nach oben

Neurocritical Care

Erschienen in:

21.03.2022 | Big Data in Neurocritical Care

Endotypes and the Path to Precision in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

verfasst von: Tej D. Azad, Pavan P. Shah, Han B. Kim, Robert D. Stevens

Erschienen in: Neurocritical Care | Sonderheft 2/2022

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Heterogeneity is recognized as a major barrier in efforts to improve the care and outcomes of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Even within the narrower stratum of moderate and severe TBI, current management approaches do not capture the complexity of this condition characterized by manifold clinical, anatomical, and pathophysiologic features. One approach to heterogeneity may be to resolve undifferentiated TBI populations into endotypes, subclasses that are distinguished by shared biological characteristics. The endotype paradigm has been explored in a range of medical domains, including psychiatry, oncology, immunology, and pulmonology. In intensive care, endotypes are being investigated for syndromes such as sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome. This review provides an overview of the endotype paradigm as well as some of its methods and use cases. A conceptual framework is proposed for endotype research in moderate and severe TBI, together with a scientific road map for endotype discovery and validation in this population.

Khellaf A, Khan DZ, Helmy A. Recent advances in traumatic brain injury. J Neurol. 2019;266(11):2878–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-019-09541-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Dewan MC, Rattani A, Gupta S, et al. Estimating the global incidence of traumatic brain injury. J Neurosurg. 2018;130(4):1080–97. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.10.JNS17352.CrossRef

Taylor CA, Bell JM, Breiding MJ, Xu L. Traumatic brain injury-related emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and deaths—United States, 2007 and 2013. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2017;66(9):1–16.CrossRef

Wright DW, Yeatts SD, Silbergleit R, et al. Very early administration of progesterone for acute traumatic brain injury. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(26):2457–66. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1404304.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Skolnick BE, Maas AI, Narayan RK, et al. A clinical trial of progesterone for severe traumatic brain injury. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(26):2467–76. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1411090.CrossRefPubMed

Hutchinson PJ, Kolias AG, Timofeev IS, et al. Trial of decompressive craniectomy for traumatic intracranial hypertension. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(12):1119–30. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1605215.CrossRefPubMed

Andrews PJD, Sinclair HL, Rodriguez A, et al. Hypothermia for intracranial hypertension after traumatic brain injury. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(25):2403–12. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1507581.CrossRefPubMed

Zafar SN, Khan AA, Ghauri AA, Shamim MS. Phenytoin versus leviteracetam for seizure prophylaxis after brain injury—a meta analysis. BMC Neurol. 2012;12:30. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2377-12-30.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Cooper DJ, Nichol AD, Bailey M, et al. Effect of early sustained prophylactic hypothermia on neurologic outcomes among patients with severe traumatic brain injury: the POLAR Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2018;320(21):2211–20. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.17075.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Cooper DJ, Rosenfeld JV, Murray L, et al. Decompressive craniectomy in diffuse traumatic brain injury. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(16):1493–502. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1102077.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Chesnut RM, Temkin N, Carney N, et al. A trial of intracranial-pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(26):2471–81. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1207363.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Luo P, Li X, Wu X, et al. Preso regulates NMDA receptor-mediated excitotoxicity via modulating nitric oxide and calcium responses after traumatic brain injury. Cell Death Dis. 2019;10(7):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-019-1731-x.CrossRef

13.

Werner C, Engelhard K. Pathophysiology of traumatic brain injury. Br J Anaesth. 2007;99(1):4–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aem131.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Menon DK, Schwab K, Wright DW, Maas AI. Position statement: definition of traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91(11):1637–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2010.05.017.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Varadhan R, Segal JB, Boyd CM, Wu AW, Weiss CO. A framework for the analysis of heterogeneity of treatment effect in patient-centered outcomes research. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(8):818–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.02.009.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness. A practical scale. Lancet. 1974;2(7872):81–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(74)91639-0.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Steyerberg EW, Mushkudiani N, Perel P, et al. Predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury: development and international validation of prognostic scores based on admission characteristics. PLoS Med. 2008;5(8):e165. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050165.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

MRC CRASH Trial Collaborators, Perel P, Arango M, et al. Predicting outcome after traumatic brain injury: practical prognostic models based on large cohort of international patients. BMJ. 2008;336(7641):425–429. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39461.643438.25

19.

