Lymphocyte count trajectories are associated with the prognosis of sepsis patients

IF 8.8 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Jiale Yang, Binli Ma, Huasheng Tong
{"title":"Lymphocyte count trajectories are associated with the prognosis of sepsis patients","authors":"Jiale Yang, Binli Ma, Huasheng Tong","doi":"10.1186/s13054-024-05186-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Sepsis causes multiorgan dysfunction from immune dysregulation, resulting in high ICU admissions and mortality [1]. Lymphocytes are essential in the immune response during sepsis, with lymphopenia linked to increased vulnerability to secondary infections, higher sepsis severity, and mortality [2]. However, prior studies primarily analyzed lymphocyte counts at fixed time points, overlooking their dynamic nature and association with sepsis prognosis. Furthermore, unlike other complex immune biomarkers such as HLA-DR, lymphocyte count is easily accessible, making it a valuable marker for continuous monitoring of immune status. This study aims to identify heterogeneous lymphocyte count trajectories in sepsis patients by leveraging the group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) [3], which accommodates unbalanced panels and missing values.</p><p>This is a retrospective study based on data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) v3.1 database (certification number: 64590357). We extracted data on 24,792 adult sepsis patients admitted to the ICU, diagnosed using Sepsis-3.0 criteria (suspected infection and a SOFA score increase of ≥ 2). After excluding patients with conditions such as long-term steroid use, transplant status, malignancy, rheumatic disease, or hematologic disease (detailed information provided in Table S1), 12,078 cases were retained. Among these, 3152 sepsis patients who had at least two lymphocyte count measurements within 7 days of ICU admission were included, with a hospital mortality rate of 24.6%.</p><p>We applied GBTM to identify lymphocyte count trajectories, selecting a three-class model (Fig. 1), based on the Akaike and Bayesian information criterion, and clinical rationality (Table S2). Trajectory 1, the “Rapid-slow decrease” class, included 525 (16.7%) patients and was characterized by a rapid decrease in lymphocyte counts in the first 3 days, followed by a slower decline. Trajectory 2, the “Stable” class, included 1453 (46.1%) patients with relatively stable lymphocyte counts. Trajectory 3, the “Rapid-slow increase” class, included 1174 (37.2%) patients who showed a rapid increase in lymphocyte counts in the first 3 days, followed by a slower rise at relatively low levels. Baseline characteristics varied significantly across these trajectories (Table 1). Patients in Trajectory 3 had the longest hospital stays, higher APSIII, OASIS, and MELD scores, and a greater prevalence of comorbidities, with the highest 28-day mortality (22.9%). In contrast, patients in Trajectory 1 had the shortest hospital stays but higher SIRS score and the highest 7-day mortality (12%).</p><figure><figcaption><b data-test=\"figure-caption-text\">Fig. 1</b></figcaption><picture><source srcset=\"//media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs13054-024-05186-6/MediaObjects/13054_2024_5186_Fig1_HTML.png?as=webp\" type=\"image/webp\"/><img alt=\"figure 1\" aria-describedby=\"Fig1\" height=\"360\" loading=\"lazy\" src=\"//media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs13054-024-05186-6/MediaObjects/13054_2024_5186_Fig1_HTML.png\" width=\"685\"/></picture><p>Lymphocyte trajectories over the first 7 days of ICU admission</p><span>Full size image</span><svg aria-hidden=\"true\" focusable=\"false\" height=\"16\" role=\"img\" width=\"16\"><use xlink:href=\"#icon-eds-i-chevron-right-small\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"></use></svg></figure><figure><figcaption><b data-test=\"table-caption\">Table 1 Baseline characteristics comparison among the three lymphocyte trajectories</b></figcaption><span>Full size table</span><svg aria-hidden=\"true\" focusable=\"false\" height=\"16\" role=\"img\" width=\"16\"><use xlink:href=\"#icon-eds-i-chevron-right-small\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"></use></svg></figure><p>Cox regression analysis and Kaplan–Meier survival curves were used to examine the relationship between lymphocyte trajectories and mortality. Compared to Trajectory 2, Trajectory 3 was associated with increased 28-day mortality (HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.34–1.92, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001), while Trajectory 1 was linked to higher 7-day mortality (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.16–2.15, <i>p</i> = 0.004). After adjusting for confounders, Trajectory 3 remained an independent risk factor of both 7-day and 28-day mortality, while Trajectory 1 was no longer significant (Table 2). Survival curves illustrated differences in mortality among trajectories over 28 days (Fig. 2). Consistent with the Cox regression results, Trajectory 1 had the highest mortality within the first 7 days, after which its mortality curve overlapped with that of Trajectory 2, while Trajectory 3 had the highest mortality beyond the 7-day timeframe. Additional subgroup analysis stratified by comorbidities demonstrated no significant interaction between lymphocyte count trajectories and any comorbidities (Figure S1 and Figure S2), indicating that comorbidities did not affect the association between trajectories and patient outcomes.