Authors : Roopender Mehala

Volume/Issue : Volume 9 - 2024, Issue 7 - July

Google Scholar : https://shorturl.at/ILwNm

Scribd : https://shorturl.at/Sjtbx

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24JUL1726

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : Sepsis, a complex medical condition characterized by physiological and biochemical abnormalities, arises from an imbalanced host response to infection. Despite its global impact, sepsis remains underreported in economically challenged nations, highlighting the need for improved diagnostic and prognostic indicators. The emergence of gene chip technology has provided insights into differential gene expression in sepsis, paving the way for identifying pivotal genes involved in disease progression. In this study, we employed bioinformatics analysis to investigate hub genes associated with sepsis, construct a protein interaction network, and identify potential therapeutic targets. Utilizing the microarray dataset GSE95233, we conducted KEGG pathway analysis and Gene Ontology enrichment analysis through ShinyGO 0.80. Furthermore, we constructed a protein-protein interaction network using String and identified hub genes using CYTOSCAPE software. Our findings revealed a repertoire of crucial genes, including CD4, CD8A, CCL5, IL7R, MMP9, GZMB, PRF1, TBX21, S100A12, and IL2RB, displaying significant expression patterns in sepsis and septic shock patients. These genes hold great potential as diagnostic biomarkers for sepsis, offering non-invasive diagnostic approaches and serving as viable targets for future sepsis therapeutics. Moreover, our study sheds light on the diverse range of bacterial and viral infections that could contribute to the development of sepsis in affected individuals, enhancing our understanding of this intricate condition. The utilization of bioinformatics and gene expression profiling represents a promising avenue for advancing sepsis management and improving patient outcomes.

References :

1. K. Reinhart, “Recognizing Sepsis as a Global Health Priority - A WHO Resolution,” The NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL of MEDICINE, pp. 0-4, 2017.
2. H.-J. d. Grooth, “Unexplained mortality differences between septic shock trials: a systematic analysis of population characteristics and control-group mortality rates,” Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 44, pp. 311-322, 2018.
3.  “ Global Report on the Epidemiology and Burden of Sepsis: Current Evidence, Identifying Gaps and Future,” reliefweb, 2020.
4. L. J. Schlapbach, “World Sepsis Day: a global agenda to target a leading cause of morbidity and mortality,” American Journal of Physiology, 2020.
5. C. W. Seymour, “Severe sepsis in pre-hospital emergency care: analysis of incidence, care, and outcome,” American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, vol. 184, no. 12, 2012.
6. A. E. Fohner, “Assessing clinical heterogeneity in sepsis through treatment patterns and machine learning,” Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, pp. 1466-1477, 2019.
7. J. P. Vakkalanka, “Clinical and epidemiological variability in severe sepsis: an ecological study,” J Epidemiol Community Health, vol. 72, no. 8, pp. 741-745, 2018.
8. C. Brun-Buisson, “Incidence, risk factors, and outcome of severe sepsis and septic shock in adults. A multicenter prospective study in intensive care units. French ICU Group for Severe Sepsis,” Janmanetwork, pp. 968-974, 1995.
9. G. P. Castelli, “Procalcitonin and C-reactive protein during systemic inflammatory response syndrome, sepsis and organ dysfunction,” Critical Care, vol. 8, 2004.
10. A. Suarez-de-la-Rica, “Precision Medicine in Sepsis and Septic Shock,” Journal of Clinical Medicine, vol. 11, no. 18, 2022.
11. J.-L. Vincent, “International Study of the Prevalence and Outcomes of Infection in Intensive Care Units,” vol. 302, no. 21, pp. 2323-2329, 2009.
12. R. S. Hotchkiss, “Immunosuppression in sepsis: a novel understanding of the disorder and a new therapeutic approach,” The Lancet Infectious Diseases, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 260-268, 2013.
13. Martin, “The effect of age on the development and outcome of adult sepsis,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 15-21, 2006.
14. A. J. Reber, “Immunosenescence and Challenges of Vaccination against Influenza in the Aging Population,” Aging and Disease, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 68-90, 2012.
15. P. Qiu, “Reviw: the role and mechanism of macrophage autophagy in sepsis,” Inflammation, vol. 42, pp. 6-19, 2018.
16. J. Cabrera-Perez, “Impact of sepsis on CD4 T cell immunity,” Journal of Leukocyte Biology, vol. 96, no. 5, pp. 767-777, 2014.
17. I. J. Jensen, “Sepsis leads to lasting changes in phenotype and function of memory CD8 T cells.,” eLife, 2021.
18. T. L. Ness, “CCR1 and CC Chemokine Ligand 5 Interaction Exacerbate Innate Immune Responses during Sepsis.,” The Journal of Immunology, vol. 173, no. 11, pp. 6938-6948, 2004.
19. Delwarde, Benjamin , “Low Interleukin-7 Receptor Messenger RNA Expression is Independently Associated With Day 28 Mortality in Septic Shock Patients,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 46, no. 11, pp. 1739-1746, 2018.
20. S. R. Maitra, “Modulation of matrix metalloproteinase-9 and tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase-1 in sepsis,” International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 180-185, 2010.
21. M. I. Garcia-Laorden, “Intracellular expression of granzymes A, B, K and M in blood lymphocytes subsets of critically ill patients with or without sepsis.,” Clinical & Experimental Immunology, vol. 205, no. 2, pp. 222-231, 2021 .
22. I. Voskoboinik, “Perforin and granzymes: function, dysfunction and human pathology,” nature reviews immunology, vol. 15, pp. 388-400, 2015.
23. C. Dubois, “High plasma level of S100A8/S100A9 and S100A12 at admission indicates a higher risk of death in septic shock patients.,” Scientific reports, vol. 9, 2019.
24. C. Ratthe, “Interleukin-15 enhances human neutrophil phagocytosis by a Syk-dependent mechanism: importance of the IL-15 Ralpha Chain,” Oxford Academics, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 162-168, journal of leukocyte biology.