Frederick K Korley1, Sonia Jain2, Xiaoying Sun2, Ava M Puccio3, John K Yue4, Raquel C Gardner5, Kevin K W Wang6, David O Okonkwo3, Esther L Yuh7, Pratik Mukherjee7, Lindsay D Nelson8, Sabrina R Taylor9, Amy J Markowitz4, Ramon Diaz-Arrastia10, Geoffrey T Manley4. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. Electronic address: korley@med.umich.edu. 2. Herbert Wertheim School of Public Health and Human Longevity Science, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA. 3. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA. 4. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, Memory and Aging Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA; Weill Institute for Neurosciences, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 6. Program for Neurotrauma, Neuroproteomics and Biomarkers Research, Department of Emergency Medicine, McKnight Brain Institute, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. 7. Department of Radiology, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 8. Department of Neurosurgery and Department of Neurology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA. 9. Brain and Spinal Injury Center, University of California at San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA. 10. Department of Neurology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Traumatic Brain Injury Clinical Research Center, Penn Presbyterian Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCH-L1) as day-of-injury predictors of functional outcome after traumatic brain injury is not well understood. GFAP is a protein found in glial cells and UCH-L1 is found in neurons, and these biomarkers have been cleared to aid in decision making regarding whether brain CT should be performed after traumatic brain injury. We aimed to quantify their prognostic accuracy and investigate whether these biomarkers contribute novel prognostic information to existing clinical models. METHODS: We enrolled patients from the Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) observational cohort study. TRACK-TBI includes patients 17 years and older who are evaluated for TBI at 18 US level 1 trauma centres. All patients receive head CT at evaluation, have adequate visual acuity and hearing preinjury, and are fluent in either English or Spanish. In our analysis, we included participants aged 17-90 years who had day-of-injury plasma samples for measurement of GFAP and UCH-L1 and completed 6-month assessments for outcome due to traumatic brain injury with the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE-TBI). Biomarkers were analysed as continuous variables and in quintiles. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02119182. FINDINGS: We enrolled 2552 patients from Feb 26, 2014, to Aug 8, 2018. Of the 1696 participants with brain injury and data available at baseline and at 6 months who were included in the analysis, 120 (7·1%) died (GOSE-TBI=1), 235 (13·9%) had an unfavourable outcome (ie, GOSE-TBI ≤4), 1135 (66·9%) had incomplete recovery (ie, GOSE-TBI <8), and 561 (33·1%) recovered fully (ie, GOSE-TBI=8). The area under the curve (AUC) of GFAP for predicting death at 6 months in all patients was 0·87 (95% CI 0·83-0·91), for unfavourable outcome was 0·86 (0·83-0·89), and for incomplete recovery was 0·62 (0·59-0·64). The corresponding AUCs for UCH-L1 were 0·89 (95% CI 0·86-0·92) for predicting death, 0·86 (0·84-0·89) for unfavourable outcome, and 0·61 (0·59-0·64) for incomplete recovery at 6 months. AUCs were higher for participants with traumatic brain injury and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 3-12 than for those with GCS score of 13-15. Among participants with GCS score of 3-12 (n=353), adding GFAP and UCH-L1 (alone or combined) to each of the three International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in traumatic brain injury models significantly increased their AUCs for predicting death (AUC range 0·90-0·94) and unfavourable outcome (AUC range 0·83-0·89). However, among participants with GCS score of 13-15 (n=1297), adding GFAP and UCH-L1 to the UPFRONT study model modestly increased the AUC for predicting incomplete recovery (AUC range 0·69-0·69, p=0·025). INTERPRETATION: In addition to their known diagnostic value, day-of-injury GFAP and UCH-L1 plasma concentrations have good to excellent prognostic value for predicting death and unfavourable outcome, but not for predicting incomplete recovery at 6 months. These biomarkers contribute the most prognostic information for participants presenting with a GCS score of 3-12. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke, US Department of Defense, One Mind, US Army Medical Research and Development Command.
BACKGROUND: The prognostic value of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and ubiquitin C-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCH-L1) as day-of-injury predictors of functional outcome after traumatic brain injury is not well understood. GFAP is a protein found in glial cells and UCH-L1 is found in neurons, and these biomarkers have been cleared to aid in decision making regarding whether brain CT should be performed after traumatic brain injury. We aimed to quantify their prognostic accuracy and investigate whether these biomarkers contribute novel prognostic information to existing clinical models. METHODS: We enrolled patients from the Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) observational cohort study. TRACK-TBI includes patients 17 years and older who are evaluated for TBI at 18 US level 1 trauma centres. All patients receive head CT at evaluation, have adequate visual acuity and hearing preinjury, and are fluent in either English or Spanish. In our analysis, we included participants aged 17-90 years who had day-of-injury plasma samples for measurement of GFAP and UCH-L1 and completed 6-month assessments for outcome due to traumatic brain injury with the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE-TBI). Biomarkers were analysed as continuous variables and in quintiles. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02119182. FINDINGS: We enrolled 2552 patients from Feb 26, 2014, to Aug 8, 2018. Of the 1696 participants with brain injury and data available at baseline and at 6 months who were included in the analysis, 120 (7·1%) died (GOSE-TBI=1), 235 (13·9%) had an unfavourable outcome (ie, GOSE-TBI ≤4), 1135 (66·9%) had incomplete recovery (ie, GOSE-TBI <8), and 561 (33·1%) recovered fully (ie, GOSE-TBI=8). The area under the curve (AUC) of GFAP for predicting death at 6 months in all patients was 0·87 (95% CI 0·83-0·91), for unfavourable outcome was 0·86 (0·83-0·89), and for incomplete recovery was 0·62 (0·59-0·64). The corresponding AUCs for UCH-L1 were 0·89 (95% CI 0·86-0·92) for predicting death, 0·86 (0·84-0·89) for unfavourable outcome, and 0·61 (0·59-0·64) for incomplete recovery at 6 months. AUCs were higher for participants with traumatic brain injury and Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score of 3-12 than for those with GCS score of 13-15. Among participants with GCS score of 3-12 (n=353), adding GFAP and UCH-L1 (alone or combined) to each of the three International Mission for Prognosis and Analysis of Clinical Trials in traumatic brain injury models significantly increased their AUCs for predicting death (AUC range 0·90-0·94) and unfavourable outcome (AUC range 0·83-0·89). However, among participants with GCS score of 13-15 (n=1297), adding GFAP and UCH-L1 to the UPFRONT study model modestly increased the AUC for predicting incomplete recovery (AUC range 0·69-0·69, p=0·025). INTERPRETATION: In addition to their known diagnostic value, day-of-injury GFAP and UCH-L1 plasma concentrations have good to excellent prognostic value for predicting death and unfavourable outcome, but not for predicting incomplete recovery at 6 months. These biomarkers contribute the most prognostic information for participants presenting with a GCS score of 3-12. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke, US Department of Defense, One Mind, US Army Medical Research and Development Command.