Carney N, Totten AM, O’Reilly C, et al. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury, Fourth Edition. Neurosurgery. 2017;80(1):6–15. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000001432.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Brennan PM, Murray GD, Teasdale GM. Simplifying the use of prognostic information in traumatic brain injury. Part 1: the GCS-Pupils score: an extended index of clinical severity. J Neurosurg. 2018;128(6):1612–20. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.12.JNS172780.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Silverberg ND, Iaccarino MA, Panenka WJ, et al. Management of concussion and mild traumatic brain injury: a synthesis of practice guidelines. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020;101(2):382–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2019.10.179.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Reddy K, Sinha P, O’Kane CM, Gordon AC, Calfee CS, McAuley DF. Subphenotypes in critical care: translation into clinical practice. Lancet Respir Med. 2020;8(6):631–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(20)30124-7.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Kuruvilla ME, Lee FEH, Lee GB. Understanding asthma phenotypes, endotypes, and mechanisms of disease. Clinic Rev Allerg Immunol. 2019;56(2):219–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12016-018-8712-1.CrossRef

24.

Gottesman II, Gould TD. The endophenotype concept in psychiatry: etymology and strategic intentions. Am J Psychiatry. 2003;160(4):636–45. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.160.4.636.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Agache I, Akdis CA. Endotypes of allergic diseases and asthma: an important step in building blocks for the future of precision medicine. Allergol Int. 2016;65(3):243–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alit.2016.04.011.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Steyerberg EW, Wiegers E, Sewalt C, et al. Case-mix, care pathways, and outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury in CENTER-TBI: a European prospective, multicentre, longitudinal, cohort study. Lancet Neurol. 2019;18(10):923–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30232-7.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Wenzel SE, Schwartz LB, Langmack EL, et al. Evidence that severe asthma can be divided pathologically into two inflammatory subtypes with distinct physiologic and clinical characteristics. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1999;160(3):1001–8. https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.160.3.9812110.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Svenningsen S, Nair P. Asthma endotypes and an overview of targeted therapy for asthma. Front Med (Lausanne). 2017;4:158. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2017.00158.CrossRef

29.

Santus P, Saad M, Damiani G, Patella V, Radovanovic D. Current and future targeted therapies for severe asthma: managing treatment with biologics based on phenotypes and biomarkers. Pharmacol Res. 2019;146:104296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrs.2019.104296.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Ortega HG, Liu MC, Pavord ID, et al. Mepolizumab treatment in patients with severe eosinophilic asthma. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(13):1198–207. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1403290.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Genkel VV, Shaposhnik II. Conceptualization of heterogeneity of chronic diseases and atherosclerosis as a pathway to precision medicine: endophenotype, endotype, and residual cardiovascular risk. Int J Chronic Dis. 2020;2020:5950813. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/5950813.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Battaglia M, Ahmed S, Anderson MS, et al. Introducing the endotype concept to address the challenge of disease heterogeneity in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(1):5–12. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc19-0880.CrossRefPubMed

33.

Tromp J, Ouwerkerk W, Demissei BG, et al. Novel endotypes in heart failure: effects on guideline-directed medical therapy. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(48):4269–76. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy712.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Collins FS, Varmus H. A new initiative on precision medicine. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(9):793–5. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1500523.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

DiNardo AR, Nishiguchi T, Grimm SL, et al. Tuberculosis endotypes to guide stratified host-directed therapy. Med. 2021;2(3):217–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medj.2020.11.003.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Shah PP, Franke JL, Medikonda R, et al. Mutation status and postresection survival of patients with non-small cell lung cancer brain metastasis: implications of biomarker-driven therapy. J Neurosurg. Published online June 4, 2021:1–11. https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.10.JNS201787

37.

Sinha P, Delucchi KL, McAuley DF, O’Kane CM, Matthay MA, Calfee CS. Development and validation of parsimonious algorithms to classify ARDS phenotypes: secondary analyses of randomised controlled trials. Lancet Respir Med. 2020;8(3):247–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(19)30369-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

38.

Famous KR, Delucchi K, Ware LB, et al. Acute respiratory distress syndrome subphenotypes respond differently to randomized fluid management strategy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;195(3):331–8. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201603-0645OC.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Calfee CS, Delucchi K, Parsons PE, et al. Subphenotypes in acute respiratory distress syndrome: latent class analysis of data from two randomised controlled trials. Lancet Respir Med. 2014;2(8):611–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(14)70097-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

McAuley DF, Laffey JG, O’Kane CM, et al. Simvastatin in the acute respiratory distress syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2014;371(18):1695–703. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1403285.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Calfee CS, Delucchi KL, Sinha P, et al. Acute respiratory distress syndrome subphenotypes and differential response to simvastatin: secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Respir Med. 2018;6(9):691–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(18)30177-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Seymour CW, Gomez H, Chang CCH, et al. Precision medicine for all? Challenges and opportunities for a precision medicine approach to critical illness. Crit Care. 2017;21:257. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1836-5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

43.

