Journal of Emergencies, Trauma, and Shock
Home About us Editors Ahead of Print Current Issue Archives Search Instructions Subscribe Advertise Login 
Users online:2058   Print this pageEmail this pageSmall font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size   


 
EXPERT COMMENTARY Table of Contents   
Year : 2010  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 36-38
Biomarkers in SIRS and sepsis: Quo vadis?


Department of Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universitaet Muenchen, Munich, Germany

Click here for correspondence address and email

Date of Submission03-Jun-2009
Date of Acceptance04-Nov-2009
Date of Web Publication5-Jan-2010
 

How to cite this article:
Novotny AR. Biomarkers in SIRS and sepsis: Quo vadis?. J Emerg Trauma Shock 2010;3:36-8

How to cite this URL:
Novotny AR. Biomarkers in SIRS and sepsis: Quo vadis?. J Emerg Trauma Shock [serial online] 2010 [cited 2020 Sep 27];3:36-8. Available from: http://www.onlinejets.org/text.asp?2010/3/1/36/58665


Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) and sepsis are still a major cause of in-hospital morbidity and mortality. [1] SIRS and sepsis are diagnosed clinically according to the American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine (ACCP/SCCM) criteria. [2] Hereby, a SIRS with proven infection is referred to as sepsis. However, in clinical routine, it is often difficult to isolate the microbial inoculum, making the differential diagnosis between SIRS and sepsis difficult. This differential diagnosis is in turn crucial for further therapeutic decisions: is an antimicrobial therapy and aggressive search for a septic focus with all its side-effects necessary or is a focussed symptomatic therapy of the SIRS the adequate treatment concept? Therefore, the concept of using biomarkers to differentiate SIRS from sepsis is appealing. [3],[4]

Apart from their potential in discriminating SIRS from sepsis, numerous biochemical indicators have been evaluated regarding their potential in predicting sepsis prognosis. [5] In the setting of postoperative sepsis for example, these can be divided into markers for pre-operative risk evaluation, markers for peri-operative risk evaluation and those for an early prediction of sepsis prognosis. Markers for pre-operative risk assessment of sepsis-related death are the interleukin (IL)-12 production after either lipopolysaccharide (LPS)stimulation of isolated monocytes [6] or whole blood. [7] It might be hypothesized that the capacity of monocytes to synthesize IL-12 may also be used as a tool for risk assessment in other types of sepsis than septic peritonitis. Markers for peri-operative risk evaluation, which assess the constitutional risk of sepsis-related death, include the tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-β gene polymorphism,[8] the TNF promotor polymorphism, [9] the IL-1ra polymorphism and the IL-1 gene polymorphism. [10] Biomarkers for early prediction of sepsis prognosis include procalcitonin (PCT), [11] IL-6, [12] IL-18 [13] and NF-xB activity. [14]

Hitherto, no single biomarker for prognosis prediction found widespread entrance into clinical routine. In most publications, a combination of biomarkers with clinical scoring systems, [11] like the APACHE 2 score, yielded the highest specificity and sensitivity in predicting patient prognosis.

These days, the most useful biomarker for routine clinical use seems to be PCT due to its high specificity for bacterial and fungal infections and its adequately sized diagnostic window due to a half-life of approximately 20-24 h. In the setting of postoperative sepsis, it is of special advantage that PCT levels are only slightly influenced by the operative trauma itself. [15]

With a more thorough understanding of the underlying immune responses in sepsis, the number of potential markers for prognosis prediction is steadily growing.

This is the context in which the manuscript "A Biomarker Panel to Discriminate between SIRS and Sepsis and Sepsis Severity" has to be seen. The authors provide evidence that metalloproteinases and sE-selectin are differentially regulated in SIRS and sepsis and can therefore be of use to distinguish between these two forms. Furthermore, they were able to identify a set of biomarkers predicting patient outcome with high specificity and sensitivity. As the authors conclude, these results should give rise to a validation study in a larger and preferably more homogenous set of patients.

Forthcoming investigations dealing with prognosis prediction in sepsis will most probably be based on microarray technology, making the investigation of a large number of potential prognosticators possible at the same time. For an effective use of this method, however, you have to know what you are looking for; otherwise, this method is comparable to dynamite fishing. Therefore, investigations providing insight into the immunologic mechanisms in SIRS and sepsis in vivo are of crucial importance. Accordingly, the set of "usual suspects" for prospective research in this field should be extended to the biomarkers proposed in "A Biomarker Panel to Discriminate between SIRS and Sepsis and Sepsis Severity."

Apart from biomarkers enabling prognostic drawbacks, one might hit upon regulatory proteins in the signaling-cascade en route [16] that might prove as potential therapeutic targets in the future.

In this context, the regulation of Toll-like receptor (TLR)signaling in sepsis deserves particular attention. TLR signaling through the MyD88 and TIR-domain-containing adapter inducing interferon-β (TRIF)pathways is crucial for induction of hyperinflammatory responses and tissue injury during sepsis. According to a recent hypothesis, full activation of multiple TLR signaling pathways may lead to hyperinflammation, resulting in organ failure and death, while a moderate signal strength might exert protective functions. [16] Because there is a considerable degree of redundancy between MyD88- and TRIF-dependent signaling pathways in mediating these responses, individual TLR signaling pathways might be targeted by affecting the function of adapter molecules. Hitherto, several negative regulators influencing TLR signaling at different steps of the cascade through competitive inhibition, sequestration or degradation of signaling proteins are known. Radioprotective 105 (RP105) interferes with TLR4 signaling by the inhibition of ligand binding. [17] Single immunoglobulin IL-1-receptor-related molecule (SIGIRR) inhibits LPS-induced signaling by interference with the TIR domain of TLR4 and TLR9. [18] The E3-ubiquitin ligase TLR-ubiquitinating enzyme 3A (Triad3A) inhibits TLR signaling by the promotion of proteolytic degradation of TLR4 and TLR9. [19] ST2-ligand (ST2L) inhibits TLR4 and IL1-R signaling, probably by sequestring MyD88 and Mal. [20] A splice variant of MyD88, MyD88s acts as a dominant negative inhibitor of the MyD88/IRAK complex by preventing phosphorylation of IRAK-1. [21] IRF-4 interacts with the IRAK-1/MyD88/TRAF-6 complex and selectively inhibits IRF-5-dependent TLR signaling. [22],[23] In humans, the TRIF pathway is negatively regulated by the TIR adapter sterile á HEAT-Armadillo motif protein (SARM).[24] Another negative regulator of the TRIF pathway is the Src homology 2 (SH2)-domain-containing inositol-5-phosphatase (SHIP)-2, which interferes with the TANK-binding kinase 1 (TBK)1-induced signaling. [25] The function of the IRAK-family members is also controlled by several mechanisms. IRAK-M inhibits the dissociation of IRAK-1 und IRAK-4 from the TLR/MyD88/IRAK signaling complex. [26] Toll-interacting protein (Tollip) inhibits the phosphorylation and kinase activity of IRAK-1. [27] Smad6 abrogates TLR signaling by complex formation with Pelle-interacting protein (Pellino), IRAK-1 and TRAF-6. [28] A20 removes K63-linked ubiquitin residues from TRAF-6 and therefore inhibits TRAF-6-dependent NF-kB activation, while β-arrestin complexes with TRAF6 and averts auto-ubiquitination and NF-kB-activation by TRAF6.

Up to now, little is known about the expression of these negative regulators of TLR signaling in human sepsis and its potential prognostic and eventual therapeutic implications. Their potential of affecting the function of adapter molecules, however, makes them interesting targets for further studies.

 
   References Top

1.Angus DC, Wax RS. Epidemiology of sepsis: an update. Crit Care Med 2001;29:109-16.  Back to cited text no. 1      
2.Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB, Dellinger RP, Fein AM, Knaus WA, et al. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest 1992;101:1644-55.  Back to cited text no. 2      
3.Herzum I, Renz H. Inflammatory markers in SIRS, sepsis and septic shock. Curr Med Chem 2008;15:581-7.  Back to cited text no. 3  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
4.Arkader R, Troster EJ, Lopes MR, Júnior RR, Carcillo JA, Leone C, et al. Procalcitonin does discriminate between sepsis and systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Arch Dis Child 2006;91:117-20.  Back to cited text no. 4      
5.Emmanuel K, Weighardt H, Bartels H, Siewert JR, Holzmann B. Current and future concepts of abdominal sepsis. World J Surg 2005;29:3-9.  Back to cited text no. 5  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
6.Weighardt H, Heidecke CD, Westerholt A, Emmanuilidis K, Maier S, Veit M, et al. Impaired monocyte IL-12 production before surgery as a predictive factor for the lethal outcome of postoperative sepsis. Ann Surg 2002;235:560-7.  Back to cited text no. 6  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
7.Novotny AR, Emmanuel K, Ulm K, Bartels H, Siewert JR, Weighardt H, et al. Blood interleukin 12 as preoperative predictor of fatal postoperative sepsis after neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy. Br J Surg 2006;93:1283-9.  Back to cited text no. 7  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
8.Majetschak M, Flohé S, Obertacke U, Schröder J, Staubach K, Nast-Kolb D, et al. Relation of a TNF gene polymorphism to severe sepsis in trauma patients. Ann Surg 1999;230:207-14.  Back to cited text no. 8      
9.Mira JP, Cariou A, Grall F, Delclaux C, Losser MR, Heshmati F, et al. Association of TNF2, a TNF-alpha promoter polymorphism, with septic shock susceptibility and mortality: a multicenter study. JAMA 1999;282:561-8.  Back to cited text no. 9  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
10.Fang XM, Schröder S, Hoeft A, Stüber F. Comparison of two polymorphisms of the interleukin-1 gene family: interleukin-1 receptor antagonist polymorphism contributes to susceptibility to severe sepsis. Crit Care Med 1999;27:1330-4.  Back to cited text no. 10      
11.Novotny A, Emmanuel K, Matevossian E, Kriner M, Ulm K, Bartels H, et al. Use of procalcitonin for early prediction of lethal outcome of postoperative sepsis. Am J Surg 2007;194:35-9.  Back to cited text no. 11  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
12.Oberhoffer M, Vogelsang H, Russwurm S, Hartung T, Reinhart K. Outcome prediction by traditional and new markers of inflammation in patients with sepsis. Clin Chem Lab Med 1999;37:363-8.  Back to cited text no. 12  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
13.Emmanuilidis K, Weighardt H, Matevossian E, Heidecke CD, Ulm K, Bartels H, et al. Differential regulation of systemic IL-18 and IL-12 release during postoperative sepsis: high serum IL-18 as an early predictive indicator of lethal outcome. Shock 2002;18:301-5.  Back to cited text no. 13  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
14.Arnalich F, Garcia-Palomero E, López J, Jiménez M, Madero R, Renart J, Vázquez JJ, et al. Predictive value of nuclear factor kappaB activity and plasma cytokine levels in patients with sepsis. Infect Immun 2000;68:1942-5.  Back to cited text no. 14      
15.Novotny AR, Emmanuel K, Hueser N, Knebel C, Kriner M, Ulm K, et al. Procalcitonin ratio indicates successful surgical treatment of abdominal sepsis. Surgery 2009;145:20-6.  Back to cited text no. 15  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
16.Weighardt H, Holzmann B. Role of Toll-like receptor responses for sepsis pathogenesis. Immunobiology 2007;212:715-22.  Back to cited text no. 16  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
17.Divanovic S, Trompette A, Atabani SF, Madan R, Golenbock DT, Visintin A, et al. Negative regulation of Toll-like receptor 4 signaling by the Toll-like receptor homolog RP105. Nat Immunol 2005;6:571-8.  Back to cited text no. 17  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
18.Thomassen E, Renshaw BR, Sims JE. Identification and characterization of SIGIRR, a molecule representing a novel subtype of the IL-1R superfamily. Cytokine 1999;11:389-99.  Back to cited text no. 18  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
19.Qin J, Qian Y, Yao J, Grace C, Li X. SIGIRR inhibits interleukin-1 receptor- and toll-like receptor 4-mediated signaling through different mechanisms. J Biol Chem 2005;280:25233-41.  Back to cited text no. 19  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
20.Brint EK, Xu D, Liu H, Dunne A, McKenzie AN, O'Neill LA, et al. ST2 is an inhibitor of interleukin 1 receptor and Toll-like receptor 4 signaling and maintains endotoxin tolerance. Nat Immunol 2004;5:373-9.  Back to cited text no. 20  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
21.Burns K, Janssens S, Brissoni B, Olivos N, Beyaert R, Tschopp J. Inhibition of interleukin 1 receptor/Toll-like receptor signaling through the alternatively spliced, short form of MyD88 is due to its failure to recruit IRAK-4. J Exp Med 2003;197:263-8.  Back to cited text no. 21  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
22.Honma K, Udono H, Kohno T, Yamamoto K, Ogawa A, Takemori T, et al. Interferon regulatory factor 4 negatively regulates the production of proinflammatory cytokines by macrophages in response to LPS. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:16001-6.  Back to cited text no. 22  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
23.Negishi H, Ohba Y, Yanai H, Takaoka A, Honma K, Yui K, et al. Negative regulation of Toll-like-receptor signaling by IRF-4. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:15989-94.  Back to cited text no. 23  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
24.Carty M, Goodbody R, Schröder M, Stack J, Moynagh PN, Bowie AG. The human adaptor SARM negatively regulates adaptor protein TRIF-dependent Toll-like receptor signaling. Nat Immunol 2006;7:1074-81.  Back to cited text no. 24      
25.An H, Zhao W, Hou J, Zhang Y, Xie Y, Zheng Y, et al. SHP-2 phosphatase negatively regulates the TRIF adaptor protein-dependent type I interferon and proinflammatory cytokine production. Immunity 2006;25:919-28.  Back to cited text no. 25  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
26.Kobayashi K, Hernandez LD, Galán JE, Janeway CA Jr, Medzhitov R, Flavell RA. IRAK-M is a negative regulator of Toll-like receptor signaling. Cell 2002;110:191-202.  Back to cited text no. 26      
27.Zhang G, Ghosh S. Negative regulation of toll-like receptor-mediated signaling by Tollip. J Biol Chem 2002;277:7059-65.  Back to cited text no. 27  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
28.Choi KC, Lee YS, Lim S, Choi HK, Lee CH, Lee EK, et al. Smad6 negatively regulates interleukin 1-receptor-Toll-like receptor signaling through direct interaction with the adaptor Pellino-1. Nat Immunol 2006;7:1057-65.  Back to cited text no. 28  [PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  

Top
Correspondence Address:
Alexander R Novotny
Department of Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technische Universitaet Muenchen, Munich
Germany
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0974-2700.58665

Rights and Permissions




 

Top
 
  Search
 
  
  
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  


    References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed4820    
    Printed184    
    Emailed4    
    PDF Downloaded108    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal