ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2022
Multi-omic comparative analysis of COVID-19 and bacterial sepsis-induced ARDS.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
17 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), a life-threatening condition characterized by hypoxemia and poor lung compliance, is associated with high mortality. ARDS induced by COVID-19 has similar clinical presentations and pathological manifestations as non-COVID-19 ARDS. However, COVID-19 ARDS is associated with a more protracted inflammatory respiratory failure compared to traditional ARDS. Therefore, a comprehensive molecular comparison of ARDS of different etiologies groups may pave the way for more specific clinical interventions. Methods and Findings: In this study, we compared COVID-19 ARDS (n=43) and bacterial sepsis-induced (non-COVID-19) ARDS (n=24) using multi-omic plasma profiles covering 663 metabolites, 1,051 lipids, and 266 proteins. To address both between- and within-ARDS group variabilities we followed two approaches. First, we identified 706 molecules differently abundant between the two ARDS etiologies, revealing more than 40 biological processes differently regulated between the two groups. From these processes, we assembled a cascade of therapeutically relevant pathways downstream of sphingosine metabolism. The analysis suggests a possible overactivation of arginine metabolism involved in long-term sequelae of ARDS and highlights the potential of JAK inhibitors to improve outcomes in bacterial sepsis-induced ARDS. The second part of our study involved the comparison of the two ARDS groups with respect to clinical manifestations. Using a data-driven multi-omic network, we identified signatures of acute kidney injury (AKI) and thrombocytosis within each ARDS group. The AKI-associated network implicated mitochondrial dysregulation which might lead to post-ARDS renal-sequalae. The thrombocytosis-associated network hinted at a synergy between prothrombotic processes, namely IL-17, MAPK, TNF signaling pathways, and cell adhesion molecules. Thus, we speculate that combination therapy targeting two or more of these processes may ameliorate thrombocytosis-mediated hypercoagulation. Conclusion: We present a first comprehensive molecular characterization of differences between two ARDS etiologies - COVID-19 and bacterial sepsis. Further investigation into the identified pathways will lead to a better understanding of the pathophysiological processes, potentially enabling novel therapeutic interventions.
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.