| Literature DB >> 34079538 |
Judith Zandstra1,2, Ilse Jongerius1,2, Taco W Kuijpers2,3.
Abstract
Febrile patients, suffering from an infection, inflammatory disease or autoimmunity may present with similar or overlapping clinical symptoms, which makes early diagnosis difficult. Therefore, biomarkers are needed to help physicians form a correct diagnosis and initiate the right treatment to improve patient outcomes following first presentation or admittance to hospital. Here, we review the landscape of novel biomarkers and approaches of biomarker discovery. We first discuss the use of current plasma parameters and whole blood biomarkers, including results obtained by RNA profiling and mass spectrometry, to discriminate between bacterial and viral infections. Next we expand upon the use of biomarkers to distinguish between infectious and non-infectious disease. Finally, we discuss the strengths as well as the potential pitfalls of current developments. We conclude that the use of combination tests, using either protein markers or transcriptomic analysis, have advanced considerably and should be further explored to improve current diagnostics regarding febrile infections and inflammation. If proven effective when combined, these biomarker signatures will greatly accelerate early and tailored treatment decisions.Entities:
Keywords: bacterial infection; biomarker; febrile children; inflammation; viral infection
Year: 2021 PMID: 34079538 PMCID: PMC8165271 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.631308
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
Figure 1Simplified scheme of the induction of fever and release acute phase response proteins. Upon bacterial infection pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) are released into the circulations which can be recognized by various cells, including macrophages and dendritic cells (DC). At the same time inflammation can occur, either as result of the infection or by tissue injury due to NETosis, leading to a release of damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs). In response to DAMPs and PAMPs recognition by several pattern recognition receptors (PPRs) receptor families, being ultimately involved in the production of pro-inflammatory cytokines, including IL-1 and IL-6. These cytokines are released and can bind to specialized regions of brain endothelium, which in response produces prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) as one of the major mediators to induce fever (17). In addition to fever, IL-1 and IL-6 also induce C-reactive protein (CRP) production in the liver and procalcitonin (PCT) production by various immune cells (macrophages, monocytes) and tissues (liver, spleen, lung), which are the most common biomarkers currently measured in the clinical setting of febrile disease, as part of the acute phase response. This figure is made using Sevier Medical Art.
Characteristics combined diagnostics markers.
| Disease | Biomarker | Patient group | Number of patients | AUC (95% CI) | Sensitivity (95% CI) | Specificity (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oved 2015 ( | Bacterial infection vs viral infection | CRP, TRAIL, IP-10 | Adults and pediatrics | Patients combined: 653 | 0.94 (0.92-0.96) | 0.87 (0.83, 0.91) | 0.90 (0.86, 0.93) |
| Ashkenazi 2018 ( | Bacterial infection vs viral infection | CRP, TRAIL, IP-10 | Adults and pediatrics | Adults: 111 | 0.94 (0.91-0.97) | 0.94 (0.89-0.98) | 0.94 (0.91-0.98) |
| van Houten 2017 ( | Bacterial infection vs viral infection | CRP, TRAIL, IP-10 | Pediatrics | 577 | 0.90 (0.86-0.95) | 0.87 (0.76-0.93) | 0.91 0.88-0.94) |
| Self 2017 ( | Bacterial infection vs viral infection | CRP, Mx1 | Pediatrics | 205 | Not reported | 0.60 (0.16-0.95) | 1 (94-1) |
| Ruan 2018 ( | Sepsis | CRP, PCT | Neonates | 2661, meta-analysis | 0.96 (0.93-0.97) | 0.91 (0.84-0.95) | 0.89 (0.81-0.93) |
| Song 2019 ( | Sepsis | CRP, CD64 | Neonates | 1114, meta-analysis | 0.96 (0.94-0.97) | 0.95 (0.86-0.98) | 0.86 (0.74-0.93) |
| Nuutila 2013 ( | Bacterial infection vs viral infection | CD32, CD35, CD88, MHC class I | Adults | 205 | Not reported | 0.91 | 0.92 |
| Tremoulet 2015 ( | KD | 8 panel | Pediatrics | 102 | 0.81-0.96 | Not reported | Not reported |
| Zandstra 2020 ( | KD vs infection | CRP, S100A8/A9, HNE | Pediatrics | 404 | 0.84 (0.80-0.88) | 0.74 | 0.83 |
Detailed information of the combined diagnostics biomarkers; including disease; used biomarker and patient group. If reported the area under the curve (AUC); sensitivity and specificity; all with 95% confidence interval (CI); are stated. CRP, C-reactive protein; HNE, human neutrophil elastase; IP-10, Interferon gamma-induced protein 10; MHC class I, major histocompatibility complex class I; Mx1, Myxovirus resistance protein 1; PCT, Procalcitonin; TRAIL, TNF-related apoptosis-inducing ligand.
Characteristics transcriptomic biomarkers.
| Disease | Transcript | Patient group | Number of patients | AUC (95% CI) | Sensitivity (95% CI) | Specificity (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ramilo 2007 ( | Bacterial infection vs viral infection | 35 genes | Pediatrics | 131 | No AUC reported. Prediction accuracy of 95% in discriminating bacterial or viral infection | ||
| Xinran 2013 ( | Bacterial infection vs viral infection | 1581 genes, and selection of 18-33 genes | Pediatrics | 30 | Prediction accuracy between 77% and 90%. | ||
| Herberg 2016 ( | Bacterial infection vs viral infection |
| Pediatrics | 370 | 0.97 (0.91-1) | 1 (0.85-1) | 0.96 (0.89-1) |
| Kaforou 2017 ( | Bacterial infection vs viral infection |
| Infants <60 days | 279 | 0.96 (0.93-0.98) | 0.89 (0.80-0.95) | 0.94 (0.87-0.97) |
| Andres-Terre 2015 ( | Influenza vs bacterial infections |
| Pediatrics | 2939, meta-analysis | 0.94 (0.98-0.9) | Not reported | Not reported |
| Heinonen 2016 ( | Rhinovirus | 393 genes | Pediatrics | 151 | AUC not reported. Gene transcript highly upregulated in patients with symptomatic rhinovirus infection compared to asymptomatic patients and controls | ||
| Mayhew 2020 ( | Bacterial vs viral or inflammation | 29 genes | Adults | 1015, meta-analysis | 0.92 (0.83-0.99) | Not reported | Not reported |
| Viral vs bacterial or inflammation | 0.91 (0.82-0.98) | ||||||
| Mahajan 2016 ( | With and without bacterial infection | 66 genes | Infants <60 days | 279 | Not reported | 0.87 (0.73-0.95) | 0.89 (0.81-0.93) |
| Bacterial infection vs serious bacterial infection |
| 0.94 (0.70-1) | 0.95 (0.88-0.98) | ||||
| Sampson 2017 ( | Viral vs non-viral systemic inflammation |
| Adults and pediatrics | 1754, meta-analysis | AUC not reported. The four-gene signature is statistically significant in 13 validation datasets to discriminate between viral and non-viral inflammatory conditions | ||
| Blohmke 2019 ( | Enteric fever vs other febrile disease |
| Adults | 0.97 (0.94-1) | 0.97 | 0.88 | |
| Wright 2018 ( | KD vs febrile disease |
| Pediatrics | 606 | 0.96 (0.93-0.99) | 0.82 (0.60-0.95) | 0.92 (0.84-0.97) |
| Wu 2019 ( | SLE vs RA vs Sjögren’s syndrome | Long non-coding RNAlinc0597, GAS5, lnc0640, lnc5150, lnc7074 | Adults | 325 | 0.80 (0.72-0.86) | 0.68 | 0.82 |
| Sweeney 2017 ( | Active tuberculosis vs latent tuberculosis |
| Adults and pediatrics | 2572, meta-analysis | 0.88 (0.84-0.92) | 0.80 | 0.86 |
Detailed information of the combined diagnostics transcripts, including disease, used transcripts and patient group. If reported the area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity and specificity, all with 95% confidence interval (CI), are stated.
Figure 2Schematic view of the different steps of interferon signaling involved in viral infection and autoimmune disease. (A) Viral infection induces interferon stimulated gene (ISG) stimulation (58). Antiviral proteins (MX1, OAS1) will inhibit viral replication in the cell. Secretion of Type I IFN by the infected cell will lead to paracrine signaling to the neighboring cell via JAK/STAT signaling, thereby stimulating ISG in non-infecting cells, leading to an antiviral state, preventing further viral infection. The anti-viral immune response is induced by activating various immune cells, especially CD8+ T cell survival and natural killer (NK) cell activation. (B) In autoimmune disease, such as Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE), a variety of environmental factors can trigger the disease in genetically predisposed individuals (12). Infection or tissue damage can be an example of a trigger for autoimmune disease by the formation of autoantibody complexes with DNA released from apoptotic cells. The antibodies bind to the IgG receptor FcγRIIa and via endocytosis can activate endosomal Toll like receptor (TLR)7 and TLR9 (117). Due to mutations in JAK/STAT and/or interferon regulating factors IRFs the release of Type I IFN is upregulated in plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDC). High levels of Type I IFNs can activate T- and B-cells via myeloid DCs, leading to more autoantibodies and proinflammatory cytokines. Type I IFN can promote cytotoxicity NK cells, phagocytosis in macrophages and NETosis in neutrophils (118, 119). This figure is made using Sevier Medical Art.