Prognostic usefulness of eosinopenia in the pediatric intensive care unit

Association between Eosinophil Count and Cortisol Concentrations in Equids Admitted in the Emergency Unit with Abdominal Pain

Stress leukogram includes eosinopenia as one of its main markers (neutrophilia, eosinopenia, lymphopenia, and mild monocytosis). Cortisol is the main stress biomarker, which is also strongly correlated with the severity of gastrointestinal diseases. This study aimed to determine the relationship between salivary cortisol and the eosinophil cell count (EC) in equids with abdominal pain. To do this, 39 horses with abdominal pain referred to an emergency service were included. All samples were taken on admission, and several parameters and clinical data were included. Equids were classified according to the outcome as survivors and non-survivors. Non-surviving equids presented higher salivary cortisol concentrations (Non-Survivors: 1.580 ± 0.816 µg/dL; Survivors 0.988 ± 0.653 µg/dL; p < 0.05) and lower EC (Non-Survivors: 0.0000 × 103/µL (0.000/0.0075); Survivors: 0.0450 × 103/µL (0.010/0.1825); p < 0.01). In addition, the relationship between salivary cortisol concentration, EC, and the WBC was determined. Only a strong correlation (negative) was observed between cortisol and EC (r = -0.523, p < 0.01). Since cortisol is not an analyte that can be measured routinely in clinical settings such as emergencies, the EC could be a good alternative. While the results are promising, further studies are needed before EC can be used confidently in routine practice to predict survival in cases of abdominal pain.

Evaluation of Eosinopenia as a SIRS Biomarker in Critically Ill Horses

Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) is a very common finding in critically ill patients. To accurately identify patients with SIRS and those who need intensive care, several markers have been evaluated, including cortisol, WBC or lactate. It is widely known that a stress leukogram includes eosinopenia as one of its main markers (neutrophilia, eosinopenia, lymphopenia and mild monocytes). It is known that cortisol concentration in plasma is the main stress biomarker and is strongly correlated with the severity of disease in horses. However, it is not possible to measure this parameter routinely in clinical conditions. Hence, in this study it was hypothesized that the eosinophil count could be a reliable parameter to identify critically ill horses. Horses included in this study were divided into three groups: Group A (sick horses received at the Emergency Unit which did not fulfil the criteria for SIRS), Group B (horses that meet two or more criteria for inclusion in the definition of SIRS) and a control group of healthy horses. In this study, horses with SIRS showed lower eosinophil counts than healthy horses. Moreover, non-surviving horses exhibited lower eosinophil counts than survivors. Eosinopenia could be used to identify horses with SIRS and can be useful as a prognostic marker.

An Artificial Intelligence-guided signature reveals the shared host immune response in MIS-C and Kawasaki disease

Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C) is an illness that emerged amidst the COVID-19 pandemic but shares many clinical features with the pre-pandemic syndrome of Kawasaki disease (KD). Here we compare the two syndromes using a computational toolbox of two gene signatures that were developed in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection, i.e., the viral pandemic (ViP) and severe-ViP signatures and a 13-transcript signature previously demonstrated to be diagnostic for KD, and validated our findings in whole blood RNA sequences, serum cytokines, and formalin fixed heart tissues. Results show that KD and MIS-C are on the same continuum of the host immune response as COVID-19. Both the pediatric syndromes converge upon an IL15/IL15RA-centric cytokine storm, suggestive of shared proximal pathways of immunopathogenesis; however, they diverge in other laboratory parameters and cardiac phenotypes. The ViP signatures reveal unique targetable cytokine pathways in MIS-C, place MIS-C farther along in the spectrum in severity compared to KD and pinpoint key clinical (reduced cardiac function) and laboratory (thrombocytopenia and eosinopenia) parameters that can be useful to monitor severity.

Eosinopenia Predicting Long-term Mortality in Hospitalized Acute Exacerbation of COPD Patients with Community-acquired Pneumonia-A Retrospective Analysis

Background

Acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) could be triggered by community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Peripheral blood eosinopenia are strongly associated with increased mortality. In hospitalized AECOPD patients with CAP, eosinopenia may be used to identify patients with high risk of death on admission.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study in 82 hospitalized AECOPD patients with CAP. Patients who had received systemic corticosteroids preadmission were excluded. The patients were identified by individual case file review. According to blood eosinophil count, patients were grouped as eosinopenia (<50/μL) and non-eosinopenia (≥50/μL). Association of eosinopenia with infection and 18-month survival were analyzed using appropriate statistical methods.

Results

Baseline demographic, comorbidity, CURB65 and Pneumonia Severity Index scores were similar between two groups. The eosinopenia group had significantly higher pro-brain natriuretic peptide, D-dimer, neutrophil percentage, and lower lymphocyte count and lymphocyte percentage. The eosinopenia group had significantly higher C-reactive protein (median 77.30 vs 16.55, p=0.008) and procalcitonin (median 0.32 vs 0.12, p=0.001). Survival at 18 months after hospital discharge was significantly lower in the eosinopenia group vs non-eosinopenia group (log rank, p=0.002).

Conclusion

Eosinopenia (<50/μL) was a strong predictor of 18-month mortality and associated with more severe infection in hospitalized AECOPD patients with CAP. Eosinophil count at admission can be used as a prognosis marker of mortality in those population.

An AI-guided signature reveals the nature of the shared proximal pathways of host immune response in MIS-C and Kawasaki disease

A significant surge in cases of multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C, also called Pediatric Inflammatory Multisystem Syndrome - PIMS) has been observed amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. MIS-C shares many clinical features with Kawasaki disease (KD), although clinical course and outcomes are divergent. We analyzed whole blood RNA sequences, serum cytokines, and formalin fixed heart tissues from these patients using a computational toolbox of two gene signatures, i.e., the 166-gene viral pandemic (ViP) signature, and its 20-gene severe (s)ViP subset that were developed in the context of SARS-CoV-2 infection and a 13-transcript signature previously demonstrated to be diagnostic for KD. Our analyses revealed that KD and MIS-C are on the same continuum of the host immune response as COVID-19. While both the pediatric syndromes converge upon an IL15/IL15RA -centric cytokine storm, suggestive of shared proximal pathways of immunopathogenesis, they diverge in other laboratory parameters and cardiac phenotypes. The ViP signatures also revealed unique targetable cytokine pathways in MIS-C, place MIS-C farther along in the spectrum in severity compared to KD and pinpoint key clinical (reduced cardiac function) and laboratory (thrombocytopenia and eosinopenia) parameters that can be useful to monitor severity.

Absolute Eosinophil Count Predicts Intensive Care Unit Transfer Among Elderly COVID-19 Patients From General Isolation Wards

Objectives: As of June 1, 2020, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has caused a global pandemic and resulted in over 370,000 deaths worldwide. Early identification of COVID-19 patients who need to be admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) helps to improve the outcomes. We aim to investigate whether absolute eosinophil count (AEC) can predict ICU transfer among elderly COVID-19 patients from general isolation wards. Methods: A retrospective study of 94 elderly patients older than 60 years old with COVID-19 was conducted. We compared the basic clinical characteristics and levels of inflammation markers on admission to general isolation wards and the needs for ICU transfer between the eosinopenia (AEC on admission <20 cells/μl) and non-eosinopenia (AEC ≥20 cells/μl) groups. Results: There was a significantly higher ICU transfer rate in the eosinopenia group than in the non-eosinopenia group (51 vs. 9%, P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that eosinopenia was associated with an increased risk of ICU transfer in elderly COVID-19 patients [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 6.12 (95% CI, 1.23-30.33), P = 0.027] after adjustment of age, lymphocyte count, neutrophil count, C-reactive protein (CRP), and ferritin levels. The eosinopenia group had higher levels of CRP, ferritin, and cytokines [interleukin-2 receptor (IL-2R), interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), interleukin-10 (IL-10), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α)] than the non-eosinophil group (P < 0.001). The area under the curve of AEC on admission for predicting ICU transfer among elderly COVID-19 patients was 0.828 (95% CI, 0.732-0.923). The best cut-off value of AEC was 25 cells/μl with a sensitivity of 91% and a specificity of 71%, respectively. Conclusion: Absolute eosinophil count on admission is a valid predictive marker for ICU transfer among elderly COVID-19 patients from general isolation wards and, therefore, can help case triage and optimize ICU utilization, especially for health care facilities with limited ICU capacity.

Differential diagnosis and prospective grading of COVID-19 at the early stage with simple hematological and biochemical variables

We evaluated simple laboratory variables to discriminate COVID-19 from bacterial pneumonia or influenza and for the prospective grading of COVID-19. Multivariate logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curve were used to estimate the diagnostic performance of the significant discriminating variables. A comparative analysis was performed with different severity. The leukocytosis (P = 0.017) and eosinopenia (P = 0.001) were discriminating variables between COVID-19 and bacterial pneumonia with area under the curve (AUC) of 0.778 and 0.825. Monocytosis (P = 0.003), the decreased lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (P < 0.001), and the increased neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) (P = 0.028) were predictive of influenza with AUC of 0.723, 0.895, and 0.783, respectively. Serum amyloid protein, lactate dehydrogenase, CD3⁺ cells, and the fibrinogen degradation products had a good correlation with the severity of COVID-19 graded by age (≥50) and NLR (≥3.13). Simple laboratory variables are helpful for rapid diagnosis on admission and hierarchical management of COVID-19 patients.

Eosinopenia and post-hospital outcomes in critically ill non-cardiac vascular surgery patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Eosinopenia is a marker for acute inflammation. We hypothesized that eosinopenia at Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission in vascular surgery patients who receive critical care, would be associated with increased mortality following hospital discharge.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a two-center observational cohort study of critically ill, non-cardiac adult vascular surgery patients who received treatment in Boston between 1997 and 2012 and survived hospital admission. The consecutive sample included 5083 patients (male 57%, white 82%, mean age [SD] 61.6 [17.4] years). The exposure was Absolute eosinophil count measured within 24 h of admission to the ICU and categorized as ≤10 cells/μL, 11-50 cells/μL, 51-100 cells/μL, 101-350 cells/μL (normal range), and >350 cells/μL. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 90 days of hospital discharge. The secondary outcome was discharge to home following hospitalization. 90-day post-discharge mortality was 6.7%, and 12.9% of patients were readmitted within 30 days. After multivariable adjustment, patients with eosinopenia (≤10 cells/μL) have a 90-day post-discharge mortality OR of 1.97 (95%CI 1.42, 2.73; P < 0.001) relative to patients with an absolute eosinophil count of 101-350 cells/μL. Further, after multivariable adjustment, patients with eosinopenia (≤10 cells/μL) have a 25% lower odds of discharge to home compared to patients with an absolute eosinophil count of 101-350 cells/μL [OR = 0.71 (CI 95% 0.59-0.85); P < 0.001].

CONCLUSION

Eosinopenia at ICU admission is a robust predictor of increased mortality and lower likelihood of discharge to home in vascular surgery patients treated with critical care who survive hospitalization.

Eosinopenia as a marker of diagnosis and prognostic to distinguish bacterial from aseptic meningitis in pediatrics

Procalcitonin (PCT) has proven its efficacy to distinguish bacterial from aseptic meningitis in children. Nevertheless, its use in routine is limited by its cost and availability, especially in low- and middle-income countries. It is now acknowledged that eosinopenia is a marker of infection and/or severity of the systemic inflammatory response. Although no study ever demonstrated that eosinopenia could differentiate bacterial from viral infection, we decided to conduct a study concerning meningitis in children. This bicentric and retrospective study was conducted between January 2012 and October 2018, in children hospitalized for meningitis. The white blood cell was systematically gathered at the admission to evaluate the eosinophil count. Characteristic data were compared between 2 groups: documented bacterial meningitis (DBP) and aseptic meningitis which includes documented viral meningitis (DVM) and non-documented meningitis (ND). Among 190 patients admitted for meningitis, 151 were analyzed, including DBM (n = 45), DVM (n = 73), and ND (n = 33) meningitis. Groups were comparable. Mean age was 33 ± 48 months with a sex ratio of 1.6. Mean of eosinophil count was 15 ± 34/mm³ in the DBM group versus 132 ± 167/mm³ for the aseptic meningitis group (p < 0.0001). Best threshold for the diagnosis of bacterial meningitis was an eosinophil count < 5/mm³ with a sensitivity of 80% and specificity of 73% and a likelihood ratio of 2.9. Eosinopenia seems to be a reliable and non-invasive marker of bacterial meningitis in pediatrics. The absence of extra cost makes it very interesting in low- and middle-income countries or when usual biomarkers such as PCT are unavailable.

[Eosinopenia in 2018]

Since 1893, eosinopenia is a biological test to help a diagnosis of bacterial infection. Several publications have confirmed this hypothesis, particularly in the intensive care, pneumology and pediatric units. The value of this marker has been identified in vascular cerebral diseases and coronary bypass. Its contribution seems as relevant as procalcitonin, without extra cost. The diagnostic performance of this test was reinforced by a composite score (CIBLE score) that may improve its value in daily routine. Finally, monitoring eosinopenia appears to be a reliable mortality marker.

C-Reactive Protein and Hemogram Parameters for the Non-Sepsis Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome and Sepsis: What Do They Mean?

Objectives

Sepsis is one of the most common reasons of increased mortality and morbidity in the intensive care unit. The changes in CRP levels and hemogram parameters and their combinations may help to distinguish sepsis from non-sepsis SIRS. The aim of this study is to investigate the CRP and hemogram parameters as an indicator of sepsis.

Methods

A total of 2777 patients admitted to the ICU of two centers between 2006–2013 were evaluated retrospectively. The patients were diagnosed as SIRS (-), non-sepsis SIRS and sepsis. The patients who were under 18 years old, re-admitted, diagnosed with hematological disease, on corticosteroid and immunosuppressive therapy, SIRS (-), culture negative, undocumented laboratory values and outcomes were excluded. 1257 patients were divided into 2 groups as non-sepsis SIRS and sepsis. The patients’ demographic data, CRP levels, hemogram parameters, length of ICU stay and mortality were recorded.

Results

1257 patients were categorized as non-sepsis SIRS (816, 64.9%) and sepsis (441, 35.1%). In the multivariate analysis, the likelihood of sepsis was increased 3.2 (2.2–4.6), 1.7 (1.2–2.4), 1.6 (1.2–2.1), 2.3 (1.4–3.8), 1.5 (1.1–2.1) times by the APACHE II≥13, SOFA score≥4, CRP≥4.0, Lym_C<0.45 and PLT_C<150 respectively (p<0.001 p = 0.007 p = 0.004 p<0.001 p = 0.027). The likelihood of sepsis was increased 18.1 (8.4–38.7) times by the combination of CRP≥4.0, lym_C<0.45 and PLT_C<150 (P<0.001).

Conclusions

While WBC_C, Neu_C, Neu%, NLCR and Eo_C are far from being the indicators to distinguish sepsis from non-sepsis SIRS, the combinations of CRP, Lym_C and PLT_C can be used to determine the likelihood of sepsis.

Eosinophil count at intensive care unit admission was not predictor of hospital mortality: results of a case control study

Background

Predicting mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU) is one of the biggest challenges in critical care medicine. Several studies have linked the presence of eosinopenia with adverse outcomes in different populations.

Methods

We performed a case control study to determine whether the eosinophil count at ICU admission was a predictor of hospital mortality. We included data from patients 18 years or older admitted to the medical or surgical ICU in a university hospital in northern of Mexico. Medical records of 86 non-survivors (cases) and 99 discharged alive patients (controls) were randomly reviewed; clinical records of patients with an ICU stay of less than 24 h and those whose information was incomplete were excluded.

Results

Median of eosinophil count at ICU admission was 0.013 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.00 to 0.57) K/μL. There was no significant statistical difference in eosinophils at admission between survivors and non-survivors (0.014 [IQR 0.00 to 0.36] vs. 0.010 [IQR 0.00 to 0.57] K/μL, P = 0.35). In the multivariate analysis, APACHE II score at ICU admission and discharge were the only mortality predictors. Survivors had a significantly greater increase in eosinophil count during the first 7 days of ICU stay (0.104 [IQR −0.64 to 0.41] vs. 0.005 [IQR −1.79 to 0.43] K/μL, P = 0.004).

Conclusions

In our study, eosinophil count at ICU admission was not associated with increased hospital mortality. The larger increase in number of eosinophils observed during the first week of ICU stay in surviving patients deserves to be investigated further.