Cytokine profiles in sepsis have limited relevance for stratifying patients in the emergency department: a prospective observational study

Virginie Lvovschi, Laurent Arnaud, Christophe Parizot, Yonathan Freund, Gaëlle Juillien, Pascale Ghillani-Dalbin, Mohammed Bouberima, Martin Larsen, Bruno Riou, Guy Gorochov, Pierre Hausfater, Virginie Lvovschi, Laurent Arnaud, Christophe Parizot, Yonathan Freund, Gaëlle Juillien, Pascale Ghillani-Dalbin, Mohammed Bouberima, Martin Larsen, Bruno Riou, Guy Gorochov, Pierre Hausfater

Abstract

Introduction: Morbidity, mortality and social cost of sepsis are high. Previous studies have suggested that individual cytokines levels could be used as sepsis markers. Therefore, we assessed whether the multiplex technology could identify useful cytokine profiles in Emergency Department (ED) patients.

Methods: ED patients were included in a single tertiary-care center prospective study. Eligible patients were >18 years and met at least one of the following criteria: fever, suspected systemic infection, ≥ 2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria, hypotension or shock. Multiplex cytokine measurements were performed on serum samples collected at inclusion. Associations between cytokine levels and sepsis were assessed using univariate and multivariate logistic regressions, principal component analysis (PCA) and agglomerative hierarchical clustering (AHC).

Results: Among the 126 patients (71 men, 55 women; median age: 54 years [19-96 years]) included, 102 had SIRS (81%), 55 (44%) had severe sepsis and 10 (8%) had septic shock. Univariate analysis revealed weak associations between cytokine levels and sepsis. Multivariate analysis revealed independent association between sIL-2R (p = 0.01) and severe sepsis, as well as between sIL-2R (p = 0.04), IL-1β (p = 0.046), IL-8 (p = 0.02) and septic shock. However, neither PCA nor AHC distinguished profiles characteristic of sepsis.

Conclusions: Previous non-multiparametric studies might have reached inappropriate conclusions. Indeed, well-defined clinical conditions do not translate into particular cytokine profiles. Additional and larger trials are now required to validate the limited interest of expensive multiplex cytokine profiling for staging septic patients.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: BR & PH have received consulting fees from ThermoFisher Brahms. This does not alter the authors' adherence to all the PLoS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. VL, LA, CP, YF, GJ, PG-D, MB, ML and GG have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1. Principal component analysis and clustering…
Figure 1. Principal component analysis and clustering of cytokine profiles in patients with (n = 102) and without (n = 24) SIRS.
Patients with (red dots) and without (blue dots) SIRS are represented according to the first three components computed using principal component analysis of either all 22 cytokines (panel A), or a more limited profile using only IL1-RA, IL-6, IL-8, IL-12, IL-13 and MCP-1 (panel B). Hierarchical cluster analysis using all 22 cytokines measured (panel C) and the limited profile (panel D) are also presented. The dendrogram at the bottom of panels C & D shows the clustering of patients with (red lines) and without (blues lines) SIRS, according to the cytokine profile selected (dendrodram at the left). The color map at the center indicates the cytokine levels for each patient (brightest green is lowest level and brightest red is higher level measured). Altogether, these analyses show that SIRS patients cannot be distinguished from non-SIRS patients.
Figure 2. Principal component analysis and clustering…
Figure 2. Principal component analysis and clustering of cytokine profiles in patients with (n = 55) and without (n = 71) severe sepsis.
Patients with (red dots) and without (blue dots) severe sepsis are represented according to the first three components computed using principal component analysis of either all 22 cytokines (panel A), or of a limited profile using only IL-13, IL-2, sIL-2R, IL-6, IL-8, MIP-1α (panel B). Hierarchical cluster analysis using all 22 cytokines measured (panel C) and the more limited profile (panel D) are also presented. The dendrogram at the bottom of panels C & D shows the clustering of patients with (red lines) and without (blues lines) severe sepsis, according to the cytokine profile selected (dendrodram at the left). The color map at the center indicates the cytokine levels for each patient (brightest green is lowest level and brightest red is highest level measured). Altogether, these analyses show patients with severe sepsis cannot be distinguished from those without.
