AzTrials
AzTrials

Pneumonia in ChildrenNCT05701605

Roles of Some Non-classic Biomarkers in Pediatric Pneumonia

An observational study of Pneumonia in Children, run by Assiut University.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The current work aims to: 1. Measure the levels of Neutrophil CD64 Receptor, Monocyte Human Leukocyte Antigen-DR (mHLA-DR), and Triggering Receptor Expressed on Myeloid Cells 1 (TREM-1) in children suffering from pneumonia. 2. Compare these levels to their levels in healthy control children. 3. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 1 month to 5 years
Conditions the study is for
Pneumonia in Children
How many people
120 participants
Where
No sites listed yet
Study dates
1 Jul 2023to 1 Jun 2024
Phase
Observational
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 1 month to 5 years
  • All sexes
  • Child

Study population: 60 infant and child aged 1 month to 5 years with pneumonia and 60 normal infant and child of comparable age and sex as control.

Who may be able to join

  • Children more than one month and till age of 5 years
  • Clinical diagnosis of CAP.

Who cannot join

  • 1) All pediatric patients with comorbidities and diagnosed with CAP as: severe sepsis\& localized infections e.g., endocarditis, empyema\& autoimmune diseases\& liver cirrhosis\& children receiving immunosuppressive therapy.

Trial locations and contacts

No sites are listed yet.

About this study

Official title: Prognostic and Diagnostic Roles of Some Non-classic Biomarkers in Pediatric Pneumonia

The current work aims to:

  1. Measure the levels of Neutrophil CD64 Receptor, Monocyte Human Leukocyte Antigen-DR (mHLA-DR), and Triggering Receptor Expressed on Myeloid Cells 1 (TREM-1) in children suffering from pneumonia.
  2. Compare these levels to their levels in healthy control children.
  3. Analyze the cut-off point, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the ROC curve of these biomarkers to test their abilities to early differentiate children with pneumonia from healthy control children.
  4. Conclude or reject their possible use as diagnostic and/or prognostic markers in pediatric pneumonia.
Read the detailed description

Pneumonia is the world's leading infectious cause of mortality. It is one of the most common lower respiratory tract infections, which contributes significantly to the burden of antibiotic use. Because of the complexity of the pathophysiology, pneumonia is widely recognized that the clinical diagnosis and prognosis are usually not enough to accurately estimate the severity of the condition. The most difficult task for a doctor is above all the value of risk in patients with community-acquired pneumonia. Early diagnosis is important to reduce hospitalization and death.

There are widespread biomarkers, none of which looks perfect, and the demand for new biomarkers that maximizes the severity and treatment response for pneumonia has increased. Indirect methods are utilized to isolate the organism. These include polymerase chain reaction of throat swab, gram stain, culture of nasopharyngeal aspirate, and blood cultures. However, interpretation can be difficult as children are found to be asymptomatic carriers of a range of organisms and a positive result on PCR may not be indicative of the cause of CAP. C-reactive protein, and White blood cell count are often part of the diagnostic workup in an inpatient setting. However, the changes observed are not specific to predict causative pathogens. Instrumental diagnostics, such as a chest X-ray are not sensitive or specific and are not recommended in the initial diagnosis of a suspected community acquired pneumonia.

Biomarkers in pneumonia may be the ones that indicate inflammation or may be released specifically, after lung injury due to infection. The measured levels of biomarkers should be interpreted cautiously and always be correlated with clinical findings as many confounding factors should be taken into consideration for interpretation. Factors like age, antibiotic pretreatment, chronic hepatic disease, corticosteroids, renal impairment, and viral confection can critically affect some biomarker levels and thus their sensitivity and specificity regarding treatment failure and clinical stability. Hence, results should be interpreted in line with the clinical presentation, and they should never substitute clinical judgment.

The importance of the classic biomarkers such as procalcitonin and C-reactive protein has been declined. The limitations of PCT are being elevated in a variety of noninfectious conditions, such as cirrhosis, pancreatitis, mesenteric infarction, burns, and aspiration pneumonitis. Also, its diagnostic and predictive value declines in patients with severe sepsis and in localized infections (e.g., endocarditis, empyema). Studies differ as to what are the appropriate negative cut-off points for PCT. Criticism of the role of CRP in diagnostics includes not only the delay in response to clinical stimulus but also its poor specificity as it is elevated in a variety of pathologies, such as trauma, surgery, burns, and immunological-mediated inflammatory diseases. Mendez et al. successfully demonstrated that CRP is a significant independent predictor for the absence of severe complications in CAP.

The establishment of new biomarkers in clinical practice would not only facilitate accurate diagnosis but would also help to reduce the amount of antibiotics used. Burgos etal. [2016] assess the usefulness of neutrophil CD64 expression to identify patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) at risk of a poor outcome. The sensitivity/specificity of nCD64 in predicting poor outcome [defined as intensive care unit (ICU) admission and/or clinical deterioration after arrival at the emergency department] was calculated. Although nCD64 expression is associated with an increased risk of ICU admission or clinical deterioration after admission, its accuracy in predicting these poor outcomes is modest and does not significantly improve the predictive ability of severity scores. Qun and Mei-Yu [2012], studied the clinical value of the expression of neutrophil surface CD64 in the diagnosis of community-acquired pneumonia in children. They found that ROC curve analysis showed that the threshold of CD64 and CRP was 2.8 and 8 mg/L respectively. Specificity of CD64 index (90%) was much higher than CRP (74%). They stated that the determination of peripheral blood neutrophil CD64 contributes to the early diagnosis of pulmonary bacterial infection and the evaluation of the anti-infection effect.

Zhuang etal., [2015] study the level of monocyte-human leukocyte antigen-DR (mHLA-DR), an immune function-related biomarker, at 24 h after admission, to predict the outcomes of subjects with severe pneumonia. They found that mHLA-DR may be a reliable biomarker that can predict the outcomes of patients with severe community-acquired pneumonia, and 27.2% may be the cut-off value to predict the outcomes. They reported that non-survivors significantly expressed reduced levels of mHLA-DR on their monocyte membranes. There is still not enough evidence whether mHLA-DR could be a useful marker in CAP.

Triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells 1 (TREM-1) is an inflammatory receptor that causes inflammation after exposure to extracellular fungi and bacterial pathogens. Elevated TREM-1 levels are a potential marker of lung disease. El Nady etal. [2019] found that TREM-1 level was significantly higher in ventilated children with pneumonia compared to the control group (1). Grover et al. [2014] found that TREM-1 is a good predictor of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) ; however, Palazzo et al. 2012 claimed that TREM-1 can be found elevated in the bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid of patients with and without confirmed VAP. Therefore, further studies are required to fully determine the diagnostic power of TREM-1 for VAP.

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Measure the level of Neutrophil CD64 Receptor

    a peripheral blood neutrophil CD64

    Measured: Baseline

  2. Measure the level of Monocyte Human Leukocyte Antigen-DR (mHLA-DR)

    an immune function-related biomarker

    Measured: Baseline

  3. Measure the level of Triggering Receptor Expressed on Myeloid Cells 1 (TREM-1)

    an inflammatory receptor that causes inflammation after exposure to extracellular fungi and bacterial pathogens

    Measured: Baseline

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted27 Jan 2023
  2. Study start1 Jul 2023 (estimated)
  3. Primary completion1 Jan 2024 (estimated)
  4. Study completion1 Jun 2024 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Observational
Observational model
Case-control
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrolment
120 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT05701605
Sponsor's protocol ID
Pneumonia biomarkers
Status last verified
Jan 2023
First submitted
17 Dec 2022
Last updated
27 Jan 2023
Results posted
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

An observational study of Pneumonia in Children, run by Assiut University.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 27 Jan 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Nahla Sameh (01096362551, nahlasameh8115@gmail.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Measure the level of Neutrophil CD64 Receptor (time frame: Baseline). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 27 Jan 2023.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in