</p><figure><figcaption><b data-test=\"table-caption\">Table 2 Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis of the three lymphocyte trajectories</b></figcaption><span>Full size table</span><svg aria-hidden=\"true\" focusable=\"false\" height=\"16\" role=\"img\" width=\"16\"><use xlink:href=\"#icon-eds-i-chevron-right-small\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"></use></svg></figure><figure><figcaption><b data-test=\"figure-caption-text\">Fig. 2</b></figcaption><picture><source srcset=\"//media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs13054-024-05186-6/MediaObjects/13054_2024_5186_Fig2_HTML.png?as=webp\" type=\"image/webp\"/><img alt=\"figure 2\" aria-describedby=\"Fig2\" height=\"448\" loading=\"lazy\" src=\"//media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs13054-024-05186-6/MediaObjects/13054_2024_5186_Fig2_HTML.png\" width=\"685\"/></picture><p>Kaplan–Meier survival curves of the three trajectories</p><span>Full size image</span><svg aria-hidden=\"true\" focusable=\"false\" height=\"16\" role=\"img\" width=\"16\"><use xlink:href=\"#icon-eds-i-chevron-right-small\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"></use></svg></figure><p>The distinct lymphocyte trajectories might imply different immune profiles and outcomes in sepsis. Trajectory 1, with initially high lymphocyte counts, was associated with elevated SIRS scores and 7-day mortality, possibly reflecting a pro-inflammatory sepsis phenotype. In contrast, Trajectory 3, with relatively low lymphocyte counts, correlated with higher 28-day mortality, suggesting an immunosuppressive profile. This pattern aligns with prior research indicating that early death in sepsis is driven by intense inflammation, while late death is more commonly associated with immunosuppression [4]. These findings highlight the potential role of tailored therapies for different sepsis subtypes. Specifically, patients with a pro-inflammatory profile (Trajectory 1) may benefit from anti-inflammatory agents like corticosteroids or ulinastatin [5]. For patients with an immunosuppressive profile (Trajectory 3), immune-stimulating therapies such as thymosin α1, which restores lymphocyte counts, or IL-7, which promotes lymphocyte proliferation and prevents apoptosis, might be advantageous [5]. As for patients in the stable profile (Trajectory 2), representing the majority of cases with the lowest mortality, standard, guideline-based supportive care may be sufficient.</p><p>In conclusion, three distinct lymphocyte trajectories were identified in sepsis patients using GBTM. Trajectory 3 was a strong predictor of 7-day and 28-day mortality, while Trajectory 1 was associated with early death. These findings might support the development of more personalized management strategies for sepsis. Future prospective studies could focus on investigating the efficacy of targeted immune therapy on different trajectories to better understand potential interactions between immune therapy and sepsis subgroups.</p><p>No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.</p><dl><dt style=\"min-width:50px;\"><dfn>ICU:</dfn></dt><dd>\n<p>Intensive care unit</p>\n</dd><dt style=\"min-width:50px;\"><dfn>HLA-DR:</dfn></dt><dd>\n<p>Human leukocyte antigen-DR isotype</p>\n</dd><dt style=\"min-width:50px;\"><dfn>GBTM:</dfn></dt><dd>\n<p>Group-based trajectory modeling</p>\n</dd><dt style=\"min-width:50px;\"><dfn>MIMIC:</dfn></dt><dd>\n<p>Medical information mart for intensive care</p>\n</dd><dt style=\"min-width:50px;\"><dfn>SOFA:</dfn></dt><dd>\n<p>Sequential organ failure assessment</p>\n</dd><dt style=\"min-width:50px;\"><dfn>APSIII:</dfn></dt><dd>\n<p>Acute physiology score III</p>\n</dd><dt style=\"min-width:50px;\"><dfn>OASIS:</dfn></dt><dd>\n<p>Oxford acute severity of illness score</p>\n</dd><dt style=\"min-width:50px;\"><dfn>SIRS:</dfn></dt><dd>\n<p>Systemic inflammatory response syndrome</p>\n</dd><dt style=\"min-width:50px;\"><dfn>MELD:</dfn></dt><dd>\n<p>Model for end-stage liver disease</p>\n</dd></dl><ol data-track-component=\"outbound reference\" data-track-context=\"references section\"><li data-counter=\"1.\"><p>Ye Q, Wang X, Xu X, Chen J, Christiani DC, Chen F, Zhang R, Wei Y. Serial platelet count as a dynamic prediction marker of hospital mortality among septic patients. Burns Trauma. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1093/burnst/tkae016/7693876.</p><p>Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar </p></li><li data-counter=\"2.\"><p>Wang Z, Zhang W, Chen L, Lu X, Tu Y. Lymphopenia in sepsis: a narrative review. Critical Care. 2024;28:315.</p><p>Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar </p></li><li data-counter=\"3.\"><p>Nagin DS, Jones BL, Passos VL, Tremblay RE. Group-based multi-trajectory modeling. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018;27(7):2015–23.</p><p>Article PubMed Google Scholar </p></li><li data-counter=\"4.\"><p>Delano MJ, Ward PA. Sepsis-induced immune dysfunction: can immune therapies reduce mortality? J Clin Invest. 