Validation of a Host Gene Expression Test for Bacterial/Viral Discrimination in Immunocompromised Hosts.
dc.contributor.author | Mahle, Rachael E | |
dc.contributor.author | Suchindran, Sunil | |
dc.contributor.author | Henao, Ricardo | |
dc.contributor.author | Steinbrink, Julie M | |
dc.contributor.author | Burke, Thomas W | |
dc.contributor.author | McClain, Micah T | |
dc.contributor.author | Ginsburg, Geoffrey S | |
dc.contributor.author | Woods, Christopher W | |
dc.contributor.author | Tsalik, Ephraim L | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-02-01T14:48:55Z | |
dc.date.available | 2022-02-01T14:48:55Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021-08 | |
dc.date.updated | 2022-02-01T14:48:47Z | |
dc.description.abstract | BackgroundHost gene expression has emerged as a complementary strategy to pathogen detection tests for the discrimination of bacterial and viral infection. The impact of immunocompromise on host-response tests remains unknown. We evaluated a host-response test discriminating bacterial, viral, and noninfectious conditions in immunocompromised subjects.MethodsAn 81-gene signature was measured using real-time-polymerase chain reaction in subjects with immunocompromise (chemotherapy, solid-organ transplant, immunomodulatory agents, AIDS) with bacterial infection, viral infection, or noninfectious illness. A regularized logistic regression model trained in immunocompetent subjects was used to estimate the likelihood of each class in immunocompromised subjects.ResultsAccuracy in the 136-subject immunocompetent training cohort was 84.6% for bacterial versus nonbacterial discrimination and 80.8% for viral versus nonviral discrimination. Model validation in 134 immunocompromised subjects showed overall accuracy of 73.9% for bacterial infection (P = .04 relative to immunocompetent subjects) and 75.4% for viral infection (P = .30). A scheme reporting results by quartile improved test utility. The highest probability quartile ruled-in bacterial and viral infection with 91.4% and 84.0% specificity, respectively. The lowest probability quartile ruled-out infection with 90.1% and 96.4% sensitivity for bacterial and viral infection, respectively. Performance was independent of the type or number of immunocompromising conditions.ConclusionsA host gene expression test discriminated bacterial, viral, and noninfectious etiologies at a lower overall accuracy in immunocompromised patients compared with immunocompetent patients, although this difference was only significant for bacterial infection classification. With modified interpretive criteria, a host-response strategy may offer clinically useful diagnostic information for patients with immunocompromise. | |
dc.identifier | 6104215 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1058-4838 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1537-6591 | |
dc.identifier.uri | ||
dc.language | eng | |
dc.publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) | |
dc.relation.ispartof | Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America | |
dc.relation.isversionof | 10.1093/cid/ciab043 | |
dc.subject | Humans | |
dc.subject | Bacteria | |
dc.subject | Bacterial Infections | |
dc.subject | Virus Diseases | |
dc.subject | Immunocompromised Host | |
dc.subject | Gene Expression | |
dc.title | Validation of a Host Gene Expression Test for Bacterial/Viral Discrimination in Immunocompromised Hosts. | |
dc.type | Journal article | |
duke.contributor.orcid | Henao, Ricardo|0000-0003-4980-845X | |
duke.contributor.orcid | Steinbrink, Julie M|0000-0003-0771-3647 | |
duke.contributor.orcid | Burke, Thomas W|0000-0003-0592-5822 | |
duke.contributor.orcid | Ginsburg, Geoffrey S|0000-0003-4739-9808 | |
duke.contributor.orcid | Woods, Christopher W|0000-0001-7240-2453 | |
duke.contributor.orcid | Tsalik, Ephraim L|0000-0002-6417-2042 | |
pubs.begin-page | 605 | |
pubs.end-page | 613 | |
pubs.issue | 4 | |
pubs.organisational-group | Duke | |
pubs.organisational-group | School of Medicine | |
pubs.organisational-group | School of Nursing | |
pubs.organisational-group | Staff | |
pubs.organisational-group | Nursing | |
pubs.organisational-group | Basic Science Departments | |
pubs.organisational-group | Clinical Science Departments | |
pubs.organisational-group | Institutes and Centers | |
pubs.organisational-group | Biostatistics & Bioinformatics | |
pubs.organisational-group | Molecular Genetics and Microbiology | |
pubs.organisational-group | Medicine | |
pubs.organisational-group | Pathology | |
pubs.organisational-group | Medicine, Cardiology | |
pubs.organisational-group | Medicine, Infectious Diseases | |
pubs.organisational-group | Duke Cancer Institute | |
pubs.organisational-group | Duke Clinical Research Institute | |
pubs.organisational-group | Institutes and Provost's Academic Units | |
pubs.organisational-group | University Institutes and Centers | |
pubs.organisational-group | Duke Global Health Institute | |
pubs.publication-status | Published | |
pubs.volume | 73 |
Files
Original bundle
- Name:
- BV validation in immunocompromised, CID 2021.pdf
- Size:
- 15.46 MB
- Format:
- Adobe Portable Document Format
- Description:
- Published version