shevin T Jacob7. 1. Austere environments Consortium for Enhanced Sepsis Outcomes, Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 2. Ministry of Health, Uganda; Kampala, Uganda. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. 4. Departments of Medicine, Pathology, Pharmacology, and Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA. 5. Tropical Disease Unit, University Health Network-Toronto General Hospital, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 6. Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases and International Health, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA. 7. Department of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sepsis is a complex clinical syndrome with substantial heterogeneity. We sought to identify patterns of serum biomarkers of endothelial activation and dysfunction in individuals with sepsis and evaluate subgroup-specific differences in mortality. METHODS: Adult patients with sepsis (n=426) were consecutively recruited from two hospitals in Uganda. Clinical information was collected and serum concentrations of eleven biomarkers involved in the endothelial response to infection were measured in samples from 315 patients. Latent variable models were fit to evaluate whether the endothelial response to sepsis consists of one unified biological process or multiple processes and to identify subgroups of patients with distinct host-response profiles. Differences in survival at day 28 were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. RESULTS: We identified three patient subgroups characterized by unique host endothelial response profiles. Patients fitting Profile 2 had significantly worse survival (log-rank p<0.001). Four latent factors (Factor 1-4) were identified, each potentially representing distinct biological processes for the endothelial response to sepsis: Factor 1 (CHI3L1, sTREM1, sFLT1); Factor 2 (ANGPT1, PF4, VEGF); Factor 3 (CXCL10, VWF, sICAM1); and Factor 4 (ANGPT2, sTEK). CONCLUSION: Patient profiles based on patterns of circulating biomarkers of endothelial responses may provide a clinically meaningful way to categorize patients into homogeneous subgroups and may identify patients with a high risk of mortality. Profile 2 may represent dysfunction of the endothelial response to infection. FUNDING: Primary funding: Investigator-Initiated Award provided by Pfizer, Inc (WMS, STJ). Additional support: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Foundation grant (KCK; FDN-148439) and the Canada Research Chair program (KCK).
BACKGROUND:Sepsis is a complex clinical syndrome with substantial heterogeneity. We sought to identify patterns of serum biomarkers of endothelial activation and dysfunction in individuals with sepsis and evaluate subgroup-specific differences in mortality. METHODS: Adult patients with sepsis (n=426) were consecutively recruited from two hospitals in Uganda. Clinical information was collected and serum concentrations of eleven biomarkers involved in the endothelial response to infection were measured in samples from 315 patients. Latent variable models were fit to evaluate whether the endothelial response to sepsis consists of one unified biological process or multiple processes and to identify subgroups of patients with distinct host-response profiles. Differences in survival at day 28 were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival curves. RESULTS: We identified three patient subgroups characterized by unique host endothelial response profiles. Patients fitting Profile 2 had significantly worse survival (log-rank p<0.001). Four latent factors (Factor 1-4) were identified, each potentially representing distinct biological processes for the endothelial response to sepsis: Factor 1 (CHI3L1, sTREM1, sFLT1); Factor 2 (ANGPT1, PF4, VEGF); Factor 3 (CXCL10, VWF, sICAM1); and Factor 4 (ANGPT2, sTEK). CONCLUSION:Patient profiles based on patterns of circulating biomarkers of endothelial responses may provide a clinically meaningful way to categorize patients into homogeneous subgroups and may identify patients with a high risk of mortality. Profile 2 may represent dysfunction of the endothelial response to infection. FUNDING: Primary funding: Investigator-Initiated Award provided by Pfizer, Inc (WMS, STJ). Additional support: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Foundation grant (KCK; FDN-148439) and the Canada Research Chair program (KCK).
Authors: W Matsuyama; T Hashiguchi; K Matsumuro; F Iwami; Y Hirotsu; M Kawabata; K Arimura; M Osame Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Linda Boloko; Charlotte Schutz; Nomfundo Sibiya; Avuyonke Balfour; Amy Ward; Muki Shey; Mark P Nicol; Rosie Burton; Robert J Wilkinson; Gary Maartens; Graeme Meintjes; David A Barr Journal: Lancet Microbe Date: 2022-05-26
Authors: M Martin-Fernandez; L M Vaquero-Roncero; R Almansa; E Gómez-Sánchez; S Martín; E Tamayo; M C Esteban-Velasco; P Ruiz-Granado; M Aragón; D Calvo; J Rico-Feijoo; A Ortega; E Gómez-Pesquera; M Lorenzo-López; J López; C Doncel; C González-Sanchez; D Álvarez; E Zarca; A Ríos-Llorente; A Diaz-Alvarez; E Sanchez-Barrado; D Andaluz-Ojeda; J M Calvo-Vecino; L Muñoz-Bellvís; J I Gomez-Herreras; C Abad-Molina; J F Bermejo-Martin; C Aldecoa; M Heredia-Rodríguez Journal: BJS Open Date: 2020-02-19
Authors: Arthur Kwizera; Olivier Urayeneza; Pierre Mujyarugamba; Inipavudu Baelani; Jens Meier; Mervyn Mer; Ndidiamaka Musa; Niranjan Kissoon; Andrew J Patterson; Joseph C Farmer; Martin W Dünser Journal: Crit Care Explor Date: 2021-12-16