2016;126(1):23–31.</p><p>Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar </p></li><li data-counter=\"5.\"><p>Liu D, Huang SY, Sun JH, Zhang HC, Cai QL, Gao C, Li L, Cao J, Xu F, Zhou Y, Guan CX. Sepsis induced immunosuppression: mechanisms, diagnosis and current treatment options. Mili Med Res. 2022;9:56.</p><p>Article CAS Google Scholar </p></li></ol><p>Download references<svg aria-hidden=\"true\" focusable=\"false\" height=\"16\" role=\"img\" width=\"16\"><use xlink:href=\"#icon-eds-i-download-medium\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"></use></svg></p><p>This research was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2024A1515012909) and the Guangzhou Municipal Science and Technology Project (2024A03J0643).</p><h3>Authors and Affiliations</h3><ol><li><p>Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China</p><p>Jiale Yang</p></li><li><p>Department of Intensive Care Unit, General Hospital of Southern Theatre Command of PLA, Guangzhou, China</p><p>Jiale Yang, Binli Ma &amp; Huasheng Tong</p></li><li><p>Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, Guangzhou, China</p><p>Binli Ma</p></li></ol><span>Authors</span><ol><li><span>Jiale Yang</span>View author publications<p>You can also search for this author in <span>PubMed<span> </span>Google Scholar</span></p></li><li><span>Binli Ma</span>View author publications<p>You can also search for this author in <span>PubMed<span> </span>Google Scholar</span></p></li><li><span>Huasheng Tong</span>View author publications<p>You can also search for this author in <span>PubMed<span> </span>Google Scholar</span></p></li></ol><h3>Contributions</h3><p>JY contributed to conceptualization, manuscript writing and editing, statistical analysis, and visualization. BM contributed to data collection and statistical analysis. HT contributed to manuscript reviewing and funding acquisition. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.</p><h3>Corresponding author</h3><p>Correspondence to Huasheng Tong.</p><h3>Competing interests</h3>\n<p>The authors declare no competing interests.</p>\n<h3>Ethic approval and consent to participate</h3>\n<p>Not applicable. The MIMIC database is publicly available and has been anonymized. No need for further approval from an ethical committee.</p>\n<h3>Consent for publication</h3>\n<p>All authors consent for publication.</p><h3>Publisher's Note</h3><p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p><h3>Additional file 1</h3><p><b>Open Access</b> This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.</p>\n<p>Reprints and permissions</p><img alt=\"Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark\" height=\"81\" loading=\"lazy\" src=\"\" width=\"57\"/><h3>Cite this article</h3><p>Yang, J., Ma, B. &amp; Tong, H. Lymphocyte count trajectories are associated with the prognosis of sepsis patients. <i>Crit Care</i> <b>28</b>, 399 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05186-6</p><p>Download citation<svg aria-hidden=\"true\" focusable=\"false\" height=\"16\" role=\"img\" width=\"16\"><use xlink:href=\"#icon-eds-i-download-medium\" xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\"></use></svg></p><ul data-test=\"publication-history\"><li><p>Received<span>: </span><span><time datetime=\"2024-11-15\">15 November 2024</time></span></p></li><li><p>Accepted<span>: </span><span><time datetime=\"2024-11-22\">22 November 2024</time></span></p></li><li><p>Published<span>: </span><span><time datetime=\"2024-12-02\">02 December 2024</time></span></p></li><li><p>DOI</abbr><span>: </span><span>https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05186-6</span></p></li></ul><h3>Share this article</h3><p>Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:</p><button data-track=\"click\" data-track-action=\"get shareable link\" data-track-external=\"\" data-track-label=\"button\" type=\"button\">Get shareable link</button><p>Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.</p><p data-track=\"click\" data-track-action=\"select share url\" data-track-label=\"button\"></p><button data-track=\"click\" data-track-action=\"copy share url\" data-track-external=\"\" data-track-label=\"button\" type=\"button\">Copy to clipboard</button><p> Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative </p>","PeriodicalId":10811,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05186-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sepsis causes multiorgan dysfunction from immune dysregulation, resulting in high ICU admissions and mortality [1]. Lymphocytes are essential in the immune response during sepsis, with lymphopenia linked to increased vulnerability to secondary infections, higher sepsis severity, and mortality [2]. However, prior studies primarily analyzed lymphocyte counts at fixed time points, overlooking their dynamic nature and association with sepsis prognosis. Furthermore, unlike other complex immune biomarkers such as HLA-DR, lymphocyte count is easily accessible, making it a valuable marker for continuous monitoring of immune status. This study aims to identify heterogeneous lymphocyte count trajectories in sepsis patients by leveraging the group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) [3], which accommodates unbalanced panels and missing values.

