Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28301543›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Inflammation biomarkers in blood as mortality predictors in community-acquired pneumonia admitted patients: Importance of comparison with neutrophil count percentage or neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio.

Jose Curbelo, Sergio Luquero Bueno, José María Galván-Román, Mara Ortega-Gómez, Olga Rajas, Guillermo Fernández-Jiménez, Lorena Vega-Piris, Francisco Rodríguez-Salvanes, Belén Arnalich, Ana Díaz and 6 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 79 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

79 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Jose CurbeloDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Sergio Luquero BuenoBiobank, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
José María Galván-RománDepartment of Immunology, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Mara Ortega-GómezBiobank, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Olga RajasDepartment of Pneumology, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Guillermo Fernández-JiménezClinical Information Unit, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Lorena Vega-PirisMethodology Unit, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Francisco Rodríguez-SalvanesMethodology Unit, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Belén ArnalichDepartment of Pneumology, Hospital del Henares, Madrid, Spain.
Ana DíazDepartment of Clinical Analysis, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Ramón CostaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Hortensia de la FuenteDepartment of Immunology, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Ángel LanchoDepartment of Immunology, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Carmen SuárezDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Julio AncocheaDepartment of Pneumology, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.
Javier AspaDepartment of Pneumology, Hospital Universitario de La Princesa, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria del Hospital Universitario de la Princesa, Madrid, Spain.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1283-995X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe increase and persistence of inflammation in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) patients can lead to higher mortality. Biomarkers capable of measuring this inadequate inflammatory response are likely candidates to be related with a bad outcome. We investigated the association between concentrations of several inflammatory markers and mortality of CAP patients. MATERIAL AND

methodsThis was a prospective study of hospitalised CAP patients in a Spanish university hospital. Blood tests upon admittance and in the early-stage evolution (72-120 hours) were carried out, where C-reactive protein, procalcitonin, proadrenomedullin, copeptin, white blood cell, Lymphocyte Count Percentage (LCP), Neutrophil Count Percentage (NCP) and Neutrophil/Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) were measured. The outcome variable was mortality at 30 and 90 days. Statistical analysis included logistic regression, ROC analysis and area-under-curve test.

results154 hospitalised CAP patients were included. Patients who died during follow-up had higher levels of procalcitonin, copeptin, proadrenomedullin, lower levels of LCP, and higher of NCP and NLR. Remarkably, multivariate analysis showed a relationship between NCP and mortality, regardless of age, severity of CAP and comorbidities. AUC analysis showed that NLR and NCP at admittance and during early-stage evolution achieved a good diagnostic power. ROC test for NCP and NLR were similar to those of the novel serum biomarkers analysed.

conclusionsNLR and NCP, are promising candidate predictors of mortality for hospitalised CAP patients, and both are cheaper, easier to perform, and at least as reliable as the new serum biomarkers. Future implementation of new biomarkers would require comparison not only with classic inflammatory parameters like White Blood Cell count but also with NLR and NCP.

Indexed as

LymphocytesNeutrophilsPatient AdmissionAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkersCommunity-Acquired InfectionsFemaleHumansInflammationMalePneumoniaProspective StudiesBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID28301543
PMCPMC5354424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.