Figure 3. Principal component analysis and clustering…
Figure 3. Principal component analysis and clustering of cytokine profiles in patients with (n = 10) and without (n = 116) septic shock.
Patients with (red dots) and without (blue dots) septic shock are represented according to the first three components computed using principal component analysis of either all 22 cytokines (panel A), or using only IFNγ, sIL-2R, IL-1β, IL-12, IL-17, IL-8 and TNFα (panel B). Hierarchical cluster analysis using all 22 cytokines measured (panel C) and more limited profiles only based on IFNγ, sIL-2R, IL-1β, IL-12, IL-17, IL-8 and TNFα (panel D) or sIL-2R, IL-1β, and IL-8 (panel E) are also presented. The dendrogram at the bottom of panels C, D & E shows the clustering of patients with (red lines) and without (blues lines) septic shock, according to the cytokine profile selected (dendrodram at the left). The color map at the center indicates the cytokine levels for each patient (brightest green is lowest level and brightest red is highest level measured). Altogether, these analyses show patients with septic shock cannot be distinguished from those without.
Figure 4. Principal component analysis and clustering…
Figure 4. Principal component analysis and clustering of cytokine profiles in febrile patients with (n = 59) and without (n = 30) bacterial infection.
Febrile patients with (red dots) and without (blue dots) bacterial infection are represented according to the first three components computed using principal component analysis of either all 22 cytokines (panel A), or a more limited profile using only GM-CSF, IL-13, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, sIL-2R, IL-17, IL-8 and TNF-α (panel B). Hierarchical cluster analysis using all 22 cytokines measured (panel C) and the more limited profile (panel D) are also presented. The dendrogram at the bottom of panels C & D shows the clustering of febrile patients with (red lines) and without (blues lines) bacterial infection, according to the cytokine profile selected (dendrodram at the left). The color map at the center indicates the cytokine levels for each patient (brightest green is lowest level and brightest red is highest level measured). Altogether, these analyses show that febrile patients with bacterial infection cannot be distinguished from those without.
Figure 5. Principal component analysis and clustering…
Figure 5. Principal component analysis and clustering of cytokine profiles in patients with (n = 75) and without (n = 51) bacterial infection.
Patients with (red dots) and without (blue dots) bacterial infection are represented according to the first three components computed using principal component analysis of either all 22 cytokines (panel A), or a more limited profile using only IL-6, IL-8, IL-17 and GM-CSF (panel B). Hierarchical cluster analysis using all 22 cytokines measured (panel C) and the more limited profile (panel D) are also presented. The dendrogram at the bottom of panels C & D shows the clustering of patients with (red lines) and without (blues lines) bacterial infection, according to the cytokine profile selected (dendrodram at the left). The color map at the center indicates the cytokine levels for each patient (brightest green is lowest level and brightest red is highest level measured). Altogether, these analyses show that patients with bacterial infection cannot be distinguished from those without.
Figure 6. Principal component analysis and clustering…
Figure 6. Principal component analysis and clustering of cytokine profiles in patients with proven bacterial infection (n = 31) and without (n = 51) any bacterial infection.
Patients with proven bacterial infection (red dots) and without bacterial infection (blue dots) are represented according to the first three components computed using principal component analysis of either all 22 cytokines (panel A), or a more limited profile using only TNF-α, IL-2, IL-6, IL-8, IL-17 and MCP-1 (panel B). Hierarchical cluster analysis using all 22 cytokines measured (panel C) and the more limited profile (panel D) are also presented. The dendrogram at the bottom of panels C & D shows the clustering of patients with proven bacterial infection (red lines) and without bacterial infection (blue lines), according to the cytokine profile selected (dendrodram at the left). The color map at the center indicates the cytokine levels for each patient (brightest green is lowest level and brightest red is highest level measured). Altogether, these analyses show that patients with proven bacterial infection cannot be distinguished from those without bacterial infection.