This is a retrospective study based on data from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) v3.1 database (certification number: 64590357). We extracted data on 24,792 adult sepsis patients admitted to the ICU, diagnosed using Sepsis-3.0 criteria (suspected infection and a SOFA score increase of ≥ 2). After excluding patients with conditions such as long-term steroid use, transplant status, malignancy, rheumatic disease, or hematologic disease (detailed information provided in Table S1), 12,078 cases were retained. Among these, 3152 sepsis patients who had at least two lymphocyte count measurements within 7 days of ICU admission were included, with a hospital mortality rate of 24.6%.

We applied GBTM to identify lymphocyte count trajectories, selecting a three-class model (Fig. 1), based on the Akaike and Bayesian information criterion, and clinical rationality (Table S2). Trajectory 1, the “Rapid-slow decrease” class, included 525 (16.7%) patients and was characterized by a rapid decrease in lymphocyte counts in the first 3 days, followed by a slower decline. Trajectory 2, the “Stable” class, included 1453 (46.1%) patients with relatively stable lymphocyte counts. Trajectory 3, the “Rapid-slow increase” class, included 1174 (37.2%) patients who showed a rapid increase in lymphocyte counts in the first 3 days, followed by a slower rise at relatively low levels. Baseline characteristics varied significantly across these trajectories (Table 1). Patients in Trajectory 3 had the longest hospital stays, higher APSIII, OASIS, and MELD scores, and a greater prevalence of comorbidities, with the highest 28-day mortality (22.9%). In contrast, patients in Trajectory 1 had the shortest hospital stays but higher SIRS score and the highest 7-day mortality (12%).

