| Literature DB >> 34859223 |
Rebecca Houghton1, Nathan Moore1, Rebecca Williams1, Fatima El-Bakri1, Jonathan Peters1, Matilde Mori1, Gabrielle Vernet1, Jessica Lynch1, Henry Lewis1, Maryanna Tavener1, Tom Durham1, Jack Bowyer1, Kordo Saeed2,3, Gabriele Pollara4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A low procalcitonin (PCT) concentration facilitates exclusion of bacterial co-infections in COVID-19, but high costs associated with PCT measurements preclude universal adoption. Changes in inflammatory markers, including C-reactive protein (CRP), can be concordant, and predicting low PCT concentrations may avoid costs of redundant tests and support more cost-effective deployment of this diagnostic biomarker.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34859223 PMCID: PMC8633792 DOI: 10.1093/jacamr/dlab180
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JAC Antimicrob Resist ISSN: 2632-1823
Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics for patients included in the study, stratified by admission PCT concentrations
| PCT value (ng/mL) at admission | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics | <0.25 ( | ≥0.25–<0.5 ( | ≥0.5 ( |
|
| Age, median (range) | 67 (26–97) | 78 (18–92) | 70 (30–97) |
|
| Gender, | ||||
| Male | 89 (55.6) | 21 (77.8) | 22 (59.5) |
|
| Female | 71 (44.4) | 6 (22.2) | 15 (40.5) | |
| Ethnicity, | ||||
| White | 137 (85.6) | 22 (81.5) | 30 (81.1) |
|
| Asian | 16 (10.0) | 4 (14.8) | 4 (10.8) | |
| Black | 6 (3.8) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (2.7) | |
| Mixed | 1 (0.63) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (2.7) | |
| Other | 2 (1.25) | 1 (3.7) | 1 (2.7) | |
| ICU admission, | ||||
| Yes | 26 (16.3) | 6 (22.2) | 12 (44.4) |
|
| No | 134 (83.8) | 21 (77.8) | 25 (67.6) | |
| Microbiology, | ||||
| Blood culture | 0/65 (0.0) [0.0] |
1/9 (3.7) [11.1]
|
2/18 (5.4) [11.1] α-haem streptococci
|
|
| Sputum culture | 0/22 (0.0) [0.0] |
1/5 (3.7) [20.0]
|
1/10 (2.7) [10.0]
| |
| Urine antigen | 0/79 (0.0) [0.0] | 0/9 (0.0) [0.0] |
2/22 (5.4) [9.1]
| |
| Death, | ||||
| Yes | 35 (21.9) | 14 (51.9) | 17 (45.9) |
|
| No | 125 (78.1) | 13 (48.1) | 20 (54.1) | |
Percentage values are calculated both relative to all patients in the group (values in round brackets) and also relative only to those that underwent microbiological sampling (values in square brackets). P values represent statistical assessments of variation between each variable and the defined patient cohorts.
For microbiology tests, the P value was unchanged when analyses were restricted to only patients that had undergone microbiological sampling. Age was compared by Kruskal-Wallis test and all other variables were compared by Chi-square test.
Figure 1.Association between inflammatory markers and the concentration of PCT in COVID-19. (a) Concentration of CRP or enumeration of WCC stratified by PCT concentrations. (b) Relationship between PCT and CRP concentrations. Scatter plot horizontal lines represent PCT concentration cut-off (≥0.25 or ≥0.5 ng/mL) and vertical lines represent geometric mean CRP for all patients at each timepoint (54 and 70 mg/L respectively). Total numbers of patients in each quadrant of scatter plots are shown in the adjacent table. Red dots indicate patients with significant microbiological findings. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) given were derived for elevated PCT determined by CRP concentrations derived at each timepoint for each PCT cut-off. Assessments were made at the time of hospital admission (‘baseline’) or 48 hours into hospital admission (‘48hr admission’). All P values derived using 2-tailed Mann–Whitney tests.