Journal
EBIOMEDICINE
Volume 48, Issue -, Pages 453-461Publisher
ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.09.040
Keywords
Biomarkers; Gene expression; Respiratory tract infections; Co infection; Diagnosis; Precision medicine
Funding
- NIAID [U01AI066569, UM1AI104681]
- U.S. DARPA [N66001-09-C-2082]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Background: Distinguishing bacterial and viral respiratory infections is challenging. Novel diagnostics based on differential host gene expression patterns are promising but have not been translated to a clinical platform nor extensively tested. Here, we validate a microarray-derived host response signature and explore performance in microbiology-negative and coinfection cases. Methods: Subjects with acute respiratory illness were enrolled in participating emergency departments. Reference standard was an adjudicated diagnosis of bacterial infection, viral infection, both, or neither. An 87-transcript signature for distinguishing bacterial, viral, and noninfectious illness was measured from peripheral blood using RT-PCR. Performance characteristics were evaluated in subjects with confirmed bacterial, viral, or noninfectious illness. Subjects with bacterial-viral coinfection and microbiologically-negative suspected bacterial infection were also evaluated. Performance was compared to procalcitonin. Findings: 151 subjects with microbiologically confirmed, single-etiology illness were tested, yielding AU-ROCs 0.85-0.89 for bacterial, viral, and noninfectious illness. Accuracy was similar to procalcitonin (88% vs 83%, p=0.23) for bacterial vs. non-bacterial infection. Whereas procalcitonin cannot distinguish viral from non-infectious illness, the RT-PCR test had 81% accuracy in making this determination. Bacterial-viral coinfection was subdivided. Among 19 subjects with bacterial superinfection, the RT-PCR test identified 95% as bacterial, compared to 68% with procalcitonin (p=0.13). Among 12 subjects with bacterial infection superimposed on chronic viral infection, the RT-PCR test identified 83% as bacterial, identical to procalcitonin. 39 subjects had suspected bacterial infection; the RT-PCR test identified bacterial infection more frequently than procalcitonin (82% vs 64%, p=0.02). Interpretation: The RT-PCR test offered similar diagnostic performance to procalcitonin in some subgroups but offered better discrimination in others such as viral vs. non-infectious illness and bacterial/viral coinfection. Gene expression-based tests could impact decision-making for acute respiratory illness as well as a growing number of other infectious and non-infectious diseases. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available