Next Article in Journal
Minimally Invasive Modified Nuss Procedure for Repair of Pectus Excavatum in Pediatric Patients: Single-Centre Retrospective Observational Study
Next Article in Special Issue
Acute Infectious Gastroenteritis: The Causative Agents, Omics-Based Detection of Antigens and Novel Biomarkers
Previous Article in Journal
Interventions for Parental Anxiety in Preparation for Pediatric Surgery: A Narrative Review
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Risk of Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs in Pediatric Medicine: Listen Carefully to Children with Pain
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Children
Volume 8
Issue 11
10.3390/children8111070
children-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Novel Biomarkers Differentiating Viral from Bacterial Infection in Febrile Children: Future Perspectives for Management in Clinical Praxis

by
Samuel Rhedin
1,2,
Kristina Elfving
3,4 and
Anna Berggren
5,6,*
1
Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, s-171 65 Stockholm, Sweden
2
Sachs’ Children and Youth Hospital, Södersjukhuset, s-118 61 Stockholm, Sweden
3
Institution of Medicine, School of Public Health, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, s-411 24 Gothenburg, Sweden
4
Department of Pediatrics, The Queen Silvia Children’s Hospital, s-413 45 Gothenburg, Sweden
5
Infectious Disease Unit, Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, s-171 65 Stockholm, Sweden
6
Research and Development, Norrtälje Hospital, s-761 29 Norrtälje, Sweden
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Children 2021, 8(11), 1070; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/children8111070
Submission received: 15 September 2021 / Revised: 31 October 2021 / Accepted: 18 November 2021 / Published: 20 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Pediatric Infection and Immunity)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Differentiating viral from bacterial infections in febrile children is challenging and often leads to an unnecessary use of antibiotics. There is a great need for more accurate diagnostic tools. New molecular methods have improved the particular diagnostics of viral respiratory tract infections, but defining etiology can still be challenging, as certain viruses are frequently detected in asymptomatic children. For the detection of bacterial infections, time consuming cultures with limited sensitivity are still the gold standard. As a response to infection, the immune system elicits a cascade of events, which aims to eliminate the invading pathogen. Recent studies have focused on these host–pathogen interactions to identify pathogen-specific biomarkers (gene expression profiles), or “pathogen signatures”, as potential future diagnostic tools. Other studies have assessed combinations of traditional bacterial and viral biomarkers (C-reactive protein, interleukins, myxovirus resistance protein A, procalcitonin, tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand) to establish etiology. In this review we discuss the performance of such novel diagnostics and their potential role in clinical praxis. In conclusion, there are several promising novel biomarkers in the pipeline, but well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the safety of using these novel biomarkers to guide clinical decisions.

1. Introduction

Acute infections represent a major cause of morbidity and mortality in children around the world, predominately in small children living in low- and middle-income countries [1]. However, also in high-income countries, infection is one of the most common reasons for seeking medical care at pediatric emergency units and thus posing a significant burden on health care systems and causing large economic consequences both for the family and society. When a child enters the emergency unit with an infection, it is of great importance to identify the etiology for further clinical management. The vast majority of pediatric infections are viral, but in young infants below three months of age, the likelihood of bacterial etiology is increased, and bacterial infections that can be potentially lethal can be detected in up to 8–14% in this group [2,3]. In many cases, fever is the only symptom present, making it a clinical challenge to differentiate self-resolving viral infections from serious bacterial infections.
Because of the difficulties in differentiating viral from bacterial infections, ill-appearing children suffer from extensive invasive testing and unnecessary usage of antibiotics. This is a great concern, as inappropriate usage of antibiotics contributes to the emerging threat of antimicrobial resistance but also disturbs the microbial flora of the gut, leading to potentially large negative consequences for the infant [4,5]. Therefore, there is a great need for more specific and reliable diagnostic tools for the identification of antibiotic-requiring bacterial infections in children.
Bacterial cultures from sterile sites are still considered the golden standard for the establishment of bacterial etiology, but the sensitivity is low, and the results may take several days [6]. For respiratory viral detection, molecular-based methods such as PCR, with increased sensitivity as compared with historical virological methods, have widely been introduced during the last decade. However, the interpretation of the results is complicated by the fact that certain respiratory viruses have been detected in up to 40% of asymptomatic children [7]. It is also a challenge to obtain representative specimens from the source of infection in children, such as from the lower respiratory tract [6]. Given the limitations with current microbiological testing in children, there has lately been an increased interest in the host’s response to invading pathogens, with the aim of identifying novel biomarkers that accurately differentiate between viral and bacterial etiology. In this review, we discuss such novel biomarkers and their potential implication in clinical praxis.

2. Methods

The aim of this narrative review was to present an overview of studies on novel biomarkers for the differentiation between viral and bacterial etiology in the febrile child presenting at the emergency department (Table 1). The focus was on studies published within the last 10 years, and articles were identified by searches in PubMed using medical subject headings (MeSH) as follows (Biomarker AND (fever (MeSH) OR sepsis (MeSH) OR neonatal sepsis (MeSH)) AND (child (MeSH) OR child, preschool [MeSH] OR infant (MeSH]) AND (“2010” (Date—Publication): “2021” (Date—Publication)) as well as through cross-references.