Fig. 1
Abstract Image

Lymphocyte trajectories over the first 7 days of ICU admission

Full size image
Table 1 Baseline characteristics comparison among the three lymphocyte trajectories
Full size table

Cox regression analysis and Kaplan–Meier survival curves were used to examine the relationship between lymphocyte trajectories and mortality. Compared to Trajectory 2, Trajectory 3 was associated with increased 28-day mortality (HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.34–1.92, p < 0.001), while Trajectory 1 was linked to higher 7-day mortality (HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.16–2.15, p = 0.004). After adjusting for confounders, Trajectory 3 remained an independent risk factor of both 7-day and 28-day mortality, while Trajectory 1 was no longer significant (Table 2). Survival curves illustrated differences in mortality among trajectories over 28 days (Fig. 2). Consistent with the Cox regression results, Trajectory 1 had the highest mortality within the first 7 days, after which its mortality curve overlapped with that of Trajectory 2, while Trajectory 3 had the highest mortality beyond the 7-day timeframe. Additional subgroup analysis stratified by comorbidities demonstrated no significant interaction between lymphocyte count trajectories and any comorbidities (Figure S1 and Figure S2), indicating that comorbidities did not affect the association between trajectories and patient outcomes.

Table 2 Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis of the three lymphocyte trajectories
Full size table
Fig. 2
Abstract Image

Kaplan–Meier survival curves of the three trajectories

Full size image

The distinct lymphocyte trajectories might imply different immune profiles and outcomes in sepsis. Trajectory 1, with initially high lymphocyte counts, was associated with elevated SIRS scores and 7-day mortality, possibly reflecting a pro-inflammatory sepsis phenotype. In contrast, Trajectory 3, with relatively low lymphocyte counts, correlated with higher 28-day mortality, suggesting an immunosuppressive profile. This pattern aligns with prior research indicating that early death in sepsis is driven by intense inflammation, while late death is more commonly associated with immunosuppression [4]. These findings highlight the potential role of tailored therapies for different sepsis subtypes. Specifically, patients with a pro-inflammatory profile (Trajectory 1) may benefit from anti-inflammatory agents like corticosteroids or ulinastatin [5]. For patients with an immunosuppressive profile (Trajectory 3), immune-stimulating therapies such as thymosin α1, which restores lymphocyte counts, or IL-7, which promotes lymphocyte proliferation and prevents apoptosis, might be advantageous [5]. As for patients in the stable profile (Trajectory 2), representing the majority of cases with the lowest mortality, standard, guideline-based supportive care may be sufficient.

In conclusion, three distinct lymphocyte trajectories were identified in sepsis patients using GBTM. Trajectory 3 was a strong predictor of 7-day and 28-day mortality, while Trajectory 1 was associated with early death. These findings might support the development of more personalized management strategies for sepsis. Future prospective studies could focus on investigating the efficacy of targeted immune therapy on different trajectories to better understand potential interactions between immune therapy and sepsis subgroups.

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

ICU:

Intensive care unit

HLA-DR:

Human leukocyte antigen-DR isotype

GBTM:

Group-based trajectory modeling

MIMIC:

Medical information mart for intensive care

SOFA:

Sequential organ failure assessment

APSIII:

Acute physiology score III

OASIS:

Oxford acute severity of illness score

SIRS:

Systemic inflammatory response syndrome

MELD:

Model for end-stage liver disease

  1. Ye Q, Wang X, Xu X, Chen J, Christiani DC, Chen F, Zhang R, Wei Y. Serial platelet count as a dynamic prediction marker of hospital mortality among septic patients. Burns Trauma. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1093/burnst/tkae016/7693876.

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  2. Wang Z, Zhang W, Chen L, Lu X, Tu Y. Lymphopenia in sepsis: a narrative review. Critical Care. 2024;28:315.

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  3. Nagin DS, Jones BL, Passos VL, Tremblay RE. Group-based multi-trajectory modeling. Stat Methods Med Res. 2018;27(7):2015–23.

    Article PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Delano MJ, Ward PA. Sepsis-induced immune dysfunction: can immune therapies reduce mortality? J Clin Invest. 2016;126(1):23–31.

    Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

  5. Liu D, Huang SY, Sun JH, Zhang HC, Cai QL, Gao C, Li L, Cao J, Xu F, Zhou Y, Guan CX. Sepsis induced immunosuppression: mechanisms, diagnosis and current treatment options. Mili Med Res. 2022;9:56.

    Article CAS Google Scholar

Download references

This research was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2024A1515012909) and the Guangzhou Municipal Science and Technology Project (2024A03J0643).

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China

    Jiale Yang

  2. Department of Intensive Care Unit, General Hospital of Southern Theatre Command of PLA, Guangzhou, China

    Jiale Yang, Binli Ma & Huasheng Tong

  3. Guangdong Pharmaceutical University, Guangzhou, China

    Binli Ma

Authors
  1. Jiale YangView author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Binli MaView author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Huasheng TongView author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

JY contributed to conceptualization, manuscript writing and editing, statistical analysis, and visualization. BM contributed to data collection and statistical analysis. HT contributed to manuscript reviewing and funding acquisition. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huasheng Tong.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethic approval and consent to participate

Not applicable. The MIMIC database is publicly available and has been anonymized. No need for further approval from an ethical committee.

Consent for publication

All authors consent for publication.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Additional file 1

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

Abstract Image

Cite this article

Yang, J., Ma, B. & Tong, H. Lymphocyte count trajectories are associated with the prognosis of sepsis patients. Crit Care 28, 399 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05186-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05186-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

淋巴细胞计数轨迹与脓毒症患者的预后有关
脓毒症引起免疫失调引起多器官功能障碍,导致高ICU入院率和死亡率。淋巴细胞在败血症期间的免疫反应中是必不可少的,淋巴细胞减少与继发性感染的易感性增加、败血症严重程度升高和死亡率相关。然而,以往的研究主要分析固定时间点的淋巴细胞计数,忽略了它们的动态性及其与脓毒症预后的关系。此外,与其他复杂的免疫生物标志物(如HLA-DR)不同,淋巴细胞计数很容易获得,使其成为持续监测免疫状态的有价值的标志物。本研究旨在通过利用基于组的轨迹模型(GBTM)[3]来识别脓毒症患者的异质性淋巴细胞计数轨迹,该模型可适应不平衡的组和缺失值。这是一项基于重症监护医疗信息市场IV (MIMIC-IV) v3.1数据库(认证号:64590357)数据的回顾性研究。我们提取了24,792例入住ICU的成人脓毒症患者的数据,这些患者采用脓毒症-3.0标准(疑似感染且SOFA评分升高≥2)进行诊断。在排除长期使用类固醇、移植状态、恶性肿瘤、风湿病或血液病(详细信息见表S1)的患者后,保留了12078例。其中,3152例脓毒症患者在ICU入院7天内至少进行了两次淋巴细胞计数测量,住院死亡率为24.6%。我们应用GBTM识别淋巴细胞计数轨迹,根据赤池和贝叶斯信息准则以及临床合理性选择一个三类模型(图1)(表S2)。轨迹1,“快速-缓慢下降”类别,包括525例(16.7%)患者,其特征是淋巴细胞计数在前3天迅速下降,随后下降速度较慢。轨迹2,“稳定”级,包括1453例(46.1%)淋巴细胞计数相对稳定的患者。轨迹3,“快速-缓慢增加”类别,包括1174例(37.2%)患者,他们在前3天淋巴细胞计数快速增加,随后在相对较低的水平上缓慢上升。这些轨迹的基线特征差异显著(表1)。轨迹3的患者住院时间最长,APSIII、OASIS和MELD评分较高,合并症患病率较高,28天死亡率最高(22.9%)。相比之下,轨迹1的患者住院时间最短,但SIRS评分较高,7天死亡率最高(12%)。1 ICU入院前7天的淋巴细胞轨迹全尺寸图像表1三种淋巴细胞轨迹的基线特征比较全尺寸表采用cox回归分析和Kaplan-Meier生存曲线来检查淋巴细胞轨迹与死亡率之间的关系。与轨迹2相比,轨迹3与28天死亡率增加相关(HR 1.61, 95% CI 1.34-1.92, p &lt; 0.001),而轨迹1与较高的7天死亡率相关(HR 1.58, 95% CI 1.16-2.15, p = 0.004)。在调整混杂因素后,轨迹3仍然是7天和28天死亡率的独立危险因素,而轨迹1不再显著(表2)。生存曲线显示了28天内轨迹之间的死亡率差异(图2)。与Cox回归结果一致,轨迹1在前7天内死亡率最高,之后其死亡率曲线与轨迹2重叠。而轨迹3超过7天的死亡率最高。另外,按合并症分层的亚组分析显示,淋巴细胞计数轨迹与任何合并症之间没有显著的相互作用(图S1和图S2),表明合并症不影响轨迹与患者结局之间的关联。表2三种淋巴细胞轨迹的单因素和多因素Cox回归分析。三种轨迹的kaplan - meier生存曲线全尺寸图像不同的淋巴细胞轨迹可能意味着不同的免疫特征和脓毒症的结局。轨迹1,最初淋巴细胞计数高,与SIRS评分升高和7天死亡率相关,可能反映了促炎败血症表型。相比之下,淋巴细胞计数相对较低的轨迹3与较高的28天死亡率相关,提示免疫抑制谱。这种模式与先前的研究一致,表明脓毒症的早期死亡是由强烈的炎症驱动的,而晚期死亡更常见的是与免疫抑制[4]相关。这些发现强调了针对不同脓毒症亚型定制治疗的潜在作用。 具体来说,具有促炎特征(轨迹1)的患者可能受益于抗炎药物,如皮质类固醇或乌司他汀[5]。对于具有免疫抑制特征的患者(轨迹3),免疫刺激疗法如胸腺素α1(可以恢复淋巴细胞计数)或IL-7(可以促进淋巴细胞增殖并防止细胞凋亡)可能是有利的。对于稳定型患者(轨迹2),代表了死亡率最低的大多数病例,标准的、基于指南的支持治疗可能就足够了。总之,在使用GBTM的脓毒症患者中发现了三种不同的淋巴细胞轨迹。轨迹3是7天和28天死亡率的有力预测因子,而轨迹1与早期死亡有关。这些发现可能支持脓毒症更个性化的管理策略的发展。未来的前瞻性研究可侧重于研究不同轨迹下靶向免疫治疗的疗效,以更好地了解免疫治疗与脓毒症亚群之间的潜在相互作用。在本研究中没有生成或分析数据集。ICU:重症监护室hla - dr:人白细胞抗原- dr同型gbtm:基于组的轨迹建模mimic:重症监护医学信息市场sofa:序次器官衰竭评估apsiii:急性生理评分IIIOASIS:牛津急性疾病严重程度评分sirs:全身炎症反应综合征memeld:终末期肝病模型魏勇。系列血小板计数作为脓毒症患者住院死亡率的动态预测指标。烧伤创伤。2024。https://doi.org/10.1093/burnst/tkae016/7693876.Article PubMed PubMed Central谷歌学者王铮,张伟,陈磊,吕晓,涂云。脓毒症淋巴细胞减少:叙述性回顾。重症监护。2024;28:315。[0]学者Nagin DS, Jones BL, Passos VL, Tremblay RE.