Ian S Jaffe1, Anja K Jaehne2, Eugenia Quackenbush3, Emily R Ko1, Emanuel P Rivers2, Micah T McClain1,4, Geoffrey S Ginsburg1, Christopher W Woods1,4, Ephraim L Tsalik1,5. 1. Duke Center for Applied Genomics & Precision Medicine, Department of Medicine, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Henry Ford Hospital, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, USA. 3. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of North Carolina Medical Center, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA. 4. Medical Service, Durham Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina, USA. 5. Emergency Medicine Service, Durham Veterans Affairs Health Care System, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Difficulty discriminating bacterial from viral infections drives antibacterial misuse. Host gene expression tests discriminate bacterial and viral etiologies, but their clinical utility has not been evaluated. METHODS: Host gene expression and procalcitonin levels were measured in 582 emergency department participants with suspected infection. We also recorded clinician diagnosis and clinician-recommended treatment. These 4 diagnostic strategies were compared with clinical adjudication as the reference. To estimate the clinical impact of host gene expression, we calculated the change in overall Net Benefit (∆NB; the difference in Net Benefit comparing 1 diagnostic strategy with a reference) across a range of prevalence estimates while factoring in the clinical significance of false-positive and -negative errors. RESULTS: Gene expression correctly classified bacterial, viral, or noninfectious illness in 74.1% of subjects, similar to the other strategies. Clinical diagnosis and clinician-recommended treatment revealed a bias toward overdiagnosis of bacterial infection resulting in high sensitivity (92.6% and 94.5%, respectively) but poor specificity (67.2% and 58.8%, respectively), resulting in a 33.3% rate of inappropriate antibacterial use. Gene expression offered a more balanced sensitivity (79.0%) and specificity (80.7%), which corresponded to a statistically significant improvement in average weighted accuracy (79.9% vs 71.5% for procalcitonin and 76.3% for clinician-recommended treatment; P<.0001 for both). Consequently, host gene expression had greater Net Benefit in diagnosing bacterial infection than clinician-recommended treatment (∆NB=6.4%) and procalcitonin (∆NB=17.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Host gene expression-based tests to distinguish bacterial and viral infection can facilitate appropriate treatment, improving patient outcomes and mitigating the antibacterial resistance crisis. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2021.
BACKGROUND: Difficulty discriminating bacterial from viral infections drives antibacterial misuse. Host gene expression tests discriminate bacterial and viral etiologies, but their clinical utility has not been evaluated. METHODS: Host gene expression and procalcitonin levels were measured in 582 emergency department participants with suspected infection. We also recorded clinician diagnosis and clinician-recommended treatment. These 4 diagnostic strategies were compared with clinical adjudication as the reference. To estimate the clinical impact of host gene expression, we calculated the change in overall Net Benefit (∆NB; the difference in Net Benefit comparing 1 diagnostic strategy with a reference) across a range of prevalence estimates while factoring in the clinical significance of false-positive and -negative errors. RESULTS: Gene expression correctly classified bacterial, viral, or noninfectious illness in 74.1% of subjects, similar to the other strategies. Clinical diagnosis and clinician-recommended treatment revealed a bias toward overdiagnosis of bacterial infection resulting in high sensitivity (92.6% and 94.5%, respectively) but poor specificity (67.2% and 58.8%, respectively), resulting in a 33.3% rate of inappropriate antibacterial use. Gene expression offered a more balanced sensitivity (79.0%) and specificity (80.7%), which corresponded to a statistically significant improvement in average weighted accuracy (79.9% vs 71.5% for procalcitonin and 76.3% for clinician-recommended treatment; P<.0001 for both). Consequently, host gene expression had greater Net Benefit in diagnosing bacterial infection than clinician-recommended treatment (∆NB=6.4%) and procalcitonin (∆NB=17.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Host gene expression-based tests to distinguish bacterial and viral infection can facilitate appropriate treatment, improving patient outcomes and mitigating the antibacterial resistance crisis. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America 2021.
Authors: Jethro A Herberg; Myrsini Kaforou; Victoria J Wright; Hannah Shailes; Hariklia Eleftherohorinou; Clive J Hoggart; Miriam Cebey-López; Michael J Carter; Victoria A Janes; Stuart Gormley; Chisato Shimizu; Adriana H Tremoulet; Anouk M Barendregt; Antonio Salas; John Kanegaye; Andrew J Pollard; Saul N Faust; Sanjay Patel; Taco Kuijpers; Federico Martinón-Torres; Jane C Burns; Lachlan J M Coin; Michael Levin Journal: JAMA Date: 2016 Aug 23-30 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Rachael E Mahle; Sunil Suchindran; Ricardo Henao; Julie M Steinbrink; Thomas W Burke; Micah T McClain; Geoffrey S Ginsburg; Christopher W Woods; Ephraim L Tsalik Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2021-08-16 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Kfir Oved; Asi Cohen; Olga Boico; Roy Navon; Tom Friedman; Liat Etshtein; Or Kriger; Ellen Bamberger; Yura Fonar; Renata Yacobov; Ron Wolchinsky; Galit Denkberg; Yaniv Dotan; Amit Hochberg; Yoram Reiter; Moti Grupper; Isaac Srugo; Paul Feigin; Malka Gorfine; Irina Chistyakov; Ron Dagan; Adi Klein; Israel Potasman; Eran Eden Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-03-18 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Christopher W Woods; Micah T McClain; Minhua Chen; Aimee K Zaas; Bradly P Nicholson; Jay Varkey; Timothy Veldman; Stephen F Kingsmore; Yongsheng Huang; Robert Lambkin-Williams; Anthony G Gilbert; Alfred O Hero; Elizabeth Ramsburg; Seth Glickman; Joseph E Lucas; Lawrence Carin; Geoffrey S Ginsburg Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-01-09 Impact factor: 3.240