References

    1. Martin GS, Mannino DM, Eaton S, Moss M. The epidemiology of sepsis in the United States from 1979 through 2000. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:1546–1554.
    1. Heffner AC, Horton JM, Marchick MR, Jones AE. Etiology of illness in patients with severe sepsis admitted to the hospital from the emergency department. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;50:814–820.
    1. Aalto H, Takala A, Kautiainen H, Repo H. Laboratory markers of systemic inflammation as predictors of bloodstream infection in acutely ill patients admitted to hospital in medical emergency. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2004;23:699–704.
    1. Heper Y, Akalin EH, Mistik R, Akgoz S, Tore O, et al. Evaluation of serum C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, tumor necrosis factor alpha, and interleukin-10 levels as diagnostic and prognostic parameters in patients with community-acquired sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2006;25:481–491.
    1. Selberg O, Hecker H, Martin M, Klos A, Bautsch W, et al. Discrimination of sepsis and systemic inflammatory response syndrome by determination of circulating plasma concentrations of procalcitonin, protein complement 3a, and interleukin-6. Crit Care Med. 2000;28(8):2793–2798.
    1. Bozza FA, Salluh JI, Japiassu AM, Soares M, Assis EF, et al. Cytokine profiles as markers of disease severity in sepsis: a multiplex analysis. Crit Care. 2007;11:R49.
    1. Claeys R, Vinken S, Spapen H, ver Elst K, Decochez K, et al. Plasma procalcitonin and C-reactive protein in acute septic shock: clinical and biological correlates. Crit Care Med. 2002;30:757–762.
    1. Damas P, Canivet JL, de Groote D, Vrindts Y, Albert A, et al. Sepsis and serum cytokine concentrations. Crit Care Med. 1997;25(3):405–412.
    1. De Freitas I, Fernandez-Somoza M, Essenfeld-Sekler E, Cardier JE. Serum levels of the apoptosis-associated molecules, tumor necrosis factor-alpha/tumor necrosis factor type-I receptor and Fas/FasL, in sepsis. Chest. 2004;125:2238–2246.
    1. Dinarello CA. Proinflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines as mediators in the pathogenesis of septic shock. Chest. 1997;112:321S–329S.
    1. Gogos CA, Drosou E, Bassaris HP, Skoutelis A. Pro- versus anti-inflammatory cytokine profile in patients with severe sepsis: a marker for prognosis and future therapeutic options. J Infect Dis. 2000;181:176–180.
    1. Hausfater P, Garric S, Ayed SB, Rosenheim M, Bernard M, et al. Usefulness of procalcitonin as a marker of systemic infection in emergency department patients: a prospective study. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;34:895–901.
    1. Hausfater P, Juillien G, Madonna-Py B, Haroche J, Bernard M, et al. Serum procalcitonin measurement as diagnostic and prognostic marker in febrile adult patients presenting to the emergency department. Crit Care. 2007;11:R60.
    1. Kofoed K, Schneider UV, Scheel T, Andersen O, Eugen-Olsen J. Development and validation of a multiplex add-on assay for sepsis biomarkers using xMAP technology. Clin Chem. 2006;52:1284–1293.
    1. Reinhart K, Karzai W, Meisner M. Procalcitonin as a marker of the systemic inflammatory response to infection. Intensive Care Med. 2000;26:1193–1200.
    1. Ulloa L, Tracey KJ. The “cytokine profile”: a code for sepsis. Trends Mol Med. 2005;11:56–63.
    1. Mera S, Tatulescu D, Cismaru C, Bondor C, Slavcovici A, et al. Multiplex cytokine profiling in patients with sepsis. APMIS. 2010;119:155–163.
    1. Levy MM, Fink MP, Marshall JC, Abraham E, Angus D, et al. 2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS International Sepsis Definitions Conference. Crit Care Med. 2003;31:1250–1256.
    1. Shapiro NI, Wolfe RE, Moore RB, Smith E, Burdick E, et al. Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis (MEDS) score: a prospectively derived and validated clinical prediction rule. Crit Care Med. 2003;31:670–675.
    1. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine Consensus Conference: definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. Crit Care Med. 1992;20:864–874.
    1. Ward J. Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J Am Stat Assoc. 1963;58:236–244.
    1. Casey LC, Balk RA, Bone RC. Plasma cytokine and endotoxin levels correlate with survival in patients with the sepsis syndrome. Ann Intern Med. 1993;119:771–778.
    1. Pinsky MR, Vincent JL, Deviere J, Alegre M, Kahn RJ, et al. Serum cytokine levels in human septic shock. Relation to multiple-system organ failure and mortality. Chest. 1993;103:565–575.
    1. van Dissel JT, van Langevelde P, Westendorp RG, Kwappenberg K, Frolich M. Anti-inflammatory cytokine profile and mortality in febrile patients. Lancet. 1998;351:950–953.
    1. Vermont CL, Hazelzet JA, de Kleijn ED, van den Dobbelsteen GP, de Groot R. CC and CXC chemokine levels in children with meningococcal sepsis accurately predict mortality and disease severity. Crit Care. 2006;10:R33.
    1. Oberholzer A, Souza SM, Tschoeke SK, Oberholzer C, Abouhamze A, et al. Plasma cytokine measurements augment prognostic scores as indicators of outcome in patients with severe sepsis. Shock. 2005;23:488–493.
    1. Wang H, Liao H, Ochani M, Justiniani M, Lin X, et al. Cholinergic agonists inhibit HMGB1 release and improve survival in experimental sepsis. Nat Med. 2004;10:1216–1221.
    1. Mauri T, Bellani G, Patroniti N, Coppadoro A, Peri G, et al. Persisting high levels of plasma pentraxin 3 over the first days after severe sepsis and septic shock onset are associated with mortality. Intensive Care Med. 2010;36:621–629.
    1. Calandra T, Baumgartner JD, Grau GE, Wu MM, Lambert PH, et al. Prognostic values of tumor necrosis factor/cachectin, interleukin-1, interferon-alpha, and interferon-gamma in the serum of patients with septic shock. Swiss-Dutch J5 Immunoglobulin Study Group. J Infect Dis. 1990;161:982–987.
    1. Calandra T, Gerain J, Heumann D, Baumgartner JD, Glauser MP. High circulating levels of interleukin-6 in patients with septic shock: evolution during sepsis, prognostic value, and interplay with other cytokines. The Swiss-Dutch J5 Immunoglobulin Study Group. Am J Med. 1991;91:23–29.
    1. Michie HR, Manogue KR, Spriggs DR, Revhaug A, O'Dwyer S, et al. Detection of circulating tumor necrosis factor after endotoxin administration. N Engl J Med. 1988;318:1481–1486.
    1. Feezor RJ, Oberholzer C, Baker HV, Novick D, Rubinstein M, et al. Molecular characterization of the acute inflammatory response to infections with gram-negative versus gram-positive bacteria. Infect Immun. 2003;71:5803–5813.

Source: PubMed

3
Sottoscrivi