Evidence Hub

Circulating circular RNAs act as potential novel biomarkers for sepsis secondary to pneumonia: a prospective cohort study

Chunxue Wang, Dianyi Yang, Yuxin Zhu, Qian Yang, Tong Liu, Xian-Dong Liu, Dongyang Zhao, Xiaowei Bao et al.

World Journal of Emergency Medicine, 2025

8,679 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Circulating biomarkers for sepsis are lacking, and research on circular RNAs (circRNAs) as potential biomarkers of pneumonia-induced sepsis is limited. This study aims to investigate the diagnostic and prognostic potential of circRNAs in patients with pneumonia-induced sepsis.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included 40 healthy individuals, 60 patients with pneumonia, and 80 patients with pneumonia-induced sepsis. CircRNAs identified through RNA-sequencing were validated using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR). Spearman correlation analysis was used to evaluate the associations between circRNAs, inflammatory markers, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) scores. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves analysis were used to assess the diagnostic performance of circRNAs, while ROC curves and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were used to evaluate their prognostic value of 28-day mortality.

RESULTS

qRT-PCR confirmed the significant upregulation of Circ-CTD-2281E23.2 and downregulation of Circ-0075723 and Circ-0008679 in sepsis patients. Spearman correlation analysis showed that Circ-CTD-2281E23.2 was positively correlated with inflammatory markers and severity scores, whereas Circ-0075723 and Circ-0008679 were negatively correlated with these parameters. The area under the curve (AUC) values for Circ-CTD-2281E23.2, Circ-0075723, and Circ-0008679 in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 8,679 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free