3. Single Biomarkers and Combined Tests That Distinguish Viral and Bacterial Etiology

3.1. Routine Biomarkers

White blood counts (WBC) have been used for decades to identify infants with severe bacterial infection, normally by using a threshold level of 15,000 cells/mm3 [8,9]. However, in the post-vaccine era, the bacterial spectrum has changed [10] and the usefulness of WBC as a predictor for bacterial infections in infants has been questioned, as most studies have shown a low predictive value [10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. Only a few studies have in the post-vaccine era investigated the performance of WBC as a predictor of bacterial infections in children older than 12 months, with the same conclusions as with younger infants [10,17,18,19]. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a commonly used biomarker for infection worldwide. Blood levels increase at time of infection, but elevated levels are also seen in other diseases, such as inflammatory disorders, cancer and trauma [20]. In a systematic review, Sanders et al. could show that CRP gave moderate information in both ruling in and out serious bacterial infections in children with fever in an outpatient setting [21]. In later studies, the same results have been confirmed for CRP, both as a single marker [22,23,24] but also together with other markers in clinical algorithms, such as the “step-by-step” approach [25]. The diagnostic accuracy for discriminating viral from bacterial etiologies is however limited, especially in early stages [21,26,27]. Procalcitonin (PCT) has, in most studies, been shown to be a superior biomarker as compared with CRP for the differentiation between infectious and non-infectious inflammation, and blood levels increase more rapidly [28,29,30,31,32]. However, the specificity for distinguishing between viral and bacterial infections is limited, particularly in children <21 days [31,33,34]. Currently, the use of PCT is mostly evaluated for ruling out severe bacterial infections in infants in combination with other microbiological findings and clinical signs [31,34,35,36,37,38], but PCT also has potential utility in the management of febrile urinary tract infections, pneumonia and non-infectious inflammatory syndromes [28,39,40]. PCT increases physiologically in newborns during the first days of life [38].

3.2. Interleukins as Biomarkers for Sepsis and Bacterial Infection

Interleukins (ILs) mediate communication between cells and are pivotal in the pro- and anti-inflammatory early immune responses to infections. The focus of ILs’ role as an infection biomarker has been mostly as a potential biomarker for sepsis and bacterial infections, and studies during the last decade on children in a post-neonatal setting are few [15,41,42,43,44,45,46]. IL6 is the most studied IL and has been shown to have a potential prognostic value in children with sepsis. The usefulness of IL6 can be increased in combination with other biomarkers [43,47,48]. A challenge with ILs is the variations in serum concentrations at different time points. In addition, the lack of a commonly used definition of pediatric sepsis makes translation of findings between studies difficult, highlighting the need for future studies with well-defined study cohorts.

3.3. Viral Biomarkers and Combination Tests

While most commercially available biomarkers have been focused on the identification of serious bacterial infection (SBIs), there is currently an increasing interest in viral biomarkers. As novel antiviral therapeutic possibilities arise and new vaccines targeting viruses are developed, the accurate identification of children with viral infections will be pivotal. Moreover, given the complexity of the host immune response to infections and the increasingly recognized importance of viral–bacterial interactions, it is likely unrealistic to think that one single biomarker would be able to accurately identify children with antibiotic-requiring bacterial infections [49,50]. Hence viral biomarkers can add further value in the differentiation between viral and bacterial etiology if analyzed in combination with other bacterial or inflammatory biomarkers.

3.3.1. Myxovirus Resistance Protein A

Myxovirus resistance protein A (MxA) is a small peptide with antiviral activity that is produced in a variety of immune cells and is rapidly upregulated by interferon signaling [51]. MxA levels have been shown to be higher in children with viral etiology, as compared with bacterial etiology in children with febrile illness, and therefore MxA levels are a promising biomarker for differentiating between these two etiologies [52]. In addition, MxA levels assist in the distinction between active infection and asymptomatic detection in children with respiratory symptoms, which is a common clinical problem when interpreting PCR data of certain respiratory viruses in children [7,51]. A commercial point-of-care combination test of MxA and CRP is approved for use in a number of European countries but has so far mostly been evaluated in an adult population, and thus more studies on MxA in children are needed [53,54].

3.3.2. Tumor Necrosis Factor-Related Apoptosis-Inducing Ligand

Tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) is another viral biomarker that historically has been used as a biomarker for cardiovascular autoimmune disease but that has lately been identified as a promising viral biomarker [55,56]. TRAIL is included in a United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved commercial combination test together with CRP and interferon gamma-induced protein 10 [57,58]. This combination test has been shown to be superior to PCT in terms of accuracy for distinguishing bacterial and viral infections in two external validation studies of children with febrile illness [57,58,59]. However, in the largest study, the performance of CRP was almost as good (area under the curve 0.89 vs 0.90) as the commercial test, underscoring the methodological challenges in this kind of study, as the imperfect biomarker CRP is often used directly or indirectly as reference standard [58,60].

3.4. Gene Expression Profiling

Since the development of microarrays, the possibility of studying the pathogen–host interaction has entered a new era [61,62]. Ribonucleic acid (RNA) can be isolated from the peripheral whole blood that constitutes a majority of white blood cells. Consequently, the host’s immune response, as reflected by the gene expression signals from the white blood cells, can be studied in detail. These techniques have the potential to be used both as pathogen-specific diagnostic tools but also as tools to discriminate an active infection from asymptomatic detection.

3.4.1. Pathogen-Specific Signatures in Children

In an attempt to identify discriminative transcriptional signatures in children with an acute infection, gene expression profiles from acutely infected children with defined infections have been evaluated [63,64]. Hereby, researchers have been able to identify sets of differently expressed genes that not only correctly distinguish febrile virus-positive children not only from afebrile controls but also from asymptomatic afebrile children with the same virus present [64]. With the same approach, bacterial infections have been distinguished from viral infections [63,64]. In addition, a number of studies have been able to define pathogen/disease-specific signatures with different etiologies in children [65,66,67,68,69,70]. However, to be useful as a diagnostic tool in the clinic, microarrays and RNA sequencing-based techniques need to be converted to rapid point-of-care platforms. To succeed with that conversion, the number of classifier genes must be reduced to a minimum. Recently, researchers identified a 2-script-Host-RNA signature that differentiated between viral and bacterial infections in children with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 96.4%; in addition, it was successfully tested in children with inflammatory disease [71]. Since then, the signature was validated as being able to correctly distinguish viral from bacterial etiology in children with gastroenteritis [72], and a qPCR expression assay detecting these two genes has successfully been set up, in addition to a recent point-of-care platform yields results within 25 min [73,74].
Another approach to finding a suitable diagnostic tool to be used in the clinic is to use multi-cohort data accessible via public platforms [75,76,77,78,79,80]. By using a multi-data cohort approach including both adult and pediatric patients, and also animals in one of the studies, two research groups were able to identify a 7- and 4- script-Host RNA signature that discriminated viral from bacterial infection and viral from non-infective inflammation with high accuracy [75,76]. These gene expression-based diagnostic approaches are promising and have been proven superior to other biomarkers, such as white blood counts and PCT [63,64,78], but further evaluation in different patient cohorts is needed, especially since a recent publication could show that gene expression profiling was not feasible in children under treatment for cancer and presenting with febrile neutropenia [81].

