ArticleInfection2016
Biomarker candidates for the detection of an infectious etiology of febrile neutropenia.
Article in Infection, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Search for novel biomarkers of febrile neutropenia in hematological patients: an overview.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Review
- One Hundred Consecutive Neutropenic Febrile Episodes Demonstrate That CXCR3 Ligands Have Predictive Value in Discriminating the Severity of Infection in Children with Cancer.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Molecular Probes, Chemosensors, and Nanosensors for Optical Detection of Biorelevant Molecules and Ions in Aqueous Media and Biofluids.Chemical reviews · 2022Review
- Novel Biomarker Candidates for Febrile Neutropenia in Hematological Patients Using Nontargeted Metabolomics.Disease markers · 2018Article
- Article
- Generalizable Biomarkers in Critical Care: Toward Precision Medicine.Critical care medicine · 2017Article
- Association between cytokine concentration kinetics and prolonged fever in febrile neutropenic children with bacteremia.International journal of immunopathology and pharmacologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeInfections and subsequent septicemia are major complications in neutropenic patients with hematological malignancies. Here, we identify biomarker candidates for the early detection of an infectious origin, and monitoring of febrile neutropenia (FN).
methodsProteome, metabolome, and conventional biomarkers from 20 patients with febrile neutropenia without proven infection (FNPI) were compared to 28 patients with proven infection, including 17 patients with bacteremia.
resultsThree peptides (mass to charge ratio 1017.4-1057.3; p-values 0.011-0.024), six proteins (mass to charge ratio 6881-17,215; p-values 0.002-0.004), and six phosphatidylcholines (p-values 0.007-0.037) were identified that differed in FNPI patients compared to patients with infection or bacteremia. Seven of these marker candidates discriminated FNPI from infection at fever onset with higher sensitivity and specificity (ROC-AUC 0.688-0.824) than conventional biomarkers i.e., procalcitonin, C-reactive protein, or interleukin-6 (ROC-AUC 0.535-0.672). In a post hoc analysis, monitoring the time course of four lysophosphatidylcholines, threonine, and tryptophan allowed for discrimination of patients with or without resolution of FN (ROC-AUC 0.648-0.919) with higher accuracy compared to conventional markers (ROC-AUC 0.514-0.871).
conclusionsTwenty-one promising biomarker candidates for the early detection of an infectious origin or for monitoring the course of FN were found which might overcome known shortcomings of conventional markers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.