| Literature DB >> 35959390 |
Carolina X Sandler1,2,3, Erin Cvejic4, Braulio M Valencia1, Hui Li1, Ian B Hickie5, Andrew R Lloyd1.
Abstract
Prospective cohort studies following individuals from acute infections have documented a prevalent post-infective fatigue state meeting diagnostic criteria for chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) - that is, a post-infective fatigue syndrome (PIFS). The Dubbo Infection Outcomes Study (DIOS) was a prospective cohort following individuals from acute infection with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), Ross River virus (RRV), or Q fever through to assessment of caseness for CFS designated by physician and psychiatrist assessments at 6 months. Previous studies in DIOS have revealed that functional genetic polymorphisms in both immunological (pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines) and neurological (the purinergic receptor, P2X7) genes are associated with both the severity of the acute infection and subsequent prolonged illness. Principal components analysis was applied to self-report data from DIOS to describe the severity and course of both the overall illness and concurrent mood disturbance. Associations between demographics and acute infection characteristics, with prolonged illness course as well as the PIFS outcome were examined using multivariable statistics. Genetic haplotype-driven functional variations in the neuropeptide Y (NPY) gene previously shown to be associated with brain responses to stress, and to trait anxiety were also examined as predictors. The sample included 484 subjects (51% female, median age 32, IQR 19-44), of whom 90 (19%) met diagnostic criteria for CFS at 6 months. Participants with greater overall illness severity and concurrent mood disturbance in the acute illness had a more prolonged illness severity (HR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.34-0.46, p < 0.001) and mood disturbance (HR = 0.36, 95% CI: 0.30-0.42, p < 0.001), respectively. Baseline illness severity and RRV infection were associated with delayed recovery. Female gender and mood disturbance in the acute illness were associated with prolonged mood disturbance. Logistic regression showed that the odds of an individual being diagnosed with PIFS increased with greater baseline illness severity (OR = 2.24, 95% CI: 1.71-2.94, p < 0.001). There was no association between the NPY haplotypes with overall illness severity or mood disturbance either during the acute illness phase or with prolonged illness (p > 0.05). Severe acute infective illnesses predicted prolonged illness, prolonged mood disturbance and PIFS. These factors may facilitate early intervention to manage both PIFS and mood disturbances.Entities:
Keywords: acute infection; chronic fatigue; genetics; mood disturbance; post-infective syndrome; predictors
Year: 2022 PMID: 35959390 PMCID: PMC9359311 DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2022.935442
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurol ISSN: 1664-2295 Impact factor: 4.086
Demographics of the DIOS cohort (n = 484) and PIFS sub-group (n = 90).
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|
| Median age (IQR) | 32 (19–44) | 38 (22–47) |
| Female; | 247 (51) | 42 (46) |
| Median days since symptom onset (IQR) | 30 (22–41) | 34 (25–47) |
| Infection type; | ||
| | 144 (30) | 15 (17) |
| | 98 (20) | 25 (28) |
| | 84 (17) | 19 (21) |
| | 158 (33) | 31 (34) |
| Median days out of role (IQR) in acute illness by infection type | ||
| | 14 (6–20) | 16 (7–28) |
| | 6 (0–20) | 10 (3–22) |
| | 14 (5–28) | 14 (4–28) |
| | 10 (2–18) | 10 (2–25) |
| Median days in bed (IQR) in acute illness by infection type | ||
| | 7 (1–10) | 11 (2–24) |
| | 0 (0–3) | 1 (0–4) |
| | 7 (3–14) | 7 (0–14) |
| | 2 (0–7) | 4 (0–7) |
IQR, Interquartile range; PIFS, post-infective fatigue syndrome.
Univariate model for overall illness severity and mood disturbance endophenotype during the acute illness phase (baseline).
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Female sex (vs. male) | 0.27 (0.09, 0.46) |
| 0.18 (−0.01, 0.37) | 0.07 |
| Age (per year) | −0.01 (−0.01, 0.00) | 0.07 | −0.01 (−0.02, −0.00) |
|
| Serology (vs. EBV) |
| 0.18 | ||
| | 0.35 (0.06, 0.64) | 0.27 (0.02, 0.52) | ||
| | 0.32 (0.01, 0.62) | 0.22 (−0.09, 0.53) | ||
| | 0.40 (0.16, 0.65) | 0.14 (−0.15, 0.43) | ||
| Diplotype | 0.50 | 0.77 | ||
| | −0.10 (−0.36, 0.16) | −0.20 (−0.47, 0.06) | ||
| | 0.11 (−0.12, 0.34) | 0.13 (−0.22, 0.25) | ||
| | 0.17 (−0.34, 0.68) | −0.00 (−0.52, 0.52) | ||
| | 0.29 (−0.23, 0.81) | 0.02 (−0.50, 0.55) | ||
| | −0.23 (−0.84, 0.37) | −0.23 (−0.85, 0.39) | ||
| | −0.22 (−0.83, 0.39) | −0.03 (−0.65, 0.59) | ||
| | −0.13 (−2.06, 1.81) | 0.13 (−1.84, 2.10) | ||
Data are shown as estimated mean differences (95% confidence interval). EBV, Epstein Barr Virus; QF, Q fever; RRV, Ross River Virus; HB1-4, NPY haplotype blocks (HB). Bold indicates statistically significant. PC, Principal components.
Cox-regression model for time to recovery for overall illness severity and mood disturbance endophenotype.
|
|
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Female sex (vs. male) | 0.80 (0.62, 1.04) | 0.09 | 0.67 (0.54, 0.85) |
| 0.72 (0.42, 1.25) | 0.24 |
| Age (per year) | 1.01 (1.00, 1.01) | 0.23 | 1.00 (0.10, 1.01) | 0.30 | 1.01 (0.99, 1.03) | 0.30 |
| Serology (vs. EBV) |
| 0.10 | 0.28 | |||
| | 0.54 (0.37, 0.80) | 0.65 (0.46, 0.93) | 2.25 (0.96, 5.28) | |||
| | 0.73 (0.48, 1.09) | 0.73 (0.51, 1.06) | 2.10 (0.85, 5.20) | |||
| | 0.80 (0.58, 1.11) | 0.75 (0.55, 1.00) | 1.69 (0.78, 3.66) | |||
| Illness severity at baseline | 0.40 (0.34, 0.46) |
| Not included | 2.24 (1.71, 2.94) |
| |
| Mood disturbance at baseline | Not included | 0.36 (0.31, 0.43) |
| Not included | ||
| Diplotype (vs. HB1 homozygous) | 0.42 | 0.23 | 0.77 | |||
| | 0.91 (0.64, 1.30) | 0.86 (0.63, 1.18) | 0.99 (0.46, 2.11) | |||
| | 1.22 (0.90, 1.66) | 0.85 (0.65, 1.12) | 1.16 (0.60, 2.21) | |||
| | 0.91 (0.45, 1.84) | 1.27 (0.69, 2.33) | 0.25 (0.29, 2.13) | |||
| | 0.62 (0.28, 1.38) | 0.48 (0.23, 1.01) | 2.46 (0.68, 8.92) | |||
| | 1.22 (0.60, 2.47) | 1.42 (0.71, 2.84) | 0.00 (0.00, 0.00) | |||
| | 1.49 (0.71, 3.15) | 1.40 (0.70, 2.82) | 1.21 (0.22, 6.72) | |||
| | a | a | a | |||
Hazard ratios (HR) are presented as the hazard of recovery (95% confidence interval for HR). A hazard ratio value of <1 indicates a reduced risk of being recovered at any given timepoint for a one-unit increase in the specific variable. The logistic regression model with PIFS as an outcome, is presented in the last column with odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. EBV, Epstein Barr Virus; QF, Q fever; RRV, Ross River Virus; HB1-4, NPY haplotype blocks (HB); PC, Principal components. a. HB3/HB4 heterozygous dipolotype was included in the model but not reported due to the small sample size (n = 1). Bold indicates statistically significant.
Figure 1Predicted recovery of (A) overall illness severity and (B) mood disturbance severity, at different baseline levels (mild, moderate, major, and severe) of overall illness (A), or mood disturbance (B).