Sequential application of time-stratified demographic, vital, clinical-laboratory and microbiology variables for accurate and rapid identification of sepsis

Background: Accurate early identification of sepsis remains a major clinical challenge due to its heterogeneous presentation and overlap of clinical signs with the non-infectious systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). Timely differentiation is crucial for improving patient outcomes, meeting sepsis bundle requirements and reducing inappropriate antimicrobial use. We hypothesized that clinical and laboratory data available within the first 3 hours of patient presentation could be used to identify patients with sepsis to an actionable level of accuracy, in lieu of traditional microbiology results which would not become available until at least 12-24 hours. Data from two independent studies were used to quantify the diagnostic value of demographic, vital, clinical-laboratory, and microbiological data available at three time points for distinguishing retrospectively diagnosed critically ill patients with either sepsis or non-infectious SIRS. A particular focus of this work was an assessment of the utility of SeptiCyte RAPID (Immunexpress Inc., Seattle, Washington, USA) as an aid to sepsis diagnosis, producing actionable data within 1 hour. Methods: Data from two independent study cohorts were analysed. The 510k cohort consisted of 419 adult patients in intensive care (ICU) (MARS, VENUS, and NEPTUNE trials). The Andalusian cohort consisted of 353 ICU patients from the PANGEA study. Logistic regression models, selected by a greedy search algorithm and validated by repeated cross-validation, were used to determine the contributions of different variables to diagnostic accuracy. Diagnostic performance was quantified by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: For the 510k cohort, a baseline AUC of 0.69-0.73 was observed using 5-7 vital and demographic variables assessed immediately upon presentation (time T1). The addition of clinical-laboratory variables, in particular SeptiCyte RAPID, within 1-3 hours post-presentation (time T2) increased the AUC to 0.83-0.85). Finally, the addition of microbiological data 12-24 hours post-presentation (time T3) further improved the AUC to 0.90-0.91. Similar results were obtained for the Andalusian cohort. AUC values at the three time points were as follows: At time T1, AUC = 0.67 based solely on vital signs and demographics; at time T2, AUC = 0.87 based on vitals + demographics + SeptiCyte RAPID or other clinical laboratory data; at time T3, AUC = 0.93 based on vitals + demographics + SeptiCyte RAPID or other clinical laboratory data + microbiology results). For both cohorts, the most significant variables included temperature, mean arterial pressure, respiratory rate, suspected infection site; SeptiCyte RAPID, procalcitonin, confirmed bacterial infection and positive blood culture confirmation. Conclusions: Accuracy of identification of sepsis increases markedly as demographics and vital signs are supplemented with clinical-laboratory information, and ultimately with microbiological culture results. The fastest improvement occurs within the first 3 hours when laboratory data, and in particular SeptiCyte RAPID results, become available. Integrating rapid host-response testing with SeptiCyte RAPID into time-based diagnostic frameworks may enhance early sepsis recognition, improve antimicrobial stewardship, and support guideline-driven clinical decisions.