{"title":"联合检测血清降钙素原和c反应蛋白在细菌性和病毒性肺炎早期鉴别诊断中的临床疗效及相关炎症反应机制分析","authors":"Rong Yu, Tang Yan, Jing He, Yuezi Hu, Hua Tang","doi":"10.1080/17520363.2025.2538428","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early distinction of bacterial etiology from viral causes represents a cornerstone for rational antimicrobial therapy. Through evaluation of dual-biomarker strategies, this investigation examined the diagnostic utility of simultaneous PCT and CRP measurement while elucidating underlying inflammatory pathways.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis encompassed 284 patients diagnosed with pneumonia (bacterial: <i>n</i> = 162, viral: <i>n</i> = 122) hospitalized during January 2023 through December 2024. Laboratory parameters including PCT, CRP, leukocyte counts, neutrophil proportions, IL-6, and TNF-α underwent comprehensive measurement. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated through ROC analysis, with severity correlations systematically assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Marked increases in inflammatory markers characterized the bacterial cohort (all parameters <i>p</i> < 0.001). Among single biomarkers, PCT demonstrated superior diagnostic capability (AUC = 0.892). When combined measurement was employed, PCT+CRP yielded optimal performance (AUC = 0.943, sensitivity 92.6%, specificity 89.3%). Positive correlations emerged between biomarker concentrations and clinical severity scores (PCT: <i>r</i> = 0.782, CRP: <i>r</i> = 0.743, both <i>p</i> < 0.001). Following multivariate adjustment, concurrent elevation of both markers emerged as the strongest independent correlate of bacterial etiology (OR = 8.74, 95% CI: 5.26-14.53, <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The synergistic assessment of PCT with CRP surpasses individual marker performance for bacterial-viral pneumonia discrimination, capturing differential inflammatory cascades and severity stratification. This dual-biomarker strategy optimizes therapeutic decisions and antimicrobial governance.</p>","PeriodicalId":9182,"journal":{"name":"Biomarkers in medicine","volume":" ","pages":"657-666"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12344818/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical efficacy of combined detection of serum procalcitonin and C-reactive protein in early differential diagnosis of bacterial and viral pneumonia and analysis of related inflammatory response mechanisms.\",\"authors\":\"Rong Yu, Tang Yan, Jing He, Yuezi Hu, Hua Tang\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17520363.2025.2538428\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early distinction of bacterial etiology from viral causes represents a cornerstone for rational antimicrobial therapy. Through evaluation of dual-biomarker strategies, this investigation examined the diagnostic utility of simultaneous PCT and CRP measurement while elucidating underlying inflammatory pathways.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis encompassed 284 patients diagnosed with pneumonia (bacterial: <i>n</i> = 162, viral: <i>n</i> = 122) hospitalized during January 2023 through December 2024. Laboratory parameters including PCT, CRP, leukocyte counts, neutrophil proportions, IL-6, and TNF-α underwent comprehensive measurement. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated through ROC analysis, with severity correlations systematically assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Marked increases in inflammatory markers characterized the bacterial cohort (all parameters <i>p</i> < 0.001). Among single biomarkers, PCT demonstrated superior diagnostic capability (AUC = 0.892). When combined measurement was employed, PCT+CRP yielded optimal performance (AUC = 0.943, sensitivity 92.6%, specificity 89.3%). Positive correlations emerged between biomarker concentrations and clinical severity scores (PCT: <i>r</i> = 0.782, CRP: <i>r</i> = 0.743, both <i>p</i> < 0.001). Following multivariate adjustment, concurrent elevation of both markers emerged as the strongest independent correlate of bacterial etiology (OR = 8.74, 95% CI: 5.26-14.53, <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The synergistic assessment of PCT with CRP surpasses individual marker performance for bacterial-viral pneumonia discrimination, capturing differential inflammatory cascades and severity stratification. This dual-biomarker strategy optimizes therapeutic decisions and antimicrobial governance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9182,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biomarkers in medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"657-666\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12344818/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biomarkers in medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17520363.2025.2538428\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/31 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomarkers in medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17520363.2025.2538428","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:早期区分细菌病因和病毒病因是合理抗菌药物治疗的基础。通过评估双生物标志物策略,本研究在阐明潜在炎症途径的同时,检验了PCT和CRP同时测量的诊断效用。方法:回顾性分析2023年1月至2024年12月住院的284例确诊为肺炎的患者(细菌性:162例,病毒性:122例)。综合测量PCT、CRP、白细胞计数、中性粒细胞比例、IL-6、TNF-α等实验室参数。通过ROC分析评估诊断准确性,并系统评估严重程度相关性。结果:炎症标志物的显著增加是细菌队列的特征(所有参数p r = 0.782, CRP: r = 0.743,两者p p)。结论:PCT与CRP的协同评估在区分细菌-病毒性肺炎、捕捉不同的炎症级联和严重程度分层方面优于个体标志物的表现。这种双生物标志物策略优化了治疗决策和抗菌治理。
Clinical efficacy of combined detection of serum procalcitonin and C-reactive protein in early differential diagnosis of bacterial and viral pneumonia and analysis of related inflammatory response mechanisms.
