HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: clinchem.2007.102442v1 54/9/1497    most recent Submit an electronic Letter to the Editor about this paper Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Zhang, D. Articles by Schneider, F. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Zhang, D. Articles by Schneider, F.

Prognostic Value of Chromogranin A at Admission in Critically Ill Patients: A Cohort Study in a Medical Intensive Care Unit

¹ Service de Réanimation Médicale, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France; ² INSERM, Physiopathologie du Système Nerveux, Strasbourg, France; ³ First Hospital, Chongqing University of Medical Science, Chongqing, China; ⁴ School of Medicine, Louis Pasteur University, Strasbourg, France; ⁵ Pôle de Santé Publique, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France.

^aAddress correspondence to this author at: INSERM, U 575, Physiopathologie du Système Nerveux, Strasbourg, France. Fax 0033 3 88 60 08 06; e-mail metz{at}neurochem.u-strasbg.fr.

Background: Risk assessments of patients should be based on objective variables, such as biological markers that can be measured routinely. The acute response to stress causes the release of catecholamines from the adrenal medulla accompanied by chromogranin A (CGA). To date, no study has evaluated the prognostic value of CGA in critically ill intensive care unit patients.

Methods: We conducted a prospective study of intensive care unit patients by measuring serum procalcitonin (PCT), C-reactive protein (CRP), and CGA at the time of admission. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate the ability of these biomarkers to predict mortality.

Results: In 120 consecutive patients, we found positive correlations between CGA and the following: CRP (r² = 0.216; P = 0.02), PCT (r² = 0.396; P < 0.001), Simplified Acute Physiologic Score II (SAPS II) (r² = 0.438; P < 0.001), and the Logistic Organ Dysfunction System (LODS) score (r² = 0.374; P < 0.001). Nonsurvivors had significantly higher CGA and PCT concentrations than survivors [median (interquartile range): 293.0 µg/L (163.5–699.5 µg/L) vs 86.0 µg/L (53.8–175.3 µg/L) for CGA, and 6.78 µg/L (2.39–22.92 µg/L) vs 0.54 µg/L (0.16–6.28 µg/L) for PCT; P < 0.001 for both comparisons]. In a multivariable linear regression analysis, creatinine (P < 0.001), age (P < 0.001), and SAPS II (P = 0.002) were the only significant independent variables predicting CGA concentration (r² = 0.352). A multivariate Cox regression analysis identified 3 independent factors predicting death: log-normalized CGA concentration [hazard ratio (HR), 7.248; 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.004–17.487], SAPS II (HR, 1.046; 95% CI, 1.026–1.067), and cardiogenic shock (HR, 3.920; 95% CI, 1.731–8.880).

Conclusions: CGA is a strong and independent indicator of prognosis in critically ill nonsurgical patients.