Location and Level of Etk Expression in Neurons Are Associated with Varied Severity of Traumatic Brain Injury

Much recent research effort in traumatic brain injury (TBI) has been devoted to the discovery of a reliable biomarker correlating with severity of injury. Currently, no consensus has been reached regarding a representative marker for traumatic brain injury. In this study, we explored the potential of epithelial/endothelial tyrosine kinase (Etk) as a novel marker for TBI.TBI was induced in Sprague Dawley (SD) rats by controlled cortical impact. Brain tissue samples were analyzed by Western blot, Q-PCR, and immunofluorescence staining using various markers including glial fibrillary acidic protein, and epithelial/endothelial tyrosine kinase (Etk). Results show increased Etk expression with increased number and severity of impacts. Expression increased 2.36 to 7-fold relative to trauma severity. Significant upregulation of Etk appeared at 1 hour after injury. The expression level of Etk was inversely correlated with distance from injury site. Etk and trauma/inflammation related markers increased post-TBI, while other tyrosine kinases did not.The observed correlation between Etk level and the number of impacts, the severity of impact, and the time course after impact, as well as its inverse correlation with distance away from injury site, support the potential of Etk as a possible indicator of trauma severity

RAGE does not contribute to renal injury and damage upon ischemia/reperfusion-induced injury.

Item does not contain fulltextThe receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE) mediates a variety of inflammatory responses in renal diseases, but its role in renal ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) injury is unknown. We showed that during renal I/R, RAGE ligands HMGB1 and S100B are expressed. However, RAGE deficiency does not affect renal injury and function upon I/R-induced injury

Serum S100B levels after meningioma surgery: A comparison of two laboratory assays

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>S100B protein is a potential biomarker of central nervous system insult. This study quantitatively compared two methods for assessing serum concentration of S100B.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A prospective, observational study performed in a single tertiary medical center. Included were fifty two consecutive adult patients undergoing surgery for meningioma that provided blood samples for determination of S100B concentrations. Eighty samples (40 pre-operative and 40 postoperative) were randomly selected for batch testing. Each sample was divided into two aliquots. These were analyzed by ELISA (Sangtec) and a commercial kit (Roche Elecsys^®) for S100B concentrations. Statistical analysis included regression modelling and Bland-Altman analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A parsimonious linear model best described the prediction of commercial kit values by those determined by ELISA (y = 0.045 + 0.277*x, x = ELISA value, R²= 0.732). ELISA measurements tended to be higher than commercial kit measurements. This discrepancy increased linearly with increasing S100B concentrations. At concentrations above 0.7 μg/L the paired measurements were consistently outside the limits of agreement in the Bland-Altman display. Similar to other studies that used alternative measurement methods, sex and age related differences in serum S100B levels were not detected using the Elecsys^®(p = 0.643 and 0.728 respectively).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although a generally linear relationship exists between serum S100B concentrations measured by ELISA and a commercially available kit, ELISA values tended to be higher than commercial kit measurements particularly at concentrations over 0.7 μg/L, which are suggestive of brain injury. International standardization of commercial kits is required before the predictive validity of S100B for brain damage can be effectively assessed in clinical practice.</p

Serum IL-6: a candidate biomarker for intracranial pressure elevation following isolated traumatic brain injury

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Increased intracranial pressure (ICP) is a serious, life-threatening, secondary event following traumatic brain injury (TBI). In many cases, ICP rises in a delayed fashion, reaching a maximal level 48-96 hours after the initial insult. While pressure catheters can be implanted to monitor ICP, there is no clinically proven method for determining a patient's risk for developing this pathology.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In the present study, we employed antibody array and Luminex-based screening methods to interrogate the levels of inflammatory cytokines in the serum of healthy volunteers and in severe TBI patients (GCS≤8) with or without incidence of elevated intracranial pressure (ICP). De-identified samples and ELISAs were used to confirm the sensitivity and specificity of IL-6 as a prognostic marker of elevated ICP in both isolated TBI patients, and polytrauma patients with TBI.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Consistent with previous reports, we observed sustained increases in IL-6 levels in TBI patients irrespective of their ICP status. However, the group of patients who subsequently experienced ICP ≥ 25 mm Hg had significantly higher IL-6 levels within the first 17 hours of injury as compared to the patients whose ICP remained ≤20 mm Hg. When blinded samples (n = 22) were assessed, a serum IL-6 cut-off of <5 pg/ml correctly identified 100% of all the healthy volunteers, a cut-off of >128 pg/ml correctly identified 85% of isolated TBI patients who subsequently developed elevated ICP, and values between these cut-off values correctly identified 75% of all patients whose ICP remained ≤20 mm Hg throughout the study period. In contrast, the marker had no prognostic value in predicting elevated ICP in polytrauma patients with TBI. When the levels of serum IL-6 were assessed in patients with orthopedic injury (n = 7) in the absence of TBI, a significant increase was found in these patients compared to healthy volunteers, albeit lower than that observed in TBI patients.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our results suggest that serum IL-6 can be used for the differential diagnosis of elevated ICP in isolated TBI.</p

The Toronto prehospital hypertonic resuscitation-head injury and multi organ dysfunction trial (TOPHR HIT) - Methods and data collection tools

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Clinical trials evaluating the use of hypertonic saline in the treatment of hypovolemia and head trauma suggest no survival superiority over normal saline; however subgroup analyses suggest there may be a reduction in the inflammatory response and multiorgan failure which may lead to better survival and enhanced neurocognitive function. We describe a feasibility study of randomizing head injured patients to hypertonic saline and dextran vs. normal saline administration in the out of hospital setting.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This feasibility study employs a randomized, placebo-controlled design evaluating normal saline compared with a single dose of 250 ml of 7.5% hypertonic saline in 6% dextran 70 in the management of traumatic brain injuries. The primary feasibility endpoints of the trial were: 1) baseline survival rates for the treatment and control group to aid in the design of a definitive multicentre trial, 2) randomization compliance rate, 3) ease of protocol implementation in the out-of-hospital setting, and 4) adverse event rate of HSD infusion.</p> <p>The secondary objectives include measuring the effect of HSD in modulating the immuno-inflammatory response to severe head injury and its effect on modulating the release of neuro-biomarkers into serum; evaluating the role of serum neuro-biomarkers in predicting patient outcome and clinical response to HSD intervention; evaluating effects of HSD on brain atrophy post-injury and neurocognitive and neuropsychological outcomes.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>We anticipate three aspects of the trial will present challenges to trial success; ethical demands associated with a waiver of consent trial, challenging follow up and comprehensive accurate timely data collection of patient identifiers and clinical or laboratory values. In addition all the data collection tools had to be derived de novo as none existed in the literature.</p> <p>Trial registration number</p> <p>NCT00878631</p