Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • ERS Guidelines
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Another view on the prediction of outcomes in patients with community-acquired pneumonia

S. Krüger, T. Welte, S. Ewig
European Respiratory Journal 2011 38: 991-992; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00039411
S. Krüger
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
T. Welte
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S. Ewig
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: ewig@augusta-bochum.de
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

To the Editors:

At least two clinical rules for predicting short- and long-term mortality in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) have been successfully validated: the Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI), and the CURB-65 score (confusion, urea >7 mmol·L−1, respiratory frequency ≥30 breaths·min−1, systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≤60 mmHg and age ≥65 yrs) and its modifications. The biomarker procalcitonin (PCT) has received much attention as another tool to predict outcomes and, possibly, stratify patients according to treatment settings. Recently, we found that PCT might carry an additional predictive potential for mortality across the clinical prediction score CRB-65 (confusion, respiratory frequency ≥30 breaths·min−1, systolic blood pressure <90 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≤60 mmHg, and age ≥65 yrs) [1]. Schuetz et al. [2] recently reported that PCT performs poorly as a predictor of mortality and does not increase mortality prediction levels of clinical scores.

There may be several reasons for these conflicting results. One of these reasons may be differences in the populations studied, particularly in the number and type of comorbidities. Another potential bias is the study design, since the study by Shuetz et al. [2] was primarily designed to guide treatment decisions and not to evaluate outcomes. Finally, the number of patients who received antimicrobial pre-treatment may affect the prognostic predictions. We previously showed that predictive values of PCT are considerably negatively affected by antimicrobial pre-treatment [3]. Unfortunately, Schuetz et al. [2] did not report the number of patients who received such pre-treatment.

In addition, we are tempted to ask whether a different analysis would not lead to divergent conclusions.

First, the authors decided to test predictions based on PCT levels using a four-level tool in order to make decisions on antimicrobial treatment. The use of only one threshold would have been statistically adequate, since deaths were very rare in the low-risk groups (four deaths in the group with <0.1 μg·L−1 PCT and seven deaths in the group with 0.1–0.25 μg·L−1 PCT). In fact, there was no linear trend across the four levels; however, figure 1 in that article demonstrates that mortality was twice as high in those with PCT levels >0.25 μg·L−1, which is very close to our findings suggesting that a cut-off of 0.228 μg·L−1 separates survivors from nonsurvivors quite confidently.

Secondly, from previous data, it appears that PCT level, alone or in conjunction with clinical scores, predicts mortality best in higher risk classes. This may also be a consequence of very low mortality in low-risk classes, leading to a high probability of missing a small, but possibly significant, difference.

Thirdly, mortality increasingly appears to be a problematic end-point of risk assessment. The authors found that the rate of complications and intensive care unit (ICU) admission, but not mortality, closely followed the four-level risk model of PCT. This may hint at the problem of treatment restrictions in elderly and/or severely disabled patients, also favouring death in lower and intermediate risk classes. Unfortunately, Schuetz et al. [2] did not report the number or mortality of patients at highest risk, i.e. those residing in nursing homes or being bedridden. In any case, complications and ICU admission appear to be the more robust end-points for the evaluation of predictive tools of outcome in patients with CAP.

Overall, receiver operating characteristics differed significantly from our findings, which showed PCT as a good predictor of mortality and CRB-65 plus PCT as the best. In the study by Schuetz et al. [2], the area under the curve (AUC) of initial PCT was very low (AUC 0.6, 95% CI 0.52–0.67). Potential reasons for this large difference are numerous, and include characteristics of the population studied, different study design and the number of patients with antimicrobial pre-treatment. Such variations challenge the general use of PCT as a predictive tool.

However, different conclusions may be drawn from the study by Schuetz et al. [2]. A PCT value of ∼0.25 μg·L−1 identifies patients at increased risk of death. When PCT is used with clinical scores, it might give additional predictive value; in fact, whereas the predictive potential in low risk classes is currently unknown, it seems to be considerable in moderate- and high-risk classes [4]. Having said this, it appears from other studies that pro-adrenomedullin is superior in terms of prediction of prognosis [5–7].

In any case, mortality as end-point should be regarded with caution because of variations in populations studied, comorbidities and possible effects of treatment restrictions, and at least always be interpreted in the light of complication and ICU admission rates. In our view, this seems to be an important message of the study by Schuetz et al. [2].

Footnotes

  • Statement of Interest

    Statements of interest for T. Welte and S. Ewig can be found at www.erj.ersjournals.com/site/misc/statements.xhtml

  • ©ERS 2011

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    1. Krüger S,
    2. Ewig S,
    3. Marre R,
    4. et al
    . Procalcitonin predicts patients at low risk of death from community-acquired pneumonia across all CRB-65 classes. Eur Respir J 2008; 31: 349–355.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Schuetz P,
    2. Suter-Widmer I,
    3. Chaudri A,
    4. et al
    . Prognostic value of procalcitonin in community-acquired pneumonia. Eur Respir J 2011; 37: 384–392.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Krüger S,
    2. Ewig S,
    3. Kunde J,
    4. et al
    . Assessment of inflammatory markers in patients with community-acquired pneumonia: influence of antimicrobial pre-treatment: results from the German competence network CAPNETZ. Clin Chim Acta 2010; 411: 1929–1934.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. ↵
    1. Huang DT,
    2. Weissfeld LA,
    3. Kellum JA,
    4. et al
    . Risk prediction with procalcitonin and clinical rules in community-acquired pneumonia. Ann Emerg Med 2008; 52: 48–58.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. ↵
    1. Christ-Crain M,
    2. Morgenthaler NG,
    3. Stolz D,
    4. et al
    . Pro-adrenomedullin to predict severity and outcome in community-acquired pneumonia. Crit Care 2006; 10: R96.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Huang DT,
    2. Angus DC,
    3. Kellum JA,
    4. et al
    . Midregional proadrenomedullin as a prognostic tool in community-acquired pneumonia. Chest 2009; 136: 823–831.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. ↵
    1. Krüger S,
    2. Ewig S,
    3. Giersdorf S,
    4. et al
    . Cardiovascular and inflammatory biomarkers to predict short- and long-term survival in community-acquired pneumonia: results from the German Competence Network, CAPNETZ. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2010; 182: 1426–1434.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 38 Issue 4 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 38 (4)
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Another view on the prediction of outcomes in patients with community-acquired pneumonia
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Another view on the prediction of outcomes in patients with community-acquired pneumonia
S. Krüger, T. Welte, S. Ewig
European Respiratory Journal Oct 2011, 38 (4) 991-992; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00039411

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
Another view on the prediction of outcomes in patients with community-acquired pneumonia
S. Krüger, T. Welte, S. Ewig
European Respiratory Journal Oct 2011, 38 (4) 991-992; DOI: 10.1183/09031936.00039411
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Respiratory infections and tuberculosis
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

  • Clinical outcomes of bronchiectasis in India
  • Reply: Clinical outcomes of bronchiectasis in India
  • Risk factors for disease progression in fibrotic hypersensitivity pneumonitis
Show more Correspondence

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society