Background: Early distinction of bacterial etiology from viral causes represents a cornerstone for rational antimicrobial therapy. Through evaluation of dual-biomarker strategies, this investigation examined the diagnostic utility of simultaneous PCT and CRP measurement while elucidating underlying inflammatory pathways.
Methods: A retrospective analysis encompassed 284 patients diagnosed with pneumonia (bacterial: n = 162, viral: n = 122) hospitalized during January 2023 through December 2024. Laboratory parameters including PCT, CRP, leukocyte counts, neutrophil proportions, IL-6, and TNF-α underwent comprehensive measurement. Diagnostic accuracy was evaluated through ROC analysis, with severity correlations systematically assessed.
Results: Marked increases in inflammatory markers characterized the bacterial cohort (all parameters p < 0.001). Among single biomarkers, PCT demonstrated superior diagnostic capability (AUC = 0.892). When combined measurement was employed, PCT+CRP yielded optimal performance (AUC = 0.943, sensitivity 92.6%, specificity 89.3%). Positive correlations emerged between biomarker concentrations and clinical severity scores (PCT: r = 0.782, CRP: r = 0.743, both p < 0.001). Following multivariate adjustment, concurrent elevation of both markers emerged as the strongest independent correlate of bacterial etiology (OR = 8.74, 95% CI: 5.26-14.53, p < 0.001).
Conclusion: The synergistic assessment of PCT with CRP surpasses individual marker performance for bacterial-viral pneumonia discrimination, capturing differential inflammatory cascades and severity stratification. This dual-biomarker strategy optimizes therapeutic decisions and antimicrobial governance.
期刊介绍:
Biomarkers are physical, functional or biochemical indicators of physiological or disease processes. These key indicators can provide vital information in determining disease prognosis, in predicting of response to therapies, adverse events and drug interactions, and in establishing baseline risk. The explosion of interest in biomarker research is driving the development of new predictive, diagnostic and prognostic products in modern medical practice, and biomarkers are also playing an increasingly important role in the discovery and development of new drugs. For the full utility of biomarkers to be realized, we require greater understanding of disease mechanisms, and the interplay between disease mechanisms, therapeutic interventions and the proposed biomarkers. However, in attempting to evaluate the pros and cons of biomarkers systematically, we are moving into new, challenging territory.
Biomarkers in Medicine (ISSN 1752-0363) is a peer-reviewed, rapid publication journal delivering commentary and analysis on the advances in our understanding of biomarkers and their potential and actual applications in medicine. The journal facilitates translation of our research knowledge into the clinic to increase the effectiveness of medical practice.
As the scientific rationale and regulatory acceptance for biomarkers in medicine and in drug development become more fully established, Biomarkers in Medicine provides the platform for all players in this increasingly vital area to communicate and debate all issues relating to the potential utility and applications.
Each issue includes a diversity of content to provide rounded coverage for the research professional. Articles include Guest Editorials, Interviews, Reviews, Research Articles, Perspectives, Priority Paper Evaluations, Special Reports, Case Reports, Conference Reports and Company Profiles. Review coverage is divided into themed sections according to area of therapeutic utility with some issues including themed sections on an area of topical interest.
Biomarkers in Medicine provides a platform for commentary and debate for all professionals with an interest in the identification of biomarkers, elucidation of their role and formalization and approval of their application in modern medicine. The audience for Biomarkers in Medicine includes academic and industrial researchers, clinicians, pathologists, clinical chemists and regulatory professionals.