A standardized protocol using clinical adjudication to define true infection status in patients presenting to the emergency department with suspected infections and/or sepsis.

In absence of a "gold standard", a standardized clinical adjudication process was developed for a registrational trial of a transcriptomic host response (HR) test. Two physicians independently reviewed clinical data to adjudicate presence and source of bacterial and viral infections in emergency department patients. Discordant cases were resolved by a third physician. Agreement among 955 cases was 74.1% (708/955) for bacterial, 75.6% (722/955) for viral infections, and 71.2% (680/955) overall. Most discordances were minor (85.2%; 409/480) versus moderate (11.7%; 56/480) or complete (3.3%; 16/480). Concordance levels were lowest for bacterial skin and soft tissue infections (8.2%) and for viral respiratory tract infections (4.5%). This robust adjudication process can be used to evaluate HR tests and other diagnostics by regulatory agencies and for educating clinicians, laboratorians, and clinical researchers. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04094818. SUMMARY: Without a gold standard for evaluating host response tests, clinical adjudication is a robust reference standard that is essential to determine the true infection status in diagnostic registrational clinical studies.

A rapid host-protein test for differentiating bacterial from viral infection: Apollo diagnostic accuracy study.

Objectives: To determine the diagnostic accuracy of a rapid host-protein test for differentiating bacterial from viral infections in patients who presented to the emergency department (ED) or urgent care center (UCC). Methods: This was a prospective multicenter, blinded study. MeMed BV (MMBV), a test based on tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL), interferon gamma-inducible protein-10 (IP-10), and C-reactive protein (CRP), was measured using a rapid measurement platform. Patients were enrolled from 9 EDs and 3 UCCs in the United States and Israel. Patients >3 months of age presenting with fever and clinical suspicion of acute infection were considered eligible. MMBV results were not provided to the treating clinician. MMBV results (bacterial/viral/equivocal) were compared against a reference standard method for classification of infection etiology determined by expert panel adjudication. Experts were blinded to MMBV results. They were provided with comprehensive patient data, including laboratory, microbiological, radiological and follow-up. Results: Of 563 adults and children enrolled, 476 comprised the study population (314 adults, 162 children). The predominant clinical syndrome was respiratory tract infection (60.5% upper, 11.3% lower). MMBV demonstrated sensitivity of 90.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 80.3-99.7), specificity of 92.8% (90.0%-95.5%), and negative predictive value of 98.8% (96.8%-99.6%) for bacterial infections. Only 7.2% of cases yielded equivocal MMBV scores. Area under the curve for MMBV was 0.95 (0.90-0.99). Conclusions: MMBV had a high sensitivity and specificity relative to reference standard for differentiating bacterial from viral infections. Future implementation of MMBV for patients with suspected acute infections could potentially aid with appropriate antibiotic decision-making.

Protocol for immunophenotyping out-of-hospital cardiac arrest patients.

Immunophenotyping of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients is of increasing interest but has challenges. Here, we describe steps for the design of the clinical cohort, planning patient enrollment and sample collection, and ethical review of the study protocol. We detail procedures for blood sample collection and cryopreservation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). We detail steps to modulate immune checkpoints in OHCA PBMC ex vivo. This protocol also has relevance for immunophenotyping other types of critical illness. For complete details on the use and execution of this protocol, please refer to Tamura et al. (2023).1.