Authors: Ann-Christine Duhaime; Alisa D Gean; E Mark Haacke; Ramona Hicks; Max Wintermark; Pratik Mukherjee; David Brody; Lawrence Latour; Gerard Riedy Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: David O Okonkwo; Ross C Puffer; Ava M Puccio; Esther L Yuh; John K Yue; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia; Frederick K Korley; Kevin K W Wang; Xiaoying Sun; Sabrina R Taylor; Pratik Mukherjee; Amy J Markowitz; Sonia Jain; Geoffrey T Manley Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2020-09-14 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: John K Yue; Esther L Yuh; Frederick K Korley; Ethan A Winkler; Xiaoying Sun; Ross C Puffer; Hansen Deng; Winward Choy; Ankush Chandra; Sabrina R Taylor; Adam R Ferguson; J Russell Huie; Miri Rabinowitz; Ava M Puccio; Pratik Mukherjee; Mary J Vassar; Kevin K W Wang; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia; David O Okonkwo; Sonia Jain; Geoffrey T Manley Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2019-08-23 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Esther L Yuh; Pratik Mukherjee; Hester F Lingsma; John K Yue; Adam R Ferguson; Wayne A Gordon; Alex B Valadka; David M Schnyer; David O Okonkwo; Andrew I R Maas; Geoffrey T Manley Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2012-12-07 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Ramon Diaz-Arrastia; Kevin K W Wang; Linda Papa; Marco D Sorani; John K Yue; Ava M Puccio; Paul J McMahon; Tomoo Inoue; Esther L Yuh; Hester F Lingsma; Andrew I R Maas; Alex B Valadka; David O Okonkwo; Geoffrey T Manley Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2013-10-09 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: Jussi P Posti; Iftakher Hossain; Riikka S K Takala; Hilkka Liedes; Virginia Newcombe; Joanne Outtrim; Ari J Katila; Janek Frantzén; Henna Ala-Seppälä; Jonathan P Coles; Anna Kyllönen; Henna-Riikka Maanpää; Jussi Tallus; Peter J Hutchinson; Mark van Gils; David K Menon; Olli Tenovuo Journal: J Neurotrauma Date: 2017-01-27 Impact factor: 5.269
Authors: Frederick K Korley; Saul A Datwyler; Sonia Jain; Xiaoying Sun; Gangamani Beligere; Raj Chandran; Jaime A Marino; Beth McQuiston; Hongwei Zhang; Krista L Caudle; Kevin K W Wang; Ava M Puccio; David O Okonkwo; John K Yue; Sabrina R Taylor; Amy Markowitz; Geoffrey T Manley; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia Journal: Neurotrauma Rep Date: 2021-04-07
Authors: Linda Papa; Gretchen M Brophy; Robert D Welch; Lawrence M Lewis; Carolina F Braga; Ciara N Tan; Neema J Ameli; Marco A Lopez; Crystal A Haeussler; Diego I Mendez Giordano; Salvatore Silvestri; Philip Giordano; Kurt D Weber; Crystal Hill-Pryor; Dallas C Hack Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2016-05-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: Esther L Yuh; Sonia Jain; Xiaoying Sun; Dana Pisica; Mark H Harris; Sabrina R Taylor; Amy J Markowitz; Pratik Mukherjee; Jan Verheyden; Joseph T Giacino; Harvey S Levin; Michael McCrea; Murray B Stein; Nancy R Temkin; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia; Claudia S Robertson; Hester F Lingsma; David O Okonkwo; Andrew I R Maas; Geoffrey T Manley; Opeolu Adeoye; Neeraj Badjatia; Kim Boase; Yelena Bodien; John D Corrigan; Karen Crawford; Sureyya Dikmen; Ann-Christine Duhaime; Richard Ellenbogen; V Ramana Feeser; Adam R Ferguson; Brandon Foreman; Raquel Gardner; Etienne Gaudette; Luis Gonzalez; Shankar Gopinath; Rao Gullapalli; J Claude Hemphill; Gillian Hotz; C Dirk Keene; Joel Kramer; Natalie Kreitzer; Chris Lindsell; Joan Machamer; Christopher Madden; Alastair Martin; Thomas McAllister; Randall Merchant; Lindsay Nelson; Laura B Ngwenya; Florence Noel; Amber Nolan; Eva Palacios; Daniel Perl; Miri Rabinowitz; Jonathan Rosand; Angelle Sander; Gabriella Satris; David Schnyer; Seth Seabury; Arthur Toga; Alex Valadka; Mary Vassar; Ross Zafonte Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2021-09-01 Impact factor: 18.302