基于群体的多轨迹建模。中华医学杂志,2018;27(7):2015-23。文章PubMed b谷歌学者Delano MJ, Ward PA。败血症引起的免疫功能障碍:免疫疗法能降低死亡率吗?中华临床医学杂志,2016;26(1):23-31。文章发表于PubMed PubMed Central bbb学者刘丹,黄世英,孙建华,张慧慧,蔡清林,高超,李丽,曹军,徐飞,周勇,关春霞。脓毒症诱导的免疫抑制:机制、诊断和目前的治疗方案。米利地中海。2022;9:56。本研究由广东省自然科学基金(2024A1515012909)和广州市科技项目(2024A03J0643)资助。作者单位:广州中医药大学(广州)杨家乐解放军南方战区总医院(广州)重症监护室杨家乐马宾利等;华盛通广东药科大学,广州华盛通mahinli authorsjiale杨嘉乐查看作者出版物您也可以在PubMed谷歌ScholarBinli MaView作者出版物您也可以在PubMed谷歌scholarhusheng TongView作者出版物您也可以在PubMed谷歌scholarcontributionsy对概念化,稿件撰写和编辑,统计分析和可视化做出了贡献。BM负责数据收集和统计分析。HT参与了稿件审核和资金获取。所有作者都阅读并批准了最终的手稿。通讯作者:同华生通信。利益竞争作者声明没有利益竞争。伦理批准和同意参与不适用。MIMIC数据库是公开的,并且是匿名的。不需要伦理委员会的进一步批准。出版同意所有作者同意出版。出版商声明:对于已出版的地图和机构关系中的管辖权要求,普林格·自然保持中立。本文遵循知识共享署名-非商业-非衍生品4.0国际许可协议,该协议允许以任何媒介或格式进行非商业用途、共享、分发和复制,只要您适当注明原作者和来源,提供知识共享许可协议的链接,并注明您是否修改了许可材料。根据本许可协议,您无权分享源自本文或其部分内容的改编材料。本文中的图像或其他第三方材料包含在文章的知识共享许可协议中,除非在材料的署名中另有说明。 如果材料未包含在文章的知识共享许可中,并且您的预期用途不被法律法规允许或超过允许的用途,您将需要直接获得版权所有者的许可。要查看本许可的副本,请访问http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.Reprints和permissionsCite这篇文章yang, J., Ma, B. &amp;淋巴细胞计数轨迹与脓毒症患者的预后相关。危重护理28,399(2024)。https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05186-6Download citation:收稿日期:2024年11月15日接受日期:2024年11月22日发布日期:2024年12月02日doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-024-05186-6Share这篇文章任何你分享以下链接的人都可以阅读到这篇文章:获取可共享链接对不起,本文目前没有可共享链接。复制到剪贴板由施普林格自然共享内容倡议提供
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Critical Care
Critical Care 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
20.60
自引率
3.30%
发文量
348
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: Critical Care is an esteemed international medical journal that undergoes a rigorous peer-review process to maintain its high quality standards. Its primary objective is to enhance the healthcare services offered to critically ill patients. To achieve this, the journal focuses on gathering, exchanging, disseminating, and endorsing evidence-based information that is highly relevant to intensivists. By doing so, Critical Care seeks to provide a thorough and inclusive examination of the intensive care field.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信