The role of antibiotics in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is controversial and a biomarker identifying patients who benefit from antibiotics is mandatory. We performed a randomised, controlled trial in patients with acute exacerbations of COPD, comparing C-reactive protein (CRP)-guided antibiotic treatment to patient reported symptoms in accordance with the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) strategy, in order to show a reduction in antibiotic prescription.Patients hospitalised with acute exacerbations of COPD were randomised to receive antibiotics based either on the GOLD strategy or according to the CRP strategy (CRP ≥50 mg·L−1).In total, 101 patients were randomised to the CRP group and 119 to the GOLD group. Fewer patients in the CRP group were treated with antibiotics compared to the GOLD group (31.7% versus 46.2%, p=0.028; adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.178, 95% CI 0.077–0.411, p=0.029). The 30-day treatment failure rate was nearly equal (44.5% in the CRP group versus 45.5% in the GOLD-group, p=0.881; adjusted OR 1.146, 95% CI 0.649–1.187, p=0.630), as was the time to next exacerbation (32 days in the CRP group versus 28 days in the GOLD group, p=0.713; adjusted hazard ratio 0.878, 95% CI 0.649–1.187, p=0.398). Length of stay was similar in both groups (7 days in the CRP group versus 6 days in the GOLD group, p=0.206). On day-30, no difference in symptom score, quality of life or serious adverse events was detected.Use of CRP as a biomarker to guide antibiotic treatment in severe acute exacerbations of COPD leads to a significant reduction in antibiotic treatment. In the present study, no differences in adverse events between both groups were found. Further research is needed for the generalisability of these findings.
BackgroundGiven the increasing burden on colonoscopy capacity, it has been suggested that faecal immunochemical test (FIT) results could guide surveillance colonoscopy intervals. Against this background, we have evaluated the test accuracy of single and double FIT sampling to detect colorectal cancer (CRC) and/or advanced adenomas in an asymptomatic colonoscopy-controlled high-risk population.MethodsCohort study of asymptomatic high-risk patients (personal history of adenomas/CRC or family history of CRC), who provided one or two FITs before elective colonoscopy. Test accuracy of FIT for detection of CRC and advanced adenomas was determined (cut-off level 50 ng/ml).Results1,041 patients provided a FIT (516 personal history of adenomas, 172 personal history of CRC and 353 family history of CRC). Five CRCs (0.5%) and 101 advanced adenomas (9.7%) were detected by colonoscopy. Single FIT sampling resulted in a sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for CRC of 80%, 89%, 3% and 99.9%, respectively, and for advanced adenoma of 28%, 91%, 24% and 92%, respectively. Double FIT sampling did not result in a significantly higher sensitivity for advanced neoplasia. Simulation of multiple screening rounds indicated that sensitivity of FIT for advanced adenoma could reach 81% after 5 screening rounds.ConclusionsIn once-only FIT sampling before surveillance colonoscopy, 70% of advanced neoplasia were missed. A simulation approach indicates that multiple screening rounds may be more promising in detecting advanced neoplasia and could potentially alleviate endoscopic burden.
Background Potentially unnecessary antibiotic use for community‐acquired pneumonia (CAP) contributes to selection of antibiotic‐resistant pathogens. Cytokine expression at the time that treatment is started may assist in identifying patients not requiring antibiotics. We determined plasma cytokine patterns in patients retrospectively categorized as strict viral, pneumococcal or combined viral‐bacterial CAP. Objective To investigate whether cytokine‐based prediction models can be used to differentiate strict viral CAP from other aetiologies at admission. Methods From 344 hospitalized CAP patients, 104 patients were categorized as viral CAP (n = 17), pneumococcal CAP (n = 48) and combined bacterial‐viral CAP (n = 39). IL‐6, IL‐10, IL‐27, IFN‐γ and C‐reactive protein (CRP) were determined on admission in plasma. Prediction of strict viral aetiology was explored with two multivariate regression models and ROC curves. Results Viral pneumonia was predicted by logistic regression using multiple cytokine levels (IL‐6, IL‐27 and CRP) with an AUC of 0.911 (95% CI: 0.852‐0.971, P < .001). For the same patients the AUC of CRP was 0.813 (95% CI: 0.728‐0.898, P < .001). Conclusions This study demonstrated differences in cytokine expression in selected CAP patients between viral and bacterial aetiology. Prospective validation studies are warranted.
Background Legionella-related community acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a disease with an increasing incidence and a high mortality rate, especially if empirical antibiotic therapy is inadequate. Antibiotic treatment highly relies on clinical symptoms, although proven non-specific, because currently available diagnostic techniques provide insufficient accuracy for detecting Legionella CAP on admission. This study validates a diagnostic scoring system for detection of Legionella-related CAP, based on six items on admission (Legionella prediction score). Methods We included patients with Legionella-related CAP admitted to five large Dutch hospitals between 2006 and 2016. Controls were non-Legionella-related CAP patients. The following six conditions were rewarded one point if present: fever > 39.4 °C; dry cough; hyponatremia (sodium) < 133 mmol/L; lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) > 225 mmol/L; C-reactive protein (CRP) > 187 mg/L and platelet count < 171 × 109/L. The accuracy of the prediction score was assessed by calculating the area under the curve (AUC) through logistic regression analysis. Results We included 131 cases and 160 controls. A score of 0 occurred in non-Legionella-related CAP patients only, a score of 5 and 6 in Legionella-related CAP patients only. A cut-off ≥ 4 resulted in a sensitivity of 58.8% and a specificity of 93.1%. The AUC was 0.89 (95% CI 0.86–0.93). The strongest predictors were elevated LDH, elevated CRP and hyponatremia. Conclusions This multi-centre study validates the Legionella prediction score, an easily applicable diagnostic scoring system, in a large group of patients and finds high diagnostic accuracy. The score shows promise for future prospective validation and could contribute to targeted antibiotic treatment of suspected Legionella CAP.
Streptococcus pneumoniae is the most important pathogen causing community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). The current diagnostic microbial standard detects S. pneumoniae in less than 30% of CAP cases. A quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) targeting autolysin (lytA) is able to increase the rate of detection. The aim of this study is validation of this quantitative PCR in vitro using different available strains and in vivo using clinical samples (oropharyngeal swabs). The PCR autolysin (lytA) was validated by testing the intra-and inter-run variability. Also, the in vitro specificity and sensitivity, including the lower limit of detection was determined. In addition, a pilot-study was performed using samples from patients (n = 28) with pneumococcal pneumonia and patients (n = 28) with a pneumonia without detection of S. pneumoniae with the current diagnostic microbial standard, but with detection of either a viral and or another bacterial pathogen to validate this test further. The intra-and inter-run variability were relatively low (SD's ranging from 0.08 to 0.96 cycle thresholds). The lower limit of detection turned out to be 1-10 DNA copies/reaction. In-vitro sensitivity and specificity of the tested specimens (8 strains carrying lytA and 6 strains negative for lytA) were both 100%. In patients with pneumococcal and non-pneumococcal pneumonia a cutoff value of 6.000 copies/mL would lead to a sensitivity of 57.1% and a specificity of 85.7%. We were able to develop a quantitative PCR targeting lytA with good in-vitro test characteristics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.