3.4.2. Future Ways to Diagnose Coinfections and Distinguish Asymptomatic from Symptomatic Infection

Another aspect to consider in the clinic is the translation of positive viral PCR findings, as certain respiratory viruses frequently are detected in asymptomatic children [7]. In addition, studies have shown that viral and bacterial coinfections are common in children with different infections, such as pneumonia and otitis media. [82,83]. These two aspects are of special importance to consider when handling patients with increased risk of bacterial infections, such as immunosuppressed children, where the judgment of when to initiate and stop antibiotics could be difficult. Human rhinovirus is the most common virus causing common cold symptoms, but it is also frequently detected in asymptomatic children [7,84]. When using gene expression analysis, researchers were able to distinguish asymptomatic rhinovirus infection from symptomatic illness [84]. In addition, symptomatic human herpesvirus-6 infections in children were possible to distinguish from asymptomatic infection but impossible to distinguish from controls without an infection present [64]. These findings indicate that transcriptional signals can be useful in the discrimination of symptomatic and asymptomatic infections. Indeed, recent studies of nasal swabs from patients with respiratory infection have identified sets of genes that are concordant with an active viral respiratory infection [85,86,87]. Co-infections are difficult to define and have not been addressed in the majority of the published gene expression-based studies. However, two studies have evaluated transcriptional signals in smaller cohorts of patients with co-infections with promising results, but larger cohorts are needed [77,78].

4. Future Perspectives

To reduce the morbidity and mortality and improve the usage of antibiotics, there is an urgent need for better diagnostic tools in the clinic for children presenting with acute infections. An ideal biomarker should not only identify serious infections but also accurately exclude non-infectious causes of inflammation to be able to guide the clinician in the important decision of whether or not to prescribe antibiotics.
Viral biomarkers and combination tests have the potential to improve the accuracy of identifying bacterial infections as compared with old inflammatory single biomarkers, but the lack of a good reference standard for bacterial infections makes it difficult to properly evaluate the performance. Furthermore, viral–bacterial co-infections remain a challenge, and evidence from microbiota studies suggests that mixed viral–bacterial infections are likely underestimated [49,88]. However, from a clinical point of view, it is more important to identify antibiotic-requiring bacterial infections rather than to determine the exact etiology of each infectious episode, as many bacterial or mixed viral–bacterial infections are in fact self-limiting.
So far, there has not been a consensus regarding the reference standard for bacterial infections, and both expert panels and algorithm-based approaches have been used [57,89]. This makes it difficult to compare the findings from different studies. Recently, the algorithm used for classification of microbiological etiology in the Personalized Risk Assessment in Febrile Children to Optimize Real-life Management across the European Union (PERFORM) consortium was validated in five independent cohorts of previous biomarker studies. By using the PERFORM classification, the accuracy of the studied biomarkers increased as compared with the previously used classification of SBI versus non-SBI. This framework could potentially serve as a novel standard for the classification of etiology for future biomarker studies [90].
Diagnostic methods based on gene expression are promising and have been shown to successfully distinguish viral from bacterial infections with high sensitivity and specificity and also to distinguish symptomatic from asymptomatic infections [71,84]. There is also evidence that co-infections can be correctly diagnosed [78]. However, as there is diversity in gene expression signaling between sexes and patients with different genetic backgrounds and also on an individual level, it is of utmost importance to validate these methods in different patient cohorts [91]. Even if the findings so far have been reproducible in children of different genetic backgrounds and for various pathogens [72,73], these findings still need to be investigated in groups of children with different underlying conditions, especially conditions mimicking those of an infection, such as asthma and inflammatory disorders and in immune-suppressed children.
With increasing evidence from observational studies, it appears as if the next natural step to push the field forward is to assess the safety of decision-making guidance regarding antibiotic treatment based on different novel biomarkers and combination tests in well-designed randomized controlled trials of children with specific diagnoses and with different genetic backgrounds. However, it is also important to recognize that the implementation of a novel diagnostic test might result in increased antibiotic treatment if it identifies self-limiting bacterial or mixed viral–bacterial infections that were previously undiagnosed [34].
Another major challenge of novel diagnostic tests is the turnaround time. For ideal usage at the emergency department, the results of a point-of-care test should preferably be available within an hour. Diagnostic platforms are under construction, and future focus should be on further development of cheap point-of-care platforms with a short turnaround time [73,74,78,92].

5. Conclusions

There is a great need for improved diagnostic tests that accurately distinguish between viral and bacterial etiology of febrile children. Several promising novel biomarkers are in the pipeline, but the lack of a reference standard for microbiological etiology is hampering the evaluation of these novel tests, while another great challenge is the need for a short turnaround time. To further push the field forward, well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the safety of decision-making guidance for antibiotic treatment based on these novel biomarkers.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.B. and S.R.; methodology, A.B., K.E. and S.R; data curation, A.B., K.E. and S.R.; writing—original draft preparation, A.B.; writing—review and editing, A.B., K.E. and S.R.; visualization, S.R.; project administration, A.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

S.R. was supported by Region Stockholm (clinical postdoctorial appointment). A.B. was supported by Research and Development, Norrtälje Hospital.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Liu, L.; Oza, S.; Hogan, D.; Chu, Y.; Perin, J.; Zhu, J.; Lawn, J.E.; Cousens, S.; Mathers, C.; Black, R.E. Global, regional, and national causes of under-5 mortality in 2000–15: An updated systematic analysis with implications for the Sustainable Development Goals. Lancet 2016, 388, 3027–3035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. DePorre, A.G.; Aronson, P.L.; McCulloh, R.J. Facing the ongoing challenge of the febrile young infant. Crit. Care 2017, 21, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Orfanos, I.; Alfven, T.; Mossberg, M.; Tenland, M.; Sotoca, F.J.; Eklund, E.A.; Elfving, K. Age- and sex-specific prevalence of serious bacterial infections in febrile infants ≤60 days, in Sweden. Acta Paediatr. 2021, 110, 3069–3076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Blaser, M.J. Antibiotic use and its consequences for the normal microbiome. Science 2016, 352, 544–545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Malhotra-Kumar, S.; Lammens, C.; Coenen, S.; Van Herck, K.; Goossens, H. Effect of azithromycin and clarithromycin therapy on pharyngeal carriage of macrolide-resistant streptococci in healthy volunteers: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Lancet 2007, 369, 482–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Rhedin, S. Establishment of childhood pneumonia cause in the era of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines. Lancet Respir. Med. 2016, 4, 423–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Rhedin, S.A.; Lindstrand, A.; Rotzen-Ostlund, M.; Tolfvenstam, T.; Öhrmalm, L.; Rinder, M.R.; Zweygberg-Wirgart, B.; Ortqvist, A.; Henriques-Normark, B.; Broliden, K.; et al. Clinical Utility of PCR for Common Viruses in Acute Respiratory Illness. PEDIATRICS 2014, 133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Dagan, R.; Powell, K.R.; Hall, C.B.; Menegus, M.A. Identification of infants unlikely to have serious bacterial infection although hospitalized for suspected sepsis. J. Pediatrics 1985, 107, 855–860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Baker, M.D.; Bell, L.M.; Avner, J.R. Outpatient Management without Antibiotics of Fever in Selected Infants. N. Engl. J. Med. 1993, 329, 1437–1441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Herz, A.M.; Greenhow, T.L.; Alcantara, J.; Hansen, J.; Baxter, R.P.; Black, S.B.; Shinefield, H.R. Changing Epidemiology of Outpatient Bacteremia in 3- to 36-Month-Old Children After the Introduction of the Heptavalent-Conjugated Pneumococcal Vaccine. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 2006, 25, 293–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Mischler, M.; Orzulak, F.M.; Hanks, J. White Blood Cell Count in the Evaluation of the Febrile Infant: Time to Revisit the Dogma? JAMA Pediatr. 2017, 171, e172796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Mintegi, S.; Benito, J.; Pijoan, J.I.; Marañon, R.; Peñalba, A.; Gonzalez, A.; Muñoz, G.; Luaces, C.; Claret, G. Occult pneumonia in infants with high fever without source: A prospective multicenter study. Pediatric Emerg. Care 2010, 26, 470–474.13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Gómez, B.; Mintegi, S.; Benito, J.; Egireun, A.; Garcia, D.; Astobiza, E. Blood Culture and Bacteremia Predictors in Infants Less than Three Months of Age with Fever Without Source. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 2010, 29, 43–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Bilavsky, E.; Yarden-Bilavsky, H.; Amir, J.; Ashkenazi, S. Should complete blood count be part of the evaluation of febrile infants aged ≤2 months? Acta Paediatrica. 2010, 99, 1380–1384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zarkesh, M.; Sedaghat, F.; Heidarzadeh, A.; Tabrizi, M.; Bolooki-Moghadam, K.; Ghesmati, S. Diagnostic value of IL-6, CRP, WBC, and absolute neutrophil count to predict serious bacterial infection in febrile infants. Acta Med. Iran. 2015, 53. [Google Scholar]
  16. Cruz, A.T.; Mahajan, P.; Bonsu, B.K.; Bennett, J.E.; Levine, D.A.; Alpern, E.; Nigrovic, L.; Atabaki, S.M.; Cohen, D.M.; VanBuren, J.; et al. Accuracy of Complete Blood Cell Counts to Identify Febrile Infants 60 Days or Younger With Invasive Bacterial Infections. JAMA Pediatr. 2017, 171, e172927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. De, S.; Williams, G.J.; Hayen, A.; Macaskill, P.; McCaskill, M.; Isaacs, D.; Craig, J. Value of white cell count in predicting serious bacterial infection in febrile children under 5 years of age. Arch. Dis. Child. 2014, 99, 493–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Myers, A.L.; Hall, M.; Williams, D.J.; Auger, K.; Tieder, J.S.; Statile, A.; Jerardi, K.; McClain, L.; Shah, S.S. Prevalence of Bacteremia in Hospitalized Pediatric Patients With Community-acquired Pneumonia. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 2013, 32, 736–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Lipsett, S.C.; Hall, M.; Ambroggio, L.; Desai, S.; Shah, S.S.; Brogan, T.V.; Hersh, A.L.; Williams, D.J.; Grijalva, C.; Gerber, J.S.; et al. Predictors of Bacteremia in Children Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia. Hosp. Pediatr. 2019, 9, 770–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Pepys, M.B.; Hirschfield, G. C-reactive protein: A critical update. J. Clin. Investig. 2003, 111, 1805–1812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sanders, S.; Barnett, A.; Correa-Velez, I.; Coulthard, M.; Doust, J. Systematic Review of the Diagnostic Accuracy of C-Reactive Protein to Detect Bacterial Infection in Nonhospitalized Infants and Children with Fever. J. Pediatr. 2008, 153, 570–574.e3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Yoon, S.H.; Shin, H.; Lee, K.H.; Kim, M.K.; Kim, D.S.; Ahn, J.G.; Shin, J.I. Predictive factors for bacteremia in febrile infants with urinary tract infection. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Paydar-Darian, N.; Kimia, A.A.; Monuteaux, M.C.; Michelson, K.A.; Landschaft, A.; Maulden, A.B.; Chenard, R.L.; Nigrovic, L.E. C-reactive protein or erythrocyte sedimentation rate results reliably exclude invasive bacterial infections. Am. J. Emerg. Med. 2019, 37, 1510–1515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Chiu, I.M.; Huang, Y.H.; Su, C.M.; Kung, C.T.; Li, C.J.; Chen, C.H.; Tang, K.S.; Kuo, K.C. C-Reactive protein concentration can help to identify bacteremia in children visiting the emergency department: A single medical center experience. Pediatric Emerg. Care 2020, 36, 291–295. [Google Scholar]
