Back

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

Navalkar, K. A.; Wani, P.; Davis, R. F.; Cermelli, S.; Dietrich, M.; von der Forst, M.; Becker, S. L.; Benthien, S.; Baumann, E.; Zeiner, C.; Lepper, P. M.; Garnacho-Montero, J.; Canton-Bulnes, M. L.; Fernandez-Galilea, A.; Luis Garcia-Garmendia, J. L.; Estella, A.; Miller, R. R.; Schultz, M. J.; Rothman, R.; Burke, J.; Patel, G.; Parada, J.; Yager, T. D.; Brandon, R. B.

2026-06-01 intensive care and critical care medicine
10.64898/2026.05.29.26354374 medRxiv
Show 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+, 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. Conclusion: 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. Such results, obtained early in the diagnostic workup process, may lead to fewer missed diagnoses and more efficient use of hospital resources.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Critical Care Explorations
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
23.0%
2
Clinical Chemistry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
19.0%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 26%
6.5%
4
The Journal of Infectious Diseases
182 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
5.0%
50% of probability mass above
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 30%
4.0%
6
Journal of Infection
71 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.7%
7
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
8
Pediatric Research
18 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
9
Critical Care
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
10
European Respiratory Journal
54 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.9%
11
Bioinformatics
1061 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.8%
12
Journal of Clinical Microbiology
120 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.7%
13
eBioMedicine
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
14
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.4%
15
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
16
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
17
Clinical and Experimental Immunology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.9%
18
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 11%
0.9%
19
Cell Reports Medicine
140 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
20
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
21
Microbiology Spectrum
435 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
22
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
23
Viruses
318 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
24
Nature Microbiology
133 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
25
EClinicalMedicine
21 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
26
Frontiers in Pediatrics
29 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
27
Journal of Hospital Infection
27 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
28
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
29
American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology
38 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.5%
30
JCI Insight
241 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.5%