Classification of patients with sepsis according to blood genomic endotype: a prospective cohort study.

IF 38.7 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Lancet Respiratory Medicine Pub Date : 2017-10-01 Epub Date: 2017-08-29 DOI:10.1016/S2213-2600(17)30294-1
Brendon P Scicluna, Lonneke A van Vught, Aeilko H Zwinderman, Maryse A Wiewel, Emma E Davenport, Katie L Burnham, Peter Nürnberg, Marcus J Schultz, Janneke Horn, Olaf L Cremer, Marc J Bonten, Charles J Hinds, Hector R Wong, Julian C Knight, Tom van der Poll
{"title":"Classification of patients with sepsis according to blood genomic endotype: a prospective cohort study.","authors":"Brendon P Scicluna,&nbsp;Lonneke A van Vught,&nbsp;Aeilko H Zwinderman,&nbsp;Maryse A Wiewel,&nbsp;Emma E Davenport,&nbsp;Katie L Burnham,&nbsp;Peter Nürnberg,&nbsp;Marcus J Schultz,&nbsp;Janneke Horn,&nbsp;Olaf L Cremer,&nbsp;Marc J Bonten,&nbsp;Charles J Hinds,&nbsp;Hector R Wong,&nbsp;Julian C Knight,&nbsp;Tom van der Poll","doi":"10.1016/S2213-2600(17)30294-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Host responses during sepsis are highly heterogeneous, which hampers the identification of patients at high risk of mortality and their selection for targeted therapies. In this study, we aimed to identify biologically relevant molecular endotypes in patients with sepsis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a prospective observational cohort study that included consecutive patients admitted for sepsis to two intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands between Jan 1, 2011, and July 20, 2012 (discovery and first validation cohorts) and patients admitted with sepsis due to community-acquired pneumonia to 29 ICUs in the UK (second validation cohort). We generated genome-wide blood gene expression profiles from admission samples and analysed them by unsupervised consensus clustering and machine learning. The primary objective of this study was to establish endotypes for patients with sepsis, and assess the association of these endotypes with clinical traits and survival outcomes. We also established candidate biomarkers for the endotypes to allow identification of patient endotypes in clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>The discovery cohort had 306 patients, the first validation cohort had 216, and the second validation cohort had 265 patients. Four molecular endotypes for sepsis, designated Mars1-4, were identified in the discovery cohort, and were associated with 28-day mortality (log-rank p=0·022). In the discovery cohort, the worst outcome was found for patients classified as having a Mars1 endotype, and at 28 days, 35 (39%) of 90 people with a Mars1 endotype had died (hazard ratio [HR] vs all other endotypes 1·86 [95% CI 1·21-2·86]; p=0·0045), compared with 23 (22%) of 105 people with a Mars2 endotype (HR 0·64 [0·40-1·04]; p=0·061), 16 (23%) of 71 people with a Mars3 endotype (HR 0·71 [0·41-1·22]; p=0·19), and 13 (33%) of 40 patients with a Mars4 endotype (HR 1·13 [0·63-2·04]; p=0·69). Analysis of the net reclassification improvement using a combined clinical and endotype model significantly improved risk prediction to 0·33 (0·09-0·58; p=0·008). A 140-gene expression signature reliably stratified patients with sepsis to the four endotypes in both the first and second validation cohorts. Only Mars1 was consistently significantly associated with 28-day mortality across the cohorts. To facilitate possible clinical use, a biomarker was derived for each endotype; BPGM and TAP2 reliably identified patients with a Mars1 endotype.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>This study provides a method for the molecular classification of patients with sepsis to four different endotypes upon ICU admission. Detection of sepsis endotypes might assist in providing personalised patient management and in selection for trials.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>Center for Translational Molecular Medicine, Netherlands.</p>","PeriodicalId":51307,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Respiratory Medicine","volume":"5 10","pages":"816-826"},"PeriodicalIF":38.7000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S2213-2600(17)30294-1","citationCount":"300","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Respiratory Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(17)30294-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/8/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 300

Abstract

Background: Host responses during sepsis are highly heterogeneous, which hampers the identification of patients at high risk of mortality and their selection for targeted therapies. In this study, we aimed to identify biologically relevant molecular endotypes in patients with sepsis.

Methods: This was a prospective observational cohort study that included consecutive patients admitted for sepsis to two intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands between Jan 1, 2011, and July 20, 2012 (discovery and first validation cohorts) and patients admitted with sepsis due to community-acquired pneumonia to 29 ICUs in the UK (second validation cohort). We generated genome-wide blood gene expression profiles from admission samples and analysed them by unsupervised consensus clustering and machine learning. The primary objective of this study was to establish endotypes for patients with sepsis, and assess the association of these endotypes with clinical traits and survival outcomes. We also established candidate biomarkers for the endotypes to allow identification of patient endotypes in clinical practice.