  25. Gomez, B.; Mintegi, S.; Bressan, S.; Da Dalt, L.; Gervaix, A.; Lacroix, L.; On behalf of the European Group for Validation of the Step-by-Step Approach. Validation of the “Step-by-Step” Approach in the Management of Young Febrile Infants. Pediatrics 2016, 138, e20154381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Heiskanen-Kosma, T.; Korppi, M. Serum C-reactive protein cannot differentiate bacterial and viral aetiology of community-acquired pneumonia in children in primary healthcare settings. Scand. J. Infect. Dis. 2000, 32, 399–402. [Google Scholar]
  27. Pérez-López, A.; Irwin, A.; Rodrigo, C.; Prat-Aymerich, C. Role of C reactive protein and procalcitonin in the diagnosis of lower respiratory tract infection in children in the outpatient setting. BMJ 2021, 373, n1409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Yoshihara, T.; Imamura, T.; Yokoi, K.; Shibata, M.; Kano, G.; Osone, S.; Yagi, K.; Todo, S.; Murakami, Y.; Yamada, Y.; et al. Potential use of procalcitonin concentrations as a diagnostic marker of the PFAPA syndrome. Eur. J. Nucl. Med. Mol. Imaging 2006, 166, 621–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Arkader, R.; Troster, E.J.; Lopes, M.R.; Junior, R.R.; Carcillo, J.A.; Leone, C.; Okay, T.S. Procalcitonin does discriminate between sepsis and systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Arch. Dis. Child. 2005, 91, 117–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Dauber, A.; Weiss, S.; Maniaci, V.; Nylen, E.; Becker, K.L.; Bachur, R. Procalcitonin Levels in Febrile Infants after Recent Immunization. PEDIATRICS 2008, 122, e1119–e1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Milcent, K.; Faesch, S.; Guen, C.G.-L.; Dubos, F.; Poulalhon, C.; Badier, I.; Marc, E.; Laguille, C.; DE Pontual, L.; Mosca, A.; et al. Use of Procalcitonin Assays to Predict Serious Bacterial Infection in Young Febrile Infants. JAMA Pediatr. 2016, 170, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Stocker, M.; van Herk, W.; el Helou, S.; Dutta, S.; Schuerman, F.A.B.A.; van den Tooren-de Groot, R.K.; Wieringa, J.W.; Janota, J.; van der Meer-Kappelle, L.H.; Moonen, R.; et al. C-Reactive Protein, Procalcitonin, and White Blood Count to Rule Out Neonatal Early-onset Sepsis Within 36 Hours: A Secondary Analysis of the Neonatal Procalcitonin Intervention Study. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020, 73, e383–e390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Manzano, S.; Bailey, B.; Gervaix, A.; Cousineau, J.; Delvin, E.; Girodias, J.-B. Markers for bacterial infection in children with fever without source. Arch. Dis. Child. 2011, 96, 440–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Manzano, S.; Bailey, B.; Girodias, J.-B.; Galetto-Lacour, A.; Cousineau, J.; Delvin, E. Impact of procalcitonin on the management of children aged 1 to 36 months presenting with fever without source: A randomized controlled trial. Am. J. Emerg. Med. 2010, 28, 647–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Kuppermann, N.; Dayan, P.S.; Levine, D.A.; Vitale, M.; Tzimenatos, L.; Tunik, M.; Saunders, M.; Ruddy, R.M.; Roosevelt, G.; Rogers, A.J.; et al. A Clinical Prediction Rule to Identify Febrile Infants 60 Days and Younger at Low Risk for Serious Bacterial Infections. JAMA Pediatr. 2019, 173, 342–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Nijman, R.G.; Vergouwe, Y.; A Moll, H.; Smit, F.J.; Weerkamp, F.; Steyerberg, E.W.; Van Der Lei, J.; De Rijke, Y.B.; Oostenbrink, R. Validation of the Feverkidstool and procalcitonin for detecting serious bacterial infections in febrile children. Pediatr. Res. 2017, 83, 466–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Maniaci, V.; Dauber, A.; Weiss, S.; Nylen, E.; Becker, K.L.; Bachur, R. Procalcitonin in Young Febrile Infants for the Detection of Serious Bacterial Infections. Pediatrics 2008, 122, 701–710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Stocker, M.; van Herk, W.; el Helou, S.; Dutta, S.; Fontana, M.S.; Schuerman, F.A.; van den Tooren-de, R.K.; Wieringa, J.W.; Janota, J.; van der Meer-Kappelle, L.H.; et al. Procalcitonin-guided decision making for duration of antibiotic therapy in neonates with suspected early-onset sepsis: A multicentre, randomised controlled trial (NeoPIns). Lancet 2017, 390, 871–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Leroy, S.; Adamsbaum, C.; Marc, E.; Moulin, F.; Raymond, J.; Gendrel, D.; Breart, G.; Chalumeau, M. Procalcitonin as a Predictor of Vesicoureteral Reflux in Children With a First Febrile Urinary Tract Infection. J. Urol. 2006, 175, 728–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Keitel, K.; Kagoro, F.; Samaka, J.; Masimba, J.; Said, Z.; Temba, H.; Mlaganile, T.; Sangu, W.; Rambaud-Althaus, C.; Gervaix, A.; et al. A novel electronic algorithm using host biomarker point-of-care tests for the management of febrile illnesses in Tanzanian children (e-POCT): A randomized, controlled non-inferiority trial. PLoS Med. 2017, 14, e1002411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Angurana, S.K.; Bansal, A.; Muralidharan, J.; Aggarwal, R.; Singhi, S. Cytokine Levels in Critically Ill Children With Severe Sepsis and Their Relation With the Severity of Illness and Mortality. J. Intensive Care Med. 2020, 36, 576–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Kortz, T.B.; Nyirenda, J.; Tembo, D.; Elfving, K.; Baltzell, K.; Bandawe, G.; Rosenthal, P.J.; Macfarlane, S.B.; Mandala, W.; Nyirenda, T.S. Distinct Biomarker Profiles Distinguish Malawian Children with Malarial and Non-malarial Sepsis. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2019, 101, 1424–1433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Shao, W.-X.; Yu, D.-J.; Zhang, W.-Y.; Wang, X.-J. Clinical Significance of Interleukin-6 in the Diagnosis of Sepsis and Discriminating Sepsis Induced by Gram-negative Bacteria. Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 2018, 37, 801–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Hanna, W.J.; Berrens, Z.; Langner, T.; Lahni, P.; Wong, H.R. Interleukin-27: A novel biomarker in predicting bacterial infection among the critically ill. Crit. Care 2015, 19, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Pavare, J.; Grope, I.; Kalniņš, I.; Gardovska, D. High-mobility group box-1 protein, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein, interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein in children with community acquired infections and bacteraemia: A prospective study. BMC Infect. Dis. 2010, 10, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Smok, B.; Domagalski, K.; Pawłowska, M. Diagnostic and Prognostic Value of IL-6 and sTREM-1 in SIRS and Sepsis in Children. Mediat. Inflamm. 2020, 2020, 8201585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Jiri, Z.; Vavrina, M.; Zurek, J. Procalcitonin Biomarker Kinetics to Predict Multiorgan Dysfunction Syndrome in Children with Sepsis and Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome. Iran. J. Pediatr. 2015, 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  48. Lamping, F.; Jack, T.; Rübsamen, N.; Sasse, M.; Beerbaum, P.; Mikolajczyk, R.T.; Boehne, M.; Karch, A. Development and validation of a diagnostic model for early differentiation of sepsis and non-infectious SIRS in critically ill children—A data-driven approach using machine-learning algorithms. BMC Pediatr. 2018, 18, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. de Steenhuijsen Piters, W.A.; Heinonen, S.; Hasrat, R.; Bunsow, E.; Smith, B.; Suarez-Arrabal, M.C.; Chaussabel, D.; Cohen, D.M.; Sanders, E.A.; Ramilo, O.; et al. Nasopharyngeal Microbiota, Host Transcriptome, and Disease Severity in Children with Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection. Am. J. Respir Crit Care Med. 2016, 194, 1104–1115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Fathima, P.; Blyth, C.; Lehmann, D.; Lim, F.; Abdalla, T.; de Klerk, N.; Moore, H. The Impact of Pneumococcal Vaccination on Bacterial and Viral Pneumonia in Western Australian Children: Record Linkage Cohort Study of 469589 Births, 1996–2012. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2017, 66, 1075–1085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Toivonen, L.; Schuez-Havupalo, L.; Rulli, M.; Ilonen, J.; Pelkonen, J.; Melen, K.; Julkunen, I.; Peltola, V.; Waris, M. Blood MxA protein as a marker for respiratory virus infections in young children. J. Clin. Virol. 2014, 62, 8–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Engelmann, I.; Dubos, F.; Lobert, P.-E.; Houssin, C.; Degas, V.; Sardet, A.; DeCoster, A.; Dewilde, A.; Martinot, A.; Hober, D. Diagnosis of Viral Infections Using Myxovirus Resistance Protein A (MxA). Pediatrics 2015, 135, e985–e993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Shapiro, N.I.; Self, W.; Rosen, J.; Sharp, S.C.; Filbin, M.R.; Hou, P.C.; Parekh, A.D.; Kurz, M.C.; Sambursky, R. A prospective, multi-centre US clinical trial to determine accuracy of FebriDx point-of-care testing for acute upper respiratory infections with and without a confirmed fever. Ann. Med. 2018, 50, 420–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Self, W.H.; Rosen, J.; Sharp, S.C.; Filbin, M.R.; Hou, P.C.; Parekh, A.D.; Kurz, M.C.; Shapiro, N.I. Diagnostic Accuracy of FebriDx: A Rapid Test to Detect Immune Responses to Viral and Bacterial Upper Respiratory Infections. J. Clin. Med. 2017, 6, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Bernardi, S.; Milani, D.; Fabris, B.; Secchiero, P.; Zauli, G. TRAIL as biomarker and potential therapeutic tool for cardiovascular diseases. Curr. Drug Targets 2012, 13, 1215–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Oved, K.; Cohen, A.; Boico, O.; Navon, R.; Friedman, T.; Etshtein, L.; Kriger, O.; Bamberger, E.; Fonar, Y.; Yacobov, R.; et al. A Novel Host-Proteome Signature for Distinguishing between Acute Bacterial and Viral Infections. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0120012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  57. Ashkenazi-Hoffnung, L.; Oved, K.; Navon, R.; Friedman, T.; Boico, O.; Paz, M.; Kronenfeld, G.; Etshtein, L.; Cohen, A.; Gottlieb, T.M.; et al. A host-protein signature is superior to other biomarkers for differentiating between bacterial and viral disease in patients with respiratory infection and fever without source: A prospective observational study. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2018, 37, 1361–1371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. van Houten, C.B.; de Groot, J.A.; Klein, A.; Srugo, I.; Chistyakov, I.; de Waal, W.; Meijssen, C.B.; Avis, W.; Wolfs, T.F.; Shachor-Meyouhas, Y.; et al. Faculty Opinions recommendation of A host-protein based assay to differentiate between bacterial and viral infections in preschool children (OPPORTUNITY): A double-blind, multicentre, validation study. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2017, 17, 431–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Srugo, I.; Klein, A.; Kerem, N.; Chistyakov, I.; Genizi, J.; Glazer, O.; Yaniv, L.; German, A.; Bamberger, E.; Oved, K.; et al. Validation of a Novel Assay to Distinguish Bacterial and Viral Infections. Pediatrics 2017, 140, e20163453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Rhedin, S.A.; Eklundh, A.; Ryd-Rinder, M.; Naucler, P.; Mårtensson, A.; Gantelius, J.; Zenk, I.; Andersson-Svahn, H.; Nybond, S.; Rasti, R.; et al. Introducing a New Algorithm for Classification of Etiology in Studies on Pediatric Pneumonia: Protocol for the Trial of Respiratory Infections in Children for Enhanced Diagnostics Study. JMIR Res. Protoc. 2019, 8, e12705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Jenner, R.G.; Young, R.A. Insights into host responses against pathogens from transcriptional profiling. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2005, 3, 281–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Mejias, A.; Suarez, N.M.; Ramilo, O. Detecting specific infections in children through host responses: A paradigm shift. Curr. Opin. Infect. Dis. 2014, 27, 228–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  63. Ramilo, O.; Allman, W.; Chung, W.; Mejias, A.; Ardura, M.; Glaser, C.; Wittkowski, K.M.; Piqueras, B.; Banchereau, J.; Palucka, A.K.; et al. Gene expression patterns in blood leukocytes discriminate patients with acute infections. Blood 2006, 109, 2066–2077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  64. Hu, X.; Yu, J.; Crosby, S.D.; Storch, G.A. Gene expression profiles in febrile children with defined viral and bacterial infection. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 12792–12797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Anderson, S.T.; Kaforou, M.; Brent, A.J.; Wright, V.; Banwell, C.M.; Chagaluka, G.; Crampin, A.; Dockrell, H.; French, N.; Hamilton, M.S.; et al. Diagnosis of Childhood Tuberculosis and Host RNA Expression in Africa. N. Engl. J. Med. 2014, 370, 1712–1723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  66. Herberg, J.A.; Kaforou, M.; Gormley, S.; Sumner, E.R.; Patel, S.; Jones, K.D.; Paulus, S.; Fink, C.; Martinon-Torres, F.; Montana, G.; et al. Transcriptomic profiling in childhood H1N1/09 influenza reveals reduced expression of protein synthesis genes. J. Infect. Dis. 2013, 208, 1664–1668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Mahajan, P.; Kuppermann, N.; Mejias, A.; Suarez, N.; Chaussabel, D.; Casper, T.C.; Smith, B.; Alpern, E.; Anders, J.; Atabaki, S.M.; et al. Association of RNA Biosignatures with Bacterial Infections in Febrile Infants Aged 60 Days or Younger. JAMA 2016, 316, 846–857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Mejias, A.; Dimo, B.; Suarez, N.M.; Garcia, C.; Arrabal, M.D.C.S.; Jartti, T.; Blankenship, D.; Jordan-Villegas, A.; Ardura, M.; Xu, Z.; et al. Whole Blood Gene Expression Profiles to Assess Pathogenesis and Disease Severity in Infants with Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection. PLoS Med. 2013, 10, e1001549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Balamuth, F.; Alpern, E.; Kan, M.; Shumyatcher, M.; Hayes, K.; Lautenbach, E.; Himes, B.E. Gene Expression Profiles in Children With Suspected Sepsis. Ann. Emerg. Med. 2020, 75, 744–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Nicolas De Lamballerie, C.; Pizzorno, A.; Dubois, J.; Padey, B.; Julien, T.; Traversier, A.; Carbonneau, J.; Orcel, E.; Lina, B.; Hamelin, M.E.; et al. Human Respiratory Syncytial Virus-induced immune signature of infection revealed by transcriptome analysis of clinical pediatric nasopharyngeal swab samples. J. Infect. Dis. 2020, 223, 1052–1061. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Herberg, J.; Kaforou, M.; Wright, V.; Shailes, H.; Eleftherohorinou, H.; Hoggart, C.J.; Cebey-López, M.; Carter, M.; Janes, V.; Gormley, S.; et al. Diagnostic Test Accuracy of a 2-Transcript Host RNA Signature for Discriminating Bacterial vs Viral Infection in Febrile Children. JAMA 2016, 316, 835–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  72. Barral-Arca, R.; Pardo-Seco, J.; Martinon-Torres, F.; Salas, A. A 2-transcript host cell signature distinguishes viral from bacterial diarrhea and it is influenced by the severity of symptoms. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Gómez-Carballa, A.; Cebey-López, M.; Pardo-Seco, J.; Barral-Arca, R.; Calle, I.R.; Pischedda, S.; Tuala, M.J.C.; Gómez-Rial, J.; Barros, F.; Martinón-Torres, F.; et al. A qPCR expression assay of IFI44L gene differentiates viral from bacterial infections in febrile children. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Pennisi, I.; Rodriguez-Manzano, J.; Moniri, A.; Kaforou, M.; Herberg, J.A.; Levin, M.; Georgiou, P. Translation of a Host Blood RNA Signature Distinguishing Bacterial From Viral Infection Into a Platform Suitable for Development as a Point-of-Care Test. JAMA Pediatr. 2021, 175, 417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Sweeney, T.E.; Wong, H.R.; Khatri, P. Robust classification of bacterial and viral infections via integrated host gene expression diagnostics. Sci. Transl. Med. 2016, 8, 346ra91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Sampson, D.L.; Fox, B.; Yager, T.D.; Bhide, S.; Cermelli, S.; McHugh, L.C.; Seldon, T.A.; Brandon, R.A.; Sullivan, E.; Zimmerman, J.J.; et al. A Four-Biomarker Blood Signature Discriminates Systemic Inflammation Due to Viral Infection Versus Other Etiologies. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Tsalik, E.L.; Henao, R.; Nichols, M.; Burke, T.; Ko, E.R.; McClain, M.T.; Hudson, L.L.; Mazur, A.; Freeman, D.H.; Veldman, T.; et al. Host gene expression classifiers diagnose acute respiratory illness etiology. Sci. Transl. Med. 2016, 8, 322ra11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Lydon, E.C.; Henao, R.; Burke, T.W.; Aydin, M.; Nicholson, B.P.; Glickman, S.W.; Fowler, V.G.; Quackenbush, E.B.; Cairns, C.B.; Kingsmore, S.; et al. Validation of a host response test to distinguish bacterial and viral respiratory infection. EBioMedicine 2019, 48, 453–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Andres-Terre, M.; McGuire, H.M.; Pouliot, Y.; Bongen, E.; Sweeney, T.; Tato, C.M.; Khatri, P. Integrated, Multi-cohort Analysis Identifies Conserved Transcriptional Signatures across Multiple Respiratory Viruses. Immunity 2015, 43, 1199–1211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Zaas, A.K.; Chen, M.; Varkey, J.; Veldman, T.; Hero, A.O., 3rd; Lucas, J.; Huang, Y.; Turner, R.; Gilbert, A.; Lambkin-Williams, R.; et al. Gene expression signatures diagnose influenza and other symptomatic respiratory viral infections in humans. Cell Host Microbe. 2009, 6, 207–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  81. Wahlund, M.; Sinha, I.; Broliden, K.; Saghafian-Hedengren, S.; Nilsson, A.; Berggren, A. The Feasibility of Host Transcriptome Profiling as a Diagnostic Tool for Microbial Etiology in Childhood Cancer Patients with Febrile Neutropenia. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020, 21, 5305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Nolan, V.G.; Arnold, S.R.; Bramley, A.M.; Ampofo, K.; Williams, D.J.; Grijalva, C.G.; Self, W.H.; Anderson, E.J.; Wunderink, R.G.; Edwards, K.M.; et al. Etiology and Impact of Coinfections in Children Hospitalized With Community-Acquired Pneumonia. J. Infect. Dis. 2018, 218, 179–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  83. Honkinen, M.; Lahti, E.; Österback, R.; Ruuskanen, O.; Waris, M. Viruses and bacteria in sputum samples of children with community-acquired pneumonia. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2012, 18, 300–307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  84. Heinonen, S.; Jartti, T.; Garcia, C.; Oliva, S.; Smitherman, C.; Anguiano, E.; Piters, W.D.S.; Vuorinen, T.; Ruuskanen, O.; Dimo, B.; et al. Rhinovirus Detection in Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Children: Value of Host Transcriptome Analysis. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 2016, 193, 772–782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Yu, J.; Peterson, D.R.; Baran, A.; Bhattacharya, S.; Wylie, T.N.; Falsey, A.R.; Mariani, T.J.; A Storch, G. Host Gene Expression in Nose and Blood for the Diagnosis of Viral Respiratory Infection. J. Infect. Dis. 2018, 219, 1151–1161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Yahya, M.; Rulli, M.; Toivonen, L.; Waris, M.; Peltola, V. Detection of Host Response to Viral Respiratory Infection by Measurement of Messenger RNA for MxA, TRIM21, and Viperin in Nasal Swabs. J. Infect. Dis. 2017, 216, 1099–1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  87. Landry, M.L.; Foxman, E.F. Antiviral Response in the Nasopharynx Identifies Patients with Respiratory Virus Infection. J. Infect. Dis. 2017, 217, 897–905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Man, W.H.; van Houten, M.A.; Mérelle, M.E.; Vlieger, A.M.; Chu, M.; Jansen, N.J.G.; Sanders, E.A.; Bogaert, D. Bacterial and viral respiratory tract microbiota and host characteristics in children with lower respiratory tract infections: A matched case-control study. Lancet Respir. Med. 2019, 7, 417–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Eklundh, A.; Rhedin, S.; Ryd-Rinder, M.; Andersson, M.; Gantelius, J.; Gaudenzi, G.; Lindh, M.; Peltola, V.; Waris, M.; Nauclér, P.; et al. Etiology of Clinical Community-Acquired Pneumonia in Swedish Children Aged 1–59 Months with High Pneumococcal Vaccine Coverage—The TREND Study. Vaccines 2021, 9, 384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Nijman, R.G.; Oostenbrink, R.; Moll, H.A.; Casals-Pascual, C.; von Both, U.; Cunnington, A.; De, T.; Eleftheriou, I.; Emonts, M.; Fink, C.; et al. A Novel Framework for Phenotyping Children with Suspected or Confirmed Infection for Future Biomarker Studies. Front. Pediatr. 2021, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Piasecka, B.; Duffy, D.; Urrutia, A.; Quach, H.; Patin, E.; Posseme, C.; Bergstedt, J.; Charbit, B.; Rouilly, V.; MacPherson, C.R.; et al. Distinctive roles of age, sex, and genetics in shaping transcriptional variation of human immune responses to microbial challenges. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 115, E488–E497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  92. Ducharme, J.; Self, W.H.; Osborn, T.M.; Ledeboer, N.A.; Romanowsky, J.; Sweeney, T.E.; Liesenfeld, O.; Rothman, R.E. A Multi-mRNA Host-Response Molecular Blood Test for the Diagnosis and Prognosis of Acute Infections and Sepsis: Proceedings from a Clinical Advisory Panel. J. Pers Med. 2020, 10, 266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table
Table 1. Overview of biomarkers included in the review.
Table 1. Overview of biomarkers included in the review.
TypeBiomarkerComment
Routine biomarkersCRPWidely introduced in the clinic. Limited specificity. Delayed increase in blood.
WBCLow specificity.
PCTRapid increase in blood. Mostly evaluated for sepsis, pneumonia and urinary tract infection.
Bacterial, inflammatory markersInterleukinsRapid increase in blood. Mostly evaluated for sepsis.
Viral biomarkersMxA, TRAILPromising as complement to bacterial biomarkers.
Blood mRNA biomarkersmRNA transcriptsPromising. Not yet commercially available.
Abbreviations: CRP, C-reactive protein; mRNA, messenger ribonucleic acid; MxA, Myxovirus resistance protein A; PCT, procalcitonin; TRAIL, tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand; WBC, white blood cell count.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rhedin, S.; Elfving, K.; Berggren, A. Novel Biomarkers Differentiating Viral from Bacterial Infection in Febrile Children: Future Perspectives for Management in Clinical Praxis. Children 2021, 8, 1070. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/children8111070

AMA Style

Rhedin S, Elfving K, Berggren A. Novel Biomarkers Differentiating Viral from Bacterial Infection in Febrile Children: Future Perspectives for Management in Clinical Praxis. Children. 2021; 8(11):1070. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/children8111070

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rhedin, Samuel, Kristina Elfving, and Anna Berggren. 2021. "Novel Biomarkers Differentiating Viral from Bacterial Infection in Febrile Children: Future Perspectives for Management in Clinical Praxis" Children 8, no. 11: 1070. https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/children8111070

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop