Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31061709›Full record

ArticleJournal of intensive care2019

Neutrophils are a main source of circulating suPAR predicting outcome in critical illness.

Hendrik Gussen, Philipp Hohlstein, Matthias Bartneck, Klaudia Theresa Warzecha, Lukas Buendgens, Tom Luedde, Christian Trautwein, Alexander Koch, Frank Tacke

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of intensive care, 2019. 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 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The Perspective of Vitamin D on suPAR-Related AKI in COVID-19.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  19. suPAR: An Inflammatory Mediator for Kidneys.Kidney diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hendrik Gussen1Department of Medicine III, RWTH-University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, 52074 Germany.
Philipp Hohlstein1Department of Medicine III, RWTH-University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, 52074 Germany.
Matthias Bartneck1Department of Medicine III, RWTH-University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, 52074 Germany.
Klaudia Theresa Warzecha1Department of Medicine III, RWTH-University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, 52074 Germany.
Lukas Buendgens1Department of Medicine III, RWTH-University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, 52074 Germany.
Tom Luedde1Department of Medicine III, RWTH-University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, 52074 Germany.
Christian Trautwein1Department of Medicine III, RWTH-University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, 52074 Germany.
Alexander Koch1Department of Medicine III, RWTH-University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, 52074 Germany.
Frank Tacke1Department of Medicine III, RWTH-University Hospital Aachen, Aachen, 52074 Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6206-0226
Universitätsklinikum Aachen · DECharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCirculating levels of soluble urokinase plasminogen activation receptor (suPAR) have been proposed as a prognostic biomarker in patients with critical illness and sepsis. However, the origin of suPAR in sepsis has remained obscure. We investigated the potential cellular sources of suPAR by analyzing membrane-bound urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (uPAR, CD87) and evaluated its clinical relevance in critically ill patients.

methodsWe studied 87 critically ill patients (44 with sepsis, 43 without sepsis) from the medical intensive care unit (ICU) in comparison to 48 standard care patients with infections and 27 healthy controls in a prospective single-center non-interventional cohort study. Cellular uPAR expression of different immune cell subsets (by flow cytometry from peripheral blood) and corresponding serum suPAR concentrations were determined upon ICU admission and at day 3. Furthermore, we analyzed the effects of serum from sepsis patients on the activation and uPAR cleavage of primary human neutrophils and macrophages in vitro.

resultsIn healthy controls, uPAR (CD87) expression was detected on nearly all blood neutrophils and monocytes, but only scarcely on lymphocytes. While uPAR expression on monocytes was maintained in ICU patients, only 58% of neutrophils from critically ill patients expressed uPAR, which was significantly lower than in healthy controls or standard care patients. Concomitantly, serum suPAR levels were significantly increased in ICU patients. We noted a clear inverse correlation between low neutrophilic uPAR and high serum suPAR in standard care and ICU patients, indicating that shedding of uPAR from activated neutrophils represents a main source of suPAR in systemic inflammation. Both low uPAR and high suPAR were closely associated with mortality in critically ill patients. Furthermore, serum from sepsis patients induced uPAR protein expression and subsequent receptor shedding on isolated primary neutrophils, but not on macrophages, in vitro.

conclusionsThe inverse correlation between low uPAR surface expression on neutrophils and high serum suPAR in critically ill patients supports that neutrophils are a main source of shed suPAR proteins in systemic inflammation. Furthermore, high suPAR levels and low neutrophilic uPAR expression predict mortality in ICU patients.

Indexed as

BiomarkerCD87ICUInnate immunityMonocytesNeutrophilsOrgan failurePrognosisSepsis

Identifiers

PMID31061709
PMCPMC6487050
OpenAlexW2945679884

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.