Findings: The discovery cohort had 306 patients, the first validation cohort had 216, and the second validation cohort had 265 patients. Four molecular endotypes for sepsis, designated Mars1-4, were identified in the discovery cohort, and were associated with 28-day mortality (log-rank p=0·022). In the discovery cohort, the worst outcome was found for patients classified as having a Mars1 endotype, and at 28 days, 35 (39%) of 90 people with a Mars1 endotype had died (hazard ratio [HR] vs all other endotypes 1·86 [95% CI 1·21-2·86]; p=0·0045), compared with 23 (22%) of 105 people with a Mars2 endotype (HR 0·64 [0·40-1·04]; p=0·061), 16 (23%) of 71 people with a Mars3 endotype (HR 0·71 [0·41-1·22]; p=0·19), and 13 (33%) of 40 patients with a Mars4 endotype (HR 1·13 [0·63-2·04]; p=0·69). Analysis of the net reclassification improvement using a combined clinical and endotype model significantly improved risk prediction to 0·33 (0·09-0·58; p=0·008). A 140-gene expression signature reliably stratified patients with sepsis to the four endotypes in both the first and second validation cohorts. Only Mars1 was consistently significantly associated with 28-day mortality across the cohorts. To facilitate possible clinical use, a biomarker was derived for each endotype; BPGM and TAP2 reliably identified patients with a Mars1 endotype.

Interpretation: This study provides a method for the molecular classification of patients with sepsis to four different endotypes upon ICU admission. Detection of sepsis endotypes might assist in providing personalised patient management and in selection for trials.

Funding: Center for Translational Molecular Medicine, Netherlands.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
根据血液基因组内型对败血症患者进行分类:一项前瞻性队列研究。
背景:败血症期间的宿主反应是高度异质性的,这阻碍了对高死亡率患者的识别和对其靶向治疗的选择。在这项研究中,我们旨在确定脓毒症患者的生物学相关分子内型。方法:这是一项前瞻性观察性队列研究,纳入2011年1月1日至2012年7月20日期间荷兰两个重症监护病房(icu)连续收治的脓毒症患者(发现和第一次验证队列)和英国29个icu收治的社区获得性肺炎脓毒症患者(第二个验证队列)。我们从入院样本中生成全基因组血液基因表达谱,并通过无监督共识聚类和机器学习对其进行分析。本研究的主要目的是建立脓毒症患者的内分型,并评估这些内分型与临床特征和生存结果的关系。我们还建立了候选的内窥镜生物标记物,以便在临床实践中识别患者的内窥镜。发现:发现队列有306例患者,第一个验证队列有216例患者,第二个验证队列有265例患者。在发现队列中发现了4种脓毒症的分子内分型,命名为Mars1-4,并与28天死亡率相关(log-rank p= 0.022)。在发现队列中,最糟糕的结果出现在被分类为Mars1内型的患者中,28天时,90名Mars1内型患者中有35人(39%)死亡(与所有其他内型相比,风险比[HR]为1.86 [95% CI为1.21 - 2.86];p= 0.0045),而105例Mars2内型患者中有23例(22%)(HR 0.64[0.40 -1·04];p= 0.061), 71例Mars3内型患者中有16例(23%)(HR 0.71[0.41 -1·22];p= 0.19), 40例Mars4内型患者中有13例(33%)(HR 1.13 [0.63 - 3.04];p = 0·69)。使用临床和内窥镜联合模型分析净重分类改善显著提高了风险预测至0.33 (0.09 - 0.58;p = 0·008)。在第一和第二验证队列中,140个基因表达特征可靠地将脓毒症患者分为四种内型。在整个队列中,只有mar1与28天死亡率持续显著相关。为了便于临床应用,我们为每一种内窥镜类型衍生了一种生物标志物;BPGM和TAP2能够可靠地鉴别mar1内窥镜患者。解释:本研究为ICU入院时脓毒症患者的四种不同内型的分子分类提供了一种方法。检测脓毒症的内型可能有助于提供个性化的病人管理和选择试验。资助:荷兰转化分子医学中心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Lancet Respiratory Medicine
Lancet Respiratory Medicine RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
CiteScore
87.10
自引率
0.70%
发文量
572
期刊介绍: The Lancet Respiratory Medicine is a renowned journal specializing in respiratory medicine and critical care. Our publication features original research that aims to advocate for change or shed light on clinical practices in the field. Additionally, we provide informative reviews on various topics related to respiratory medicine and critical care, ensuring a comprehensive coverage of the subject. The journal covers a wide range of topics including but not limited to asthma, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), tobacco control, intensive care medicine, lung cancer, cystic fibrosis, pneumonia, sarcoidosis, sepsis, mesothelioma, sleep medicine, thoracic and reconstructive surgery, tuberculosis, palliative medicine, influenza, pulmonary hypertension, pulmonary vascular disease, and respiratory infections. By encompassing such a broad spectrum of subjects, we strive to address the diverse needs and interests of our readership.
期刊最新文献
Equitable, personalised medicine for tuberculosis: treating patients, not diseases The importance of post-tuberculosis morbidity in high-income countries Transition of adolescents with asthma to adult care Post-tuberculosis lung disease: towards prevention, diagnosis, and care Nasal high-flow oxygen for apnoeic oxygenation during emergency endotracheal intubation of children
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1