Biomarkers in Critical Illness: New Insights and Challenges for the Future

Biomarkers as Prognostic Predictors and Therapeutic Guide in Critically Ill Patients: Clinical Evidence

A biomarker is a molecule that can be measured in a biological sample in an objective, systematic, and precise way, whose levels indicate whether a process is normal or pathological. Knowing the most important biomarkers and their characteristics is the key to precision medicine in intensive and perioperative care. Biomarkers can be used to diagnose, in assessment of disease severity, to stratify risk, to predict and guide clinical decisions, and to guide treatments and response to them. In this review, we will analyze what characteristics a biomarker should have and how to ensure its usefulness, and we will review the biomarkers that in our opinion can make their knowledge more useful to the reader in their clinical practice, with a future perspective. These biomarkers, in our opinion, are lactate, C-Reactive Protein, Troponins T and I, Brain Natriuretic Peptides, Procalcitonin, MR-ProAdrenomedullin and BioAdrenomedullin, Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio and lymphopenia, Proenkephalin, NefroCheck, Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), Interleukin 6, Urokinase-type soluble plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR), Presepsin, Pancreatic Stone Protein (PSP), and Dipeptidyl peptidase 3 (DPP3). Finally, we propose an approach to the perioperative evaluation of high-risk patients and critically ill patients in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) based on biomarkers.

Prognostic association of routinely measured biomarkers in patients admitted to critical care: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To examine reported prognostic associations of routine blood measurements in the intensive care unit.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE through 28^th May 2020 to identify all studies in adult critical care investigating associations between parameters measured routinely in whole blood, plasma or serum, and length of stay or mortality. Registration: PROSPERO; CRD42019122058.

RESULTS

A total of 128 studies, reporting 28 different putative prognostic biomarkers, met eligibility criteria. Those most frequently examined were red cell distribution width, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, C-reactive protein, and platelet count. A higher red cell distribution width, a lower platelet count, and a higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio were consistently associated with both increased mortality and length of stay. A lower level of albumin was consistently associated with greater mortality. C-reactive protein was inconsistent. Most studies (n = 110) used regression modelling with wide variation in variable selection and covariate-adjustment; none externally validated the proposed predictive models.

CONCLUSIONS

Simple regression models have so far proved inadequate for the complexity of data available from routine blood sampling in critical care. Adoption of a direct causal framework may help better assess mechanistic processes, aid design of future studies, and guide clinical decision making using routine data.

Biomarkers in critical care nutrition

The goal of nutrition support is to provide the substrates required to match the bioenergetic needs of the patient and promote the net synthesis of macromolecules required for the preservation of lean mass, organ function, and immunity. Contemporary observational studies have exposed the pervasive undernutrition of critically ill patients and its association with adverse clinical outcomes. The intuitive hypothesis is that optimization of nutrition delivery should improve ICU clinical outcomes. It is therefore surprising that multiple large randomized controlled trials have failed to demonstrate the clinical benefit of restoring or maximizing nutrient intake. This may be in part due to the absence of biological markers that identify patients who are most likely to benefit from nutrition interventions and that monitor the effects of nutrition support. Here, we discuss the need for practical risk stratification tools in critical care nutrition, a proposed rationale for targeted biomarker development, and potential approaches that can be adopted for biomarker identification and validation in the field.

The Future of Biomarkers

Numerous compounds have been tested as potential biomarkers for multiple possible applications within intensive care medicine but none is or will ever be sufficiently specific or sensitive for the heterogeneous syndromes of critical illness. New technology and access to huge patient databases are providing new biomarker options and the focus is shifting to combinations of several or multiple biomarkers rather than the single markers that research has concentrated on in the past. Biomarkers will increasingly be used as part of routine clinical practice in the future, complementing clinical examination and physician expertise to provide accurate disease diagnosis, prediction of complications, personalized treatment guidance, and prognosis.

Endothelial biomarkers in human sepsis: pathogenesis and prognosis for ARDS

Experimental models of sepsis in small and large animals and a variety of in vitro preparations have established several basic mechanisms that drive endothelial injury. This review is focused on what can be learned from the results of clinical studies of plasma biomarkers of endothelial injury and inflammation in patients with sepsis. There is excellent evidence that elevated plasma levels of several biomarkers of endothelial injury, including von Willebrand factor antigen (VWF), angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2), and soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase 1 (sFLT-1), and biomarkers of inflammation, especially interleukin-8 (IL-8) and soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor (sTNFr), identify sepsis patients with a higher mortality. There are also some data that elevated levels of endothelial biomarkers can identify which patients with non-pulmonary sepsis will develop acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). If ARDS patients are divided among those with indirect versus direct lung injury, then there is an association of elevated levels of endothelial biomarkers in indirect injury and markers of inflammation and alveolar epithelial injury in patients with direct lung injury. New research suggests that the combination of biologic and clinical markers may make it possible to segregate patients with ARDS into hypo- versus hyper-inflammatory phenotypes that may have implications for therapeutic responses to fluid therapy. Taken together, the studies reviewed here support a primary role of the microcirculation in the pathogenesis and prognosis of ARDS after sepsis. Biological differences identified by molecular patterns could explain heterogeneity of treatment effects that are not explained by clinical factors alone.