Prescott HC, Calfee CS, Thompson BT, Angus DC, Liu VX. Toward smarter lumping and smarter splitting: rethinking strategies for sepsis and acute respiratory distress syndrome clinical trial design. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2016;194(2):147–55. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201512-2544CP.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Leligdowicz A, Matthay MA. Heterogeneity in sepsis: new biological evidence with clinical applications. Crit Care. 2019;23:80. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-019-2372-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

45.

Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801–10. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.0287.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

46.

DeMerle KM, Angus DC, Baillie JK, et al. Sepsis subclasses: a framework for development and interpretation. Crit Care Med. 2021;49(5):748–59. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000004842.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Davenport EE, Burnham KL, Radhakrishnan J, et al. Genomic landscape of the individual host response and outcomes in sepsis: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Respir Med. 2016;4(4):259–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(16)00046-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

Antcliffe DB, Burnham KL, Al-Beidh F, et al. Transcriptomic signatures in sepsis and a differential response to steroids. From the VANISH randomized trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019;199(8):980–6. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201807-1419OC.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

49.

Antcliffe DB, Gordon AC. Why understanding sepsis endotypes is important for steroid trials in septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2019;47(12):1782–4. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000003833.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Sweeney TE, Azad TD, Donato M, et al. Unsupervised analysis of transcriptomics in bacterial sepsis across multiple datasets reveals three robust clusters. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(6):915–25. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000003084.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

51.

Girard TD, Thompson JL, Pandharipande PP, et al. Clinical phenotypes of delirium during critical illness and severity of subsequent long-term cognitive impairment: a prospective cohort study. Lancet Respir Med. 2018;6(3):213–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(18)30062-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

52.

Sinha P, Delucchi KL, Chen Y, et al. Latent class analysis-derived subphenotypes are generalisable to observational cohorts of acute respiratory distress syndrome: a prospective study. Thorax. Published online July 12, 2021:thoraxjnl-2021–217158. https://doi.org/10.1136/thoraxjnl-2021-217158

53.

Sinha P, Calfee CS, Delucchi KL. Practitioner’s guide to latent class analysis: methodological considerations and common pitfalls. Crit Care Med. 2021;49(1):e63–79. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000004710.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Kondziella D, Menon DK, Helbok R, et al. A precision medicine framework for classifying patients with disorders of consciousness: advanced classification of consciousness endotypes (ACCESS). Neurocrit Care. 2021;35(Suppl 1):27–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-021-01246-9.CrossRefPubMed

55.

Sandsmark DK, Bashir A, Wellington CL, Diaz-Arrastia R. Cerebral microvascular injury: a potentially treatable endophenotype of traumatic brain injury-induced neurodegeneration. Neuron. 2019;103(3):367–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2019.06.002.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

56.

Dhar R, Falcone GJ, Chen Y, et al. Deep learning for automated measurement of hemorrhage and perihematomal edema in supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage. Stroke. 2020;51(2):648–51. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.027657.CrossRefPubMed

57.

Nielson JL, Cooper SR, Yue JK, et al. Uncovering precision phenotype-biomarker associations in traumatic brain injury using topological data analysis. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(3):e0169490. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169490.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

58.

Huibregtse ME, Bazarian JJ, Shultz SR, Kawata K. The biological significance and clinical utility of emerging blood biomarkers for traumatic brain injury. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2021;130:433–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.08.029.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

59.

Jahns FP, Miroz JP, Messerer M, et al. Quantitative pupillometry for the monitoring of intracranial hypertension in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. Crit Care. 2019;23(1):155. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-019-2436-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

60.

Haveman ME, Van Putten MJAM, Hom HW, Eertman-Meyer CJ, Beishuizen A, Tjepkema-Cloostermans MC. Predicting outcome in patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury using electroencephalography. Crit Care. 2019;23(1):401. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-019-2656-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

61.

Lee H, Mizrahi MA, Hartings JA, et al. Continuous electroencephalography after moderate to severe traumatic brain injury. Crit Care Med. 2019;47(4):574–82. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000003639.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

62.

Jha RM, Elmer J, Zusman BE, et al. Intracranial pressure trajectories: a novel approach to informing severe traumatic brain injury Phenotypes. Crit Care Med. 2018;46(11):1792–802. https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000003361.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

63.

Pollard TJ, Johnson AEW, Raffa JD, Celi LA, Mark RG, Badawi O. The eICU collaborative research database, a freely available multi-center database for critical care research. Sci Data. 2018;5:180178. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2018.178.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

64.

Johnson AEW, Pollard TJ, Shen L, et al. MIMIC-III, a freely accessible critical care database. Sci Data. 2016;3:160035. https://doi.org/10.1038/sdata.2016.35.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

65.

Yue JK, Vassar MJ, Lingsma HF, et al. Transforming research and clinical knowledge in traumatic brain injury pilot: multicenter implementation of the common data elements for traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2013;30(22):1831–44. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2013.2970.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

66.

Maas AIR, Menon DK, Steyerberg EW, et al. Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI): a prospective longitudinal observational study. Neurosurgery. 2015;76(1):67–80. https://doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000000575.CrossRefPubMed

67.

Bowman K, Matney C, Berwick DM. Improving Traumatic Brain Injury Care and Research: A Report From the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. JAMA. 2022;327(5):419–20. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2022.0089.CrossRefPubMed

68.

Bhatraju PK, Zelnick LR, Herting J, et al. Identification of acute kidney injury subphenotypes with differing molecular signatures and responses to vasopressin therapy. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2019;199(7):863–72. https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201807-1346OC.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Titel: Endotypes and the Path to Precision in Moderate and Severe Traumatic Brain Injury
verfasst von: Tej D. Azad
Pavan P. Shah
Han B. Kim
Robert D. Stevens
Publikationsdatum: 21.03.2022
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Neurocritical Care / Ausgabe Sonderheft 2/2022
Print ISSN: 1541-6933
Elektronische ISSN: 1556-0961
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-022-01475-6

Leitlinien kompakt für die Neurologie

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

^{Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag}

Kostenlos registrieren

Neu im Fachgebiet Neurologie

Hirnblutung unter DOAK und VKA ähnlich bedrohlich

17.05.2024 Direkte orale Antikoagulanzien Nachrichten

Kommt es zu einer nichttraumatischen Hirnblutung, spielt es keine große Rolle, ob die Betroffenen zuvor direkt wirksame orale Antikoagulanzien oder Marcumar bekommen haben: Die Prognose ist ähnlich schlecht.

Thrombektomie auch bei großen Infarkten von Vorteil

16.05.2024 Ischämischer Schlaganfall Nachrichten

Auch ein sehr ausgedehnter ischämischer Schlaganfall scheint an sich kein Grund zu sein, von einer mechanischen Thrombektomie abzusehen. Dafür spricht die LASTE-Studie, an der Patienten und Patientinnen mit einem ASPECTS von maximal 5 beteiligt waren.

Schwindelursache: Massagepistole lässt Otholiten tanzen

14.05.2024 Benigner Lagerungsschwindel Nachrichten

Wenn jüngere Menschen über ständig rezidivierenden Lagerungsschwindel klagen, könnte eine Massagepistole der Auslöser sein. In JAMA Otolaryngology warnt ein Team vor der Anwendung hochpotenter Geräte im Bereich des Nackens.

Schützt Olivenöl vor dem Tod durch Demenz?

10.05.2024 Morbus Alzheimer Nachrichten

Konsumieren Menschen täglich 7 Gramm Olivenöl, ist ihr Risiko, an einer Demenz zu sterben, um mehr als ein Viertel reduziert – und dies weitgehend unabhängig von ihrer sonstigen Ernährung. Dafür sprechen Auswertungen zweier großer US-Studien.

Update Neurologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Sonderheft 2/2022

The Noise of Bla, Bla, Bla, and the Missing Sound of Facts

Precision Care in Cardiac Arrest: ICECAP (PRECICECAP) Study Protocol and Informatics Approach

Neurocritical Care Performance Measures Derived from Electronic Health Record Data are Feasible and Reveal Site-Specific Variation: A CHoRUS Pilot Project

Harmonization of Physiological Data in Neurocritical Care: Challenges and a Path Forward

Predicting Early Seizures After Intracerebral Hemorrhage with Machine Learning