Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Latest content
    • Latest content
  • Archive
  • About the journal
    • About the journal
    • Editorial board
    • Information for authors
    • FAQs
    • Thank you to our reviewers
    • The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma
  • Submit a paper
    • Online submission site
    • Information for authors
  • Email alerts
    • Email alerts
  • Help
    • Contact us
    • Feedback form
    • Reprints
    • Permissions
    • Advertising
  • BMJ Journals

User menu

  • Login

Search

  • Advanced search
  • BMJ Journals
  • Login
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
TSACO

Advanced Search

  • Latest content
    • Latest content
  • Archive
  • About the journal
    • About the journal
    • Editorial board
    • Information for authors
    • FAQs
    • Thank you to our reviewers
    • The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma
  • Submit a paper
    • Online submission site
    • Information for authors
  • Email alerts
    • Email alerts
  • Help
    • Contact us
    • Feedback form
    • Reprints
    • Permissions
    • Advertising
Open Access

Derivation and validation of a two-biomarker panel for diagnosis of ARDS in patients with severe traumatic injuries

Lorraine B Ware, Zhiguo Zhao, Tatsuki Koyama, Ryan M Brown, Matthew W Semler, David R Janz, Addison K May, Richard D Fremont, Michael A Matthay, Mitchell J Cohen, Carolyn S Calfee
DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2017-000121 Published 28 August 2017
Lorraine B Ware
1 Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
2 Department of Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zhiguo Zhao
3 Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tatsuki Koyama
3 Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ryan M Brown
1 Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Matthew W Semler
1 Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David R Janz
4 Department of Medicine, Section of Pulmonary/Critical Care and Allergy/Immunology, Louisiana State University School of Medicine in New Orleans, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Addison K May
5 Department of Surgical Science, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Richard D Fremont
6 Department of Medicine, Meharry Medical College, Nashville, Tennessee, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael A Matthay
7 Departments of Medicine and Anesthesia and the Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mitchell J Cohen
8 Department of Surgery, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, Colorado, USA
9 University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Carolyn S Calfee
7 Departments of Medicine and Anesthesia and the Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis of the plasma biomarker panels for differentiating ARDS (cases) from controls in patients with severe traumatic injuries in the VALID cohort. The solid line shows predicted probability of occurrence of ARDS for each subject computed from a logistic regression model that included 11 biomarkers (RAGE, PCPIII, BNP, Ang-2, IL-8, TNF-α, IL-10, VWF, SP-D, PAI-1 and CC16). Specificity and sensitivity were computed at each possible cut-off of the predicted probability. The area under the curve (AUC) is 0.78. The dotted line shows the ROC analysis in the same patients using only the two most discriminatory biomarkers (RAGE and Ang-2). The AUC for this model is 0.74. For comparison, the dashed line shows the ROC analysis for clinician recognition of ARDS with an AUC of 0.55. Ang-2, angiopoietin-2; BNP, brain natriuretic peptide; CC16, club cell-16 protein; IL-8, interleukin 8; IL-10; interleukin 10; PAI-1, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1; PCPIII, procollagen peptide-III; RAGE, receptor for advanced glycation endproducts; SP-D, surfactant protein-D; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α; VALID, Validating Acute Lung Injury biomarkers for Diagnosis; VWF, von Willebrand factor antigen.

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    The two biomarker (RAGE and Ang-2) multivariable logistic regression model was used to create a prediction model for the probability of ARDS. The value for each predictor variable (RAGE, Ang-2, both in pg/mL) is used to determine a number of points using the point scale at the top. The sum of the individual predictor variable points for the measured RAGE and Ang-2 levels corresponds to the total points and the probability of ARDS shown at the bottom. Ang-2, angiopoietin-2; ARDS, acute respiratory distress syndrome; RAGE, receptor for advanced glycation endproducts.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Table 1

    Patient characteristics by patient cohort

    VALID cohortACIT cohortGender study cohort
    ARDS (n=78)No ARDS (n=315)pARDS (n=75)No ARDS (n=119)pARDS (n=105)No ARDS (n=85)p
    Age (years)42 (26–55)41 (27–55)0.7941 (27–59)40 (27–60)0.9339 (25–53)33 (23–47)0.18
    Female22 (17)27 (85)0.3516 (12)29 (356)0.0334 (36)29 (25)0.50
    Caucasian78 (61)80 (252)0.9473 (55)63 (75)0.1483 (87)84 (71)0.31
    Blunt trauma86 (67)84 (263)0.73100 (75)100 (119)NA85 (88)86 (72)0.96
    TBI50 (39)58 (182)0.2575 (56)71 (84)0.5336 (37)51 (43)0.036
    Arterial base deficit (mEq/L)8.8±5.06.0±5.1<0.0016.8±6.54.0±4.90.0077.2±5.84.6±4.2<0.001
    PaO2/FiO2 143 (103–190)251 (164–337)<0.001244 (143–380)349 (212–454)0.00372 (38–140)123 (89–153)<0.001
    ISS33 (26–38)26 (18–34)<0.00130 (26–43)26 (14–30)<0.00134 (25–41)29 (17–35)0.002
    APACHE II27 (22–31)22 (18–27)<0.00116 (12–20)17 (8–23)0.8417 (14–21)13 (11–17)<0.001
    Vent days (to 28 days)10 (4–15)4 (2–9)<0.00111 (7–21)3 (2–8)<0.0019 (5–14)4 (3–7)<0.001
    Hospital mortality10 (8) 9 (29)0.7836 (27)14 (17)<0.00114 (15)5 (4)0.03
    Ang-2 (pg/mL)5880 (4429–7724)4007 (2763–5816)<0.0016812 (4323–12223)4393 (3093–6378)<0.0018681 (5724–14044)5697 (3784–8521)<0.001
    RAGE (pg/mL)1886 (956–3298)944 (646–1523)<0.0011184 (847–2068)912 (588–1348)<0.0012505 (1779–5081)1415 (1024–2022)<0.001
    • Data as mean±SD, median (IQR) or percentage (number).

    • ACIT, Activation of Coagulation and Inflammation in Trauma; Ang-2, angiopoietin-2; APACHE II, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II; FiO2, fractional inspired oxygen; ISS, injury severity score; ARDS, acute respiratory distress syndrome; NA, not available; PaO2, arterial oxygen tension (or pressure); RAGE, receptor for advanced glycation endproducts; TBI, traumatic brain injury, defined as AIS head ≥3; VALID, Validating Acute Lung Injury biomarkers for Diagnosis.

  • Table 2

    Comparison of 11 plasma biomarkers between ARDS cases and controls in the derivation cohort

    BiomarkerARDS (n=79)No ARDS (n=318)p Value
    RAGE (pg/mL)1886 (956–3298)944 (646–1523) <0.001
    PCPIII (ng/mL)3.9 (2.9–5.0)3.5 (2.7–4.8)0.251
    BNP (ng/mL)0.4 (0.3–0.7)0.4 (0.3–0.6)0.312
    Ang-2 (pg/mL)5880 (4429–7724)4007 (2763–5816) <0.001
    IL-8 (pg/mL)15.6 (15.6–57.7)15.6 (15.6–34.9) 0.017
    TNF-α (pg/mL)1.0 (0.6–3.0)1.4 (0.6–5.1)0.195
    IL-10 (pg/mL)18.2 (9.4–82.4)18.1 (8.1–56.7)0.373
    VWF (% control)230 (173–353)270 (198–364) 0.045
    SP-D (ng/mL)60.3 (37.2–91.9)53.6 (32.9–78.4)0.061
    PAI-1 (ng/mL)118.9 (39.1–248.5)92.3 (50.6–174.5)0.476
    CC16 (ng/mL)7.0 (4.2–11.2)5.5 (3.4–8.6) 0.004
    • Data as median (IQR).Ang-2, angiopoietin-2; BNP, brain natriuretic peptide; CC16, club cell-16 protein; IL-8, interleukin 8; IL-10; interleukin 10; PAI-1, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1; PCPIII, procollagen peptide-III; RAGE, receptor for advanced glycation endproducts; SP-D, surfactant protein-D; TNF-α, tumor necrosis factor-α; VWF, von Willebrand factor antigen.

  • Table 3

    Summary of the two-biomarker model for diagnosis of ARDS in the derivation cohort

    Biomarker
    (upper and lower quartiles)
    OR for ARDS*95% CIp
    RAGE (1846 vs 656)2.3821.638 to 3.464<0.001
    Ang-2 (6128 vs 2935)1.8901.322 to 2.702<0.001
    • *OR for ARDS comparing upper quartile (75th percentile) to lower quartile (25th percentile).

    • Ang-2, angiopoietin-2; ARDS, acute respiratory distress syndrome; RAGE, receptor for advanced glycation endproducts.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on TSACO.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Derivation and validation of a two-biomarker panel for diagnosis of ARDS in patients with severe traumatic injuries
(Your Name) has sent you a message from TSACO
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the TSACO web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
Derivation and validation of a two-biomarker panel for diagnosis of ARDS in patients with severe traumatic injuries
Lorraine B Ware, Zhiguo Zhao, Tatsuki Koyama, Ryan M Brown, Matthew W Semler, David R Janz, Addison K May, Richard D Fremont, Michael A Matthay, Mitchell J Cohen, Carolyn S Calfee
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Aug 2017, 2 (1) e000121; DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2017-000121

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Cite This
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • Endnote
  • MLA
Loading
Derivation and validation of a two-biomarker panel for diagnosis of ARDS in patients with severe traumatic injuries
Lorraine B Ware, Zhiguo Zhao, Tatsuki Koyama, Ryan M Brown, Matthew W Semler, David R Janz, Addison K May, Richard D Fremont, Michael A Matthay, Mitchell J Cohen, Carolyn S Calfee
Trauma Surg Acute Care Open Aug 2017, 2 (1) e000121; DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2017-000121
Download PDF

Share
Derivation and validation of a two-biomarker panel for diagnosis of ARDS in patients with severe traumatic injuries
Lorraine B Ware, Zhiguo Zhao, Tatsuki Koyama, Ryan M Brown, Matthew W Semler, David R Janz, Addison K May, Richard D Fremont, Michael A Matthay, Mitchell J Cohen, Carolyn S Calfee
Trauma Surgery & Acute Care Open Aug 2017, 2 (1) e000121; DOI: 10.1136/tsaco-2017-000121
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Respond to this article
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Intraoperative REBOA: an analysis of the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma AORTA registry
  • Opioid stewardship after emergency laparoscopic general surgery
  • Comparative analysis of isoform-specific and non-selective histone deacetylase inhibitors in attenuating the intestinal damage after hemorrhagic shock
Show more Original article

Similar Articles

 
 

CONTENT

  • Latest content
  • Archive
  • eLetters
  • Sign up for email alerts
  • RSS

JOURNAL

  • About the journal
  • Editorial board
  • Thank you to our reviewers
  • The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma

AUTHORS

  • Information for authors
  • Submit a paper
  • Track your article
  • Open Access at BMJ

HELP

  • Contact us
  • Reprints
  • Permissions
  • Advertising
  • Feedback form

©Copyright 2022 The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma