Thai University RankingsRESEARCH RADAR
← Back to research database
มีศักยภาพระดับโลก

Ruling In and Ruling Out Sepsis Using Likelihood Ratios of a Host Response Assay

IMPACT SIGNAL78/100
01

Information from the abstract

Overview: SeptiCyte RAPID is an FDA-cleared gene expression test that quantifies host immune response to aid in the diagnosis of sepsis. The test yields a score (the SeptiScore) ranging from 0–15, distributed across four bands (1–4) based on increased likelihood of sepsis. Each band can be characterized by average positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR−, respectively) for the discrimination of sepsis versus the non-infectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). Methods: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a combined cohort of critically ill patients suspected of sepsis (n = 889), recruited across 19 hospitals in the USA and Europe. The analysis quantified the LR+ and LR− parameters as a function of SeptiScore, for discrimination of sepsis vs. SIRS in patients admitted to ICU. Hypotheses: (1) The likelihood ratio (LR) framework provides a clinically useful interpretive approach that complements the previously used SeptiScore banding scheme; (2) Low Band 1 SeptiScores are associated with sufficiently small LR− to support the use of SeptiCyte RAPID as a rule-out test for sepsis; (3) High Band 4 SeptiScores are associated with sufficiently large LR+ to support the use of SeptiCyte RAPID as a rule-in test for sepsis; and (4) SeptiScore-derived LR+ and LR− values can be combined with estimates of pre-test probability (derived from patient characteristics and/or other diagnostic tests) to generate individualized, patient-specific post-test probabilities of sepsis. Results: The SeptiCyte RAPID test demonstrates strong diagnostic performance in distinguishing sepsis from SIRS. The likelihood ratios across different score bands provide clear clinical utility: the median LR+ was 3.26 (range 2.57–4.24) for Band 3, and 6.97 (range 4.35–15.57) for Band 4, providing evidence toward ruling in sepsis at high SeptiScores. Conversely, the median LR− was 0.16 (range 0.14–0.20) for Band 2 and 0.085 (range 0.014–0.16) for Band 1, providing evidence toward ruling out sepsis at low SeptiScores. A higher-resolution analysis of SeptiCyte RAPID performance confirmed these trends by evaluating LR+ and LR− at specific values within each band. The sepsis group was further stratified according to whether patients were classified as blood culture positive (BC+) or blood culture negative (BC−), and the detailed LR+ and LR− analyses were repeated. A monotonic increase in likelihood ratio with increasing SeptiScore was consistently observed, independent of whether sepsis patients were culture-positive, culture-negative, or unstratified with respect to blood culture status. Conclusions: High SeptiScores have correspondingly high LR+ values, and low SeptiScores have correspondingly low LR− values, both of which may have clinical utility. High likelihood ratios for Band 4 SeptiScores, which precede traditional microbiology results, may provide clinicians with early confidence of a sepsis diagnosis and microbiology diagnostic stewardship. Low likelihood ratios for Band 1 SeptiScores may prompt clinicians to consider an alternate diagnosis to sepsis. These are diagnostic-performance-based observations; whether they translate into fewer missed diagnoses or more efficient use of hospital resources has not been directly assessed in this study and will require dedicated clinical outcome studies.

02

Why this record is monitored

This record has an Impact Signal of 78/100 based on recency, source, collaboration, and bibliographic signals. It prioritizes monitoring and is not a judgment of research quality.

Related topics: Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment · Immune Response and Inflammation · Neonatal and Maternal Infections

03

Thai researcher and institutional participation

Marcus J. Schultz · Mahidol University · Mahidol Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Unit

04

Data limitations

This page is a bibliographic record based on abstract-level information, not a full analysis or quality assessment. Verify